About Orthodox Sabha

 
What do we believe?

What do the Orthodox Believe
What do we believe? It is more to ask: "in whom do we put our trust?" "Believe" is a very vague word. Often it means simply holding an opinion without demonstrable evidence. But our faith is not an opinion, not one of many possible views. It is an affirmation of what ultimate reality is-dependable, trustable reality.
We do not put our trust either in the ancient character of our Church or in any dogmas or doctrines. Our trust is in the One True God-Father, Son and Holy Spirit, eternal, self-existent, indivisible, infinite, incomprehensible, glorious, holy, not created or owing his being to something else, all-sovereign, Creator of the whole universe. All things are from Him. We too have our being from Him, acknowledge him as the source of our being. Of the being of all else, of all good and therefore worthy of adoration and praise perpetual.
About the First Person of the Trinity, the Father we know only what the Son and the Spirit have revealed to us, and still continue to reveal. The knowledge or statable doctrine, but true worship in the community of Faith. True knowledge of God comes through the quality of our life than through intellectual clarification. Some things, however we can affirm conceptually, knowing well that these concepts do not fully conform to reality.
The Triune God is beyond all conceptual comprehension not only by human beings, but by any created mind. He is, in a way different from the way anything else in creation is. We know the Triune God, not because we have comprehended His being or isness, but through His operations or activities, the energies of God which come down to us through the Incarnate Son and through the Holy Spirit. The Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, share the same is-ness; their being is one-infinite, eternal, uncreated, self-existent, with three persons or centres of consciousness and response, always acting in concord and unison as one being. There is no gap or interval of time or space between the three persons; there is no senior or junior; greater or lesser.

We believe that Jesus Christ the Son of God became a human being, rules in the universe. All power in heaven (the aspects of the universe now not open to our senses) and on earth (that is, the universe in all-its tangible, sensible aspects) is given to Jesus Christ the God-Man. Death and Evil have been overcome, but they are still allowed to function, serving Christ’s purposes. They will disappear-love and life will triumph-this is the faith of the Church, and this we affirm.
For us the Holy Spirit is Life-giver, Sanctifier and perfecter. We do think in terms of sin and grace, but the central category in our understanding of salvation is the life-giving Spirit. It is He who effects forgiveness of sins, removes barriers between human beings as well as between them and God, gives life, makes people more holy and God-like, and draws us to perfection. He works in the Church, through His special gifts, to build up the body of Christ and to make its members holy. He also works in the Creation, bringing all things to their fullness and perfection.
While we do speak about these operations of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, who are not three Gods, but one God, we know next to nothing about His being as Triune God, It is important for us to confess the incomprehensibility of God. He is not to be discussed or explained, but to be worshipped and adored and acknowledged as Lord of all.
We believe in the Church, all who acknowledge the Niceno Constantinopolitan creed do. The Church is the great consequence of the Son of God becoming flesh. It is this community that not only bears witness to Christ, but also is the abode of Christ, Christ dwelling in the Church, which is His body. It is in the Church that the life-giving power of the Spirit is at work.
But the Church is not simply the community believers gathered together. It is a reality which spans heaven and earth, the risen Christ himself as chief cornerstone, the Apostles and Prophets as foundation, and all who belong to Christ from Adam to second coming being members of this one, holy Catholic apostolic community.
The local Church is not a mere part of this one great heaven-and-earth community; it is the full manifestation of the One Church, especially when the community is gathered together with the Bishop for the hearing of the Word of God and for the Eucharistic participation in the one eternal sacrifice of Christ of the Cross.

We are never allowed to forget even in a small local church the presence of this great cloud of witnesses who share with us the life of the One Church. We remember at every Eucharist the departed as a whole, and especially the Apostles, great teachers, and spiritual leaders who have helped build up and protect the Church from error and deviation. It is not a law that we have to ask the Saints to intercede for us. We do it with great joy and genuine appreciation of their past and present role in the one Church of Jesus Christ.
Of the great Saints in the Church, the first (after Christ) and unique place goes to the Blessed Virgin Mary, for she was the first to hear the Gospel of the Incarnation of our Lord from the Archangel, and to receive Him, on behalf of all of us human beings, into her womb. She is the mother of Christ, and thus mother of all the faithful who are joint-heirs with Christ. But she is also the Theotokos, the Godbearer, for the one whom she bore in her womb was truly God himself.
For her, Jesus Christ was not an ordinary human being who was then adopted or exalted as Son by God the Father. No, He is the Second person of the Trinity, who dwelt in the womb of Mary without being absent from the "place" of His eternal being. Jesus Christ is now fully God as he always was, of the same being as God the Father. He is also fully a human being, sharing our fallen human nature, but without incurring sin. His humanness and his Godness are inseparably and indivisibly united without change or mixture. One divine-human Christ, one Person, with one united nature and faculties which combine the divine and the human. Our union with this divine-human nature of Christ is what makes us participate in the divine nature (2 Pet. 2:4; Hebrews 2:10-14) without ceasing to be human beings.
Salvation for us means more than escaping hell and going to heaven. It means separation from evil and growth in the good. It means eternal life with true holiness and righteousness. It means also being united with Christ in his divine-human nature, in his sonship and rule over the universe. It means becoming more and more God-like in love, power and wisdom. This is what the Holy spirit makes possible. What is humanly impossible becomes reality by the grace and power of God.
The participation in Christ’s body and His being and nature becomes possible, by the grace of God, by the Holy Spirit, through the "mysteries of the Church" (roze-d-idtho in Syriac), which are called Sacraments in the West. These mysteries, mainly Baptism -Chrismation-Eucharist, are acts in the community of Faith by which the eternal and eschatological (i.e. pertaining to the last times) reality of our oneness with Christ becomes experienced by faith in the Church, in time, here and now.

There are other mysteries also-Confession-Absolution for forgiveness of sins for the baptized, an anointing of the Sick for deliverance from Sin and Sickness. Marriage too is a mystery of the Church, because it unites Man and Woman in an act of permanent mutual commitment and permanent union, reflecting the Union of Christ with His Bride, the Church, or of God with the new Humanity.
Another great mystery of the Church is hierotonia (or hierothesia) the special laying of hands for receiving special gifts of the Holy Spirit - for the Bishop as the mystery -presence of Christ the High Priest and Good Shepherd with His Church, and the related ministries of ruling elders (priests or presbyters) and serving ministers (deacons and deaconesses).
We hold the Bible in very high regard. The Gospel is the Word of Life, the proclamation of life and salvation to the world. We hold the Scriptures in the highest respect, and no other writings can have the same standing, for the primary witness to Christ is in the Scriptures. We revere the Scriptures as the inspired Word of God, and all our prayers, as well as the services of the mysteries of the Church are saturated with Biblical reference, and always completed by the public reading of the Scriptures.
Icons are important for us. These mediate to the worshipping community the presence of the Saints, and of the saving events of our Lord’s incarnate life. We do not make images of the unseen God. We consecrate icons to mediate to us the Godbearing persons and events which have been actually manifested to our senses.

For us Tradition is not something old, static, and life-less; it is the life of the Church as a counting body, with the presence of Christ and the Holy Spirit in it. It is the Spirit that makes the Tradition alive and it bears witness to Christ; it also moves forward in expectation of the final fulfillment. Hence Tradition for us is dynamic. It includes knowledge of Christ, the teaching of the Apostles, the doctrine of the Saints and fathers, the practices of worship developed by the community of faith, its way of doing things and practicing love. Scripture is part of this tradition. Tradition is not just a body of knowledge, but a way of life and worship and service.
Our worship as a community is the centre of our life, not our own personal articulations of faith. It is there that the Church, united with Christ, participates in Christ’s self-offering for the world. Our daily life flows out from worship and has to be a life of love and compassion, caring for the needy, struggling against evil, serving the poor.
Our hope is focused on Christ’s coming again. It is only in that coming that evil would be separated from good, death from life, so that the good can triumph eternally and grow eternally also. In that coming there will be a reconstitution of the universe; all things shall be made new; evil shall be banished. Death and darkness would be finally overcome; light and life and love will triumph.
It is our task to bear witness to this final reality, while living it out here and now, as much as we can, beset as we are by sin and frailty.
Thy Kingdom Come Lord. And when Thou comest in Thy Kingdom, remember us poor sinners also.

==========================
Nicene Creed

The Ecumenical Council of Nicea and Nicene Creed

The Oriental Orthodox Churches recognize only three ecumenical councils and the council of Nicea is the first among them. The Nicene Council, also known as First Ecumenical Council, was held in 325 and is one of the most important councils in Christian history. It was originally called by Emperor Constantine in order to address the challenges posed by Arianism. The council established the foundations of orthodox Christian belief with the Nicene Creed.

Two reasons are usually cited to justify the council’s ecumenical status. Firstly, the Emperor ordered that all legitimate bishops from the whole Church shall participate and secondly, a problem that affected the whole Church, namely, the Arian controversy was discussed and decided upon in the council. It was the Emperor Constantine himself, who opened the council on 20th May 325. He affirmed that the decision of the council shall be binding to the whole Church and he promised himself as the guarantor of unity between the state and the Church so that the decision of the council shall be universally binding. Also he declared that his successors would follow his policy.

318 bishops participated in the council, who are called ‘holy fathers of Nicea’ or just ‘holy 318’. The number 318 has a biblical significance as the bishops are seen like 318 servants of Abraham (Gen 14:14). Main participants were Ossius of Cordoba, Alexander of Alexandria, his deacon and secretary Athanasius, Eusthathius of Antioch, who was consecrated to the see of Antioch shortly before the council, and Eusebius of Caesarea, who accepted the homo-ousius teaching just before the council of Nicea. Arius and Eusebius of Nicomedia and some other Arian supporters were also present in the proceedings. The council concluded on 19th of June officially, although, some records say that the council went on for some more time.

The council gave out four documents: 1. Confession of faith (Symbol), which Arius and two of his supporters declined to undersign and were thereby excommunicated and exiled to Illiricum. 2. The council decided upon the date of Easter and controversies on this issue were settled. 3. 20 Canons to the question of ecclesiastical discipline. 4. A synodal letter, which was sent to all sister Churches to explain the proceedings of the council and thereby a call to obey the decisions of the council.

Symbol of the Council of Nicea:
“We believe in one true God, the Father almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten, begotten of the Father, that is, out of the ousia of the Father, God out of God, Light out of Light, true God out of true God, begotten, not made, of the same ousia as the Father, through whom all things were made, both those things in heaven and those on earth, who for us men and our salvation came down, took flesh, and was made human, suffered and rose up on the third day, ascended unto heaven and will come to judge both the quick and the dead; And in the Holy Spirit.

But those who say that there was a when, when He was not, and that He was made out of nothing (what did not exist), or who say that He is of another hypostasis or ousia, or that the Son of God is created or subject to change or alteration, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematize.”

Date of Easter:
From the time of Polycarp of Smyrna (first half of the second century), the date of Easter was a matter of dispute. Irenaeus of Lyon has also expressed his opinion on this issue, but there was no consensus about this problem among the Church as a whole and therefore, the council of Nicea decided upon this question. Alexandrine Church as well as the Western Church celebrated Easter on the first Sunday after the first full moon in spring season and this was according to the Synoptic tradition. The Church in Asia Minor celebrated Easter according to the Jewish pattern, namely, the first Sunday after Nissan 14th, which was eventually the Johannine one too. The council of Nicea decided that Easter was to be celebrated according to the Alexandrine-Western practice, namely, on the first Sunday after the first full moon in spring season.

Canons of the Council:
Council of Nicea issued 20 canons on issues that matter to the discipline of the Church. Ecclesiastical structures are dealt with in canons 4-7, 15 and 16. Dignity of ordained people is mentioned in canons 1-3, 9, 10 and 17. The problem of open confession of sins during a liturgical action is the theme in canons 11-14. The question how to reinstate the lapsed, schismatic and heretics etc. into the Church is dealt with in canons 8 and 19. Liturgical admonitions are given in canons 18 and 20. From the above narration, it is clear that there is no systematic treatment of problems in the order of canons. Yet, these canons are considered as most important and binding to the whole Christian Church even today.

The history of Nicene Creed:
As it seen above, the Nicene Creed was first adopted in 325 at the First Universal Christian Council of Nicaea. The Coptic Church has the tradition that the original creed was authored by Athanasius. There is also a strong tradition that the Nicene Creed was the local creed of Caesarea brought to the council by Eusebius of Caesarea. However, the creed was not in the full form that we see and use today! It is in the second Ecumenical Council in 381 added the section that follows the words "We believe in the Holy
Spirit" hence the creed is also known in the history as "Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed", referring to the Creed as it was after the modification in Constantinople.

The third Ecumenical Council, Ephesus in 431, reaffirmed the 381 version, and decreed that "it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different Faith as a rival to that established by the holy Fathers assembled with the Holy Ghost in Nicæa."

The Filioque controversy:
Amongst the Latin-speaking churches of Western Europe, the words "and the Son" (Filioque) were added to the description of the procession of the Holy Spirit, in what many have argued is a violation of the Canons of the Third Ecumenical Council. Those words were not included by either the Council of Nicaea or that of Constantinople, and hence Eastern Orthodox theologians consider their inclusion to be a heresy. The dispute over the Filioque clause was one of the reasons for the East-West Schism. The clause had been adopted in the west , although the Third Ecumenical Council (431) had prohibited to individuals the promulgation of any other creed. The manner of the clause's adoption was therefore controversial and in the 10th century Photius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, used this clause in his conflict with the Pope. He accused the West of having fallen into heresy and thereby turned the Filioque clause into the doctrinal issue of contention between East and West.

Conclusion:
The Eastern Orthodox Churches those who follow the uncorrupted faith of the Three Holy Ecumenical Synods have thus the Creed in the following formula. Since it the declaration of our Faith and cream of our theological stand point, it is the duty of the Church and believers to recite it in all our liturgical prayers and keep hold its faith in their daily life.

I have also did a biblical analysis of the Nicene Creed to show that how much its words and usages are owed and quoted from the Holly Bible, the word of God and the chief resource of the Church. One could see many more quotations from the word of God, however, what I did is giving model study of it.

The Nicene Creed
We believe in one true God (Heb 11:6, 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, Romans 3:29-31, Eph 4:6)
The Father Almighty (1Cor. 8:6Rev. 1:8)
Maker of heaven and earth (Ex. 20:11, Gen. Ch. 1 &2)
and of all things visible and invisible (Jer. 32:17. Col. 1:16)
And in the one Lord (Acts 10:36) Jesus (Matt. 1:21) Christ (John 4:25-26),
the only-begotten Son of God (John 1:14),
begotten of the Father before all worlds(1 John 4:9),
Light of Light, very God of very God (John 1:4, 1 John 1:5-7, John 12:35-37, John 5:18),
begotten, not made (John 8:58),
being of the same substance with the Father (John10:30);
and by whom all things were made (John 1:3);
+ who for us men and for our salvation (Mat 1:21) came down from heaven (John 3:31),
+ and was incarnate of the Holy Virgin Mary, Mother of God (Luke 2:6),
by the Holy Ghost (Luke 1:35), and became man (John 1:14);
+ and was crucified for us (Mark 15:25) in the days of Pontius Pilate (Matt 27:22-26);
and suffered, and died, and was buried (Matt 27:50-60);
And the third day rose again (Matt 28:6) according to His will (1.Cor 15:4),
and ascended into heaven (Luke 24:51), and sat on the right side of the Father (Mark 16:19); and shall come again in His great glory (Matt 25:31),
to judge both the quick and the dead (2 Tim 4:1);
whose kingdom shall have no end (Luke 1:33);
And in the one living Holy Spirit (John 14:26),
the life-giving Lord of all (2cor 3:17-18, Is. 6:8, Acts 28:25 Rom 8:2, 2.Cor 3:6),
who proceeds from the Father (John 15:26):
and who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified (Rev. 4:8),
who spoke by the Prophets and Apostles (2 Peter 1:21);
And in the One (John 10:16), Holy (Eph 5:26-27, 2 Peter 2:5&9),
Catholic (Rom 10:18 "Catholic" means universal or comprehensive, as well as "relating to the ancient undivided Christian church")
and Apostolic (Eph 2:20) Church;
and we acknowledge one Baptism (Eph. 4:5) for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38),
and look for the resurrection of the dead (Rom 6:5),
and the new life in the world to come (Mat. 25:34., Rev. 21:1-7). Amen.

Fr. George Pulikkottil, D.Th.
==========================
Syrian Heritage
Syrian Heritage of the St. Thomas Christians
Revd. Fr. Dr. Johns Abraham Konat
Professor
Orthodox Theological Seminary, Kottayam.

Syriac is the liturgical language of the St. Thomas Christians from a very early date, even though their identity and culture remained always truly Indian. This language, which belongs to the family of Semitic languages developed as an independent dialect of Aramaic with its own script in the 1st century A. D. Aramaic, believed to be in continuous use since 3000 years, was one of the most prominent languages of the middle east. It was the language of commerce and international relations in this region at least from 7th century B. C, and was the official language of the Persian (Achaemenid) empire from the 6th century B. C. Aramaic dialects were spoken in Palestine in the time of Jesus and thus it has the honor of being the language in which Christ and his disciples spoke. The early forms of Christian worship conducted in Jerusalem also would have been in Aramaic.



Edessa was the cradle of Syriac and it was primarily among the Christians of Edessa that it began to be used as an independent language. Soon it acquired the status of the language of Christian communities of Mesopotamia and Syria. These Christians began to be called as Syrians after the Roman province in which they lived – Syria-and their language was called Syriac. It did not take long for this language to reach Persia and from there to India – where it remains even today as the basic liturgical language of some Christian communities – and even up to China.
Estrangela was the script initially used to write Syriac. Later two different scripts and pronunciations developed, one in the western parts of the Middle East (especially in the Roman empire) known as the western script or serto and another one in the eastern parts (especially in Persia) known as the eastern script or chaldean script. The serto is being used by the Syrian Orthodox, the Maronite and Syrian Catholic denominations whereas the Assyrian and Chaldean churches use the eastern script. Although remaining a single language, the two employ distinctive variations in pronunciation and writing system. The exact periods in which each of these forms developed is still a disputed question. It was after the 8th century that the estrangela script was steadily replaced in the west Syrian circles by the serto. However, recent discoveries show that serto scripts were in use much earlier; but as they were used more in business or administrative texts, ecclesiastical institutions and libraries rarely preserved them. The eastern script, which resembles more to the estrangela came into regular use even later.

Syriac literature covers numerous fields within and outside Christianity such as Biblical interpretations, theology, apologetics, history, monasticism, legends, civil and cannon law, philosophy, natural and physical science, astronomy and mathematics. St. Ephrem of Nisibis, Aphrahat the Persian Sage, Jacob of Serugh etc. are some of the eminent Syriac writers of the early centuries. With the invasion of the Middle Eastern region by the Arabs, Syriac language slowly lost its prominence until it was gradually banned by the Arab rulers. By the end of the 8th century, this language ceased to be spoken in cities, but was kept alive in villages and as a liturgical language. Writers like Moses Bar Kepha (9th cent.) Bar Salibi (12th cent.) continued to produce important literary works. Gregorios Bar Hebraeus (13th century) can be considered as the most renowned scholar and writer of the middle ages.A considerable amount of both prose and poetry continued to be written during the centuries that followed, but the language and literature could not flourish as before; it underwent a period of decline until it became almost a dead language. The late 19th century witnessed a revival of Syriac literary activity thanks to the contributions of men like T’oma Audo, Rahmani, Patriarch Ephrem Barsaum etc. Today different dialects of Syriac are spoken as the first language in small scattered communities in Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, Iran etc. Turoyo and Assyrian Neo-Aramaic are two of the important dialects of modern Syriac. Attempts are being made to revive its use. It remains as the basic liturgical language of some Christian denominations in the Middle East, but most of the liturgy has been translated into and is being conducted in Arabic.

As far as historical evidence is available, it is now more or less an established fact that the St. Thomas Christians had very intimate relations with the Persian Church from a very early date. Even though it is difficult to precise dates due to scarcity of documents, most of the modern historians agree that the Church of Malabar was under the Metropolitan of Riwadisher, belonging to the Persian Church and they had adopted the east Syrian (Persian) liturgical traditions at least from the 4th century. We do not know how far the ordinary people of Malabar were proficient in this language, but at least the clergy would have been well versed in Syriac and the people could follow the worship conducted in it. Thus, even though Syriac neither is nor was the mother tongue of the Thomas Christians, they have a longer acquaintance with it than with their own mother tongue Malayalam (developed only in the 10th cent.) As Syriac was already present during the formative period of Malayalam, a lot of Syriac words have crept into it. Sleeba (cross), madbaha (alter), kasesa (priest), qurbana (Eucharist) are examples.

The liturgy that was in use in this church when the Portuguese landed in Malabar (end of 15th cent.) was the east Syrian liturgy of Adai and Mari, the same as that of the Persian Church. Other liturgical practices also would have been in line with that of the east Syrian tradition. Later when the church had to face the threat of latinization under the Portuguese Archbishop Menezes, the Archdeacon of India and other leaders of the Church were constantly trying to establish contacts with churches in the Middle East following Syrian liturgy and traditions. In the turbulent events that followed in the 17th century, the St. Thomas Christians who resisted latinisation entered into an intimate relation with the west Syrian Church of Antioch. During the succeeding centuries (18th and 19th) the Church slowly accepted west Syrian liturgical traditions. Thus the liturgy of St. James replaced that of Adai and Mari. Other liturgical books such as order of sacraments of marriage, baptism, house blessing, funeral rites etc. were brought to Malabar by visiting bishops and Patriarchs of the Antiochian Church. Books of prayer such as shimo (prayer for ordinary days) prayers for the holy week, prayers for lent, the penquito (prayers for feasts and special days) etc. followed suite. Detailed rubrics conforming to antiochian practices were slowly established through bulls of Patriarchs and direct instructions given by visiting prelates. Patriarch Peter III, who visited the Malankara Church during the last quarter of the 19th century, did give the final touch to the antiochianisation of the Malankara Church. It is inferred that he even tried to conform the dress of the people of Malankara to that of the Syrians, an attempt which proved to be a failure.

The establishment of Syriac printing presses, first in Cochin, (St. Thomas press), which was later shifted to Kottayam, and in Pampakuda (Mar Julius press, in 1879) helped the spread of west Syrian liturgical traditions. A Syriac periodical by name simath haye, published from the Mar Julius Press popularized even patristic texts, side by side with books of worship.

If the 19th century saw the establishment of west Syrian traditions in Kerala, the 20th century can be distinguished as the era of translations. Especially during the second half of the past cent most of the liturgical texts were translated to Malayalam. Eminent linguists like St. Dionysius Vattasseril, Konat Mathen Malpan and Mattackal Alexandreos Malpan gave the lead to this trend while H. H. Mar Baselios Augen I, H. H. Mar Baselios Mathews I, H. G. Youhanon Mar Severios and Konat Abraham Malpan followed suit in the next generation. Now almost all liturgical texts, except some used in very rare and special occasions, have been made available in Malayalam. Translations in other Indian languages and English are under way.

It has to be born in mind that the St. Thomas Christians, even while accepting and feeling proud of their Syrian liturgical heritage, has always adopted those traditions in combination with local customs and practices. For example, customs related to birth, marriage and funeral have a lot of local elements. As stated at the out set, though they have inherited Antiochian faith and liturgy, their culture is Indian.
==========================
Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches

How Different is The Eastern Orthodox Church?
Dr. Paulos Mar Gregorios

Several people have asked me this question in several different forms:
Who are these Orthodox-- Protestants or Roman Catholics?
What do they believe differently from the others?
What is the difference between Orthodox and other Christians?
Let me try some simple answers to these three questions.

Who are the Indian Orthodox?
First, both Roman Catholics and Protestants are Western Christian groups. The Orthodox Church is not Western Christianity. Eastern in origin, it was from the beginning open to influences from all cultures. In the first century, Christianity was primarily an Asian-African religion. Only by the 4th century did the Roman Empire become increasingly Christian. The Strength of Christianity in the early period was in Palestine, Syria, Greece, Asia Minor, Egypt, and Libya. We can make a list of the earliest Churches -- the Churches of the first century.

In the West, i.e. Italy: 2 Churches -- Rome and Puteoli (today Pozzuoli near Naples)
Western Greece: 5 Churches -- Nicopolis, Corinth, Athens, Thessalonica and Philippi.
Eastern Greece (Asia Minor, today Turkey): 15 Churches -- Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea, Troas, Miletus, Colossae, Perga, Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe.
Syria and the East: 6 Churches -- Antioch, Tarsus Edessa, Damascus, Tyre, Sidon
Palestine: 4 Churches-- Caesarea, Jerusalem, Samaria, Pella
Cyprus: 2 Churches-- Paphos and Salamis
Egypt: Alexandria
Pentapolis (North Africa): Cyrene
India: Malabar

As you can see, only 2 out of 37 Apostolic Churches are strictly Western. If Western Greece and Cyprus are also regarded as Europe, then nine Churches are in Europe, while 28 are in Asia and Africa.
The Orthodox Church claims to be the true successor of all these Apostolic Churches, including the Italian Churches, which used Greek as their language of worship in that century. So the Orthodox Church is neither Roman Catholic nor Protestant. It regards itself as the true and faithful successor of the ancient Apostolic Church, and regards the Western or Roman Catholic Church as a group that broke off and went astray from the true tradition of the Christian Church. The Protestant Churches broke off much later (in the 16th century and after) from the Roman Catholic.
The Orthodox are today in two families -- the Oriental Orthodox family, to which the Indian Orthodox Church belongs, and the Byzantine Orthodox family, which is four times as large.
The Oriental Orthodox family has five Churches -- India, Armenia, Syria, Egypt and Ethiopia - three in Asia and two in Africa. Total membership is over 25 millions.

The Byzantine Orthodox family has over 100 million members -- in Greece, Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Western Europe, America, Australia and so on. Their members are mostly Slavic, Greek or Roman in origin. But they are also regarded as Eastern, though they are a bit less Asian-African.
Thus the Indian Orthodox Church is a strictly Asian-African Church, an Apostolic Church in continuity with the ancient West Asian Apostolic Church. This Church was established in India in the very first century by the Apostle. St. Thomas, one of the twelve Apostles of Jesus Christ. It is one of the 40 or so ancient Apostolic Churches of the world.
What do they believe differently?
The very question is a Western one. In the West a Church is defined mainly by what it believes, ie. by its doctrines and teachings. This intellectualist orientation of faith does not belong to the Eastern tradition.
The Orthodox confess the same faith as the ancient Church -- the faith as was later formulated in the fourth century in the councils of Nicea and Constantinople.
We object to certain later additions made by the Roman Catholics, for example the addition of the word ‘filioque’ in the Latin creed. They, for example, teach that the Holy Spirit, one of the Three Persons of the Trinity, proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque means ‘and from the Son’). We do not teach so. The son is begotten by the father; the Spirit proceeds from the Father. The words “begotten’ and ‘proceeding’ delineate the difference between the Son and the Spirit in their relation to the Father. In later centuries, especially after the fifth century when the Western Church broke from the Asian-African moorings, it misunderstood the word ‘proceeding’ as related to the coming of the Spirit in the Church on Pentecost. This coming, of course, is from the Father and the Son, but that is not what is meant by ‘proceeding’. The latter word denotes the eternal relation between the Father and the Spirit, and not the relation in time and history.

In the eternal dimension we cannot say that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Therefore ‘filioque’ is out of place, wrong and misleading.
There are other doctrines and dogmas which the Roman Catholic Church has added to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed -- eg. the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, the dogma of Papal Infallibility, and the dogma of the bodily assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The first two are wrong and the third is not dogma, for the Orthodox. We do not believe that there is any special miracle called Immaculate Conception connected with the origin and birth of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Nor do we believe that the Pope or any other human being is infallible. As for the teaching about the bodily assumption of Mary, We do teach it, but not as some central dogma of the Church.
Nor do we believe that believing in the right dogma is the evidence of a true Christian. We put equal emphasis on the way of life, on the way of worship, on the way of disciplining oneself as on the way of thinking and belief.

What then is the difference between East and West?
It is not so easy to pinpoint the difference in words. It seems the difference is more one of ethos, of orientation, of spirit rather than of dogma or belief.
Let us state some of the more obvious differences. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, believes in a universal organizational structure for the Church with one particular bishop, namely the Bishop of Rome or the Pope, holding a unique position in the whole world. We Easterners do not accept any one bishop as having universal jurisdiction or authority. So the Orthodox have no Pope. What they have is really an Episcopal Synod for each local or national Church. The President of the Synod may be a Patriarch, a Catholicos, and Archbishop or even a Pope as in the case of the Coptic Church of Egypt. But no such Synod or its president can have universal jurisdiction over the Churches of other countries. Each local or national Church with its Episcopal Synod and Patriarch is autocephalous, ie. it has its own head, and does not look to any other Church to exercise authority over it.

This difference in turn is based on a more profound understanding of what we call the Church Catholic. The Church Catholic is not the Roman Catholic Church. It is the whole Church, in all time and space, in its qualitative and quantitative fullness. The universal Church is not the Church Catholic. The latter includes all those who have ever lived on earth as Christians in former times, ie. Christ and the Apostles, the prophets, martyrs, confessors, fathers, doctors, ordinary believers and so on. The universal Church is, of course, composed only of those now living. The Orthodox Church had no category called the universal Church. The attempt to create a category called the “ecumenical church” by the Constantinople Church, has been virtually rejected by the Orthodox tradition.

Now the Roman Catholic Church has something called the Universal Church, and the Pope is the head of this Universal Church. So, for them, the fullness of the Church means the Universal Church which is for them, the manifestation of the Church Catholic. Because they think this way, the local Church is only part of the Universal Church and cannot be autocephalous or having its own head. The local church is ever incomplete, according to this view, without the head of the Universal Church, the Pope, since the part is never complete without the whole. Hence the insistence of the second Vatican Council that
“The College or body of bishops has no authority unless it is simultaneously conceived of in terms of its head, the Roman Pontiff, Peter’s successor.... Together with its head, the Roman Pontiff, and never without this head, the Episcopal order is the subject of Supreme and full power over the Universal Church. But this power can be exercised only with the consent of the Roman Pontiff.” (Lumen Gentinum: 22)
This teaching the Eastern Orthodox regard as rank heresy, and based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the relation between the local Church and the Church Catholic. The Easterners believe that the Church Catholic is fully manifest in the local Church, where the people are in communion with the bishops of the Episcopal Synod. We do not regard the local Church as part, but as the manifestation of the fullness, of the Church Catholic. The error in the teaching of the Roman Church, we feel, is due to its breaking away from the tradition of the Church Catholic in the 5th century.

Neither does the Orthodox Church teach that the bishop or college of bishops alone exercise authority in the Church. Every baptised Christian shares in the kingly, priestly and prophetic authority of the Church, though the bishop has a certain fullness of spiritual power which others in the Church do not have. But the bishop separated form the Church is nothing. It is only in communion with the Church. With the college of presbyters and deacons and with the people that he exercises his power. The Orthodox Church is thus much more conciliar and communitarian in structure.
Neither did the Orthodox Church ever develop an aggressive or institutional mission such as Roman Catholics and Protestants have developed. The witness of the Orthodox is a quiet one, based more on worship and a holy life of love and service, than on preaching and proselytism. This lack of aggressiveness is often criticized by Western Christians as a lack of missionary fervour. But we know that the aggressive Western missionary movement is intimately linked with the economic, cultural and colonial expansionism of the West, and we would rather not be associated with such an aggressive and institutionalized mission.

The worship of the Church is the centre of the Orthodox ethos, rather than its mission. The mission follows naturally from true worship and feeds into it. It is in the eucharistic worship of the Church that the Orthodox have a foretaste of the Kingdom which is coming. To join with the angels and archangels in the adoration of the one True God and to rejoice in his presence of the Spirit through the Son-- this is the heart of the Orthodox ethos. The Orthodox Churches under Muslim or Communist oppression always survived because of this worship orientation.
The West separates action from contemplation, thought and prayer. For us it is in and from eucharistic worship that all action, contemplation, thought and prayer derive their significance.
==========================
Before 1653

THE THOMAS CHRISTIANS BEFORE 1653 IN CONTACT WITH THE ROMAN CATHOLICS DURING THE PORTUGUESE COLONIALISM.

Introduction
It was with the arrival of the Portuguese in the 16th century to South India that the ancient church of St. Thomas there for the first time in its history, began to undergo the decisive impacts of the Portuguese colonial era, also with which, the adverse effects of the Roman Catholicism. As the result, it was enforced to succumb under Rome, through the Portuguese in the course of time. Five well – planned maneuvers were played to force this church finally to obey Rome. Among these the first one is bringing the church of Thomas under the administrative control of the Portuguese. The second, subjecting this Church under a thorough latinization process by establishing two clergy training institutions; Third, forcefully terminating all contacts of the Kerala Church, once for all with the East Syrian Church. Fourthly, enforcing the whole Church of the Thomas through a representation in an assembly under Rome. Fifthly imposing upon it a direct rule of the Roman Catholic regime destructing at the same time of all indigenous precious heritages of the Church of Thomas.

CONTACT OF THE THOMAS CHRISTIAN WITH THE PORTUGESE
The Thomas Christians as a whole reacted against the Roman Catholicism in 1653 through the famous event known by the name the Coonan Cross Oath. Although the event was a great success, the Church of St. Thomas could not long continue in its determination. As the pressures from the Roman Catholic side continued to haunt, the leadership was subjected to division. A group once again rejoined Roman Catholicism and stood against the free movement of the group which stood for freedom from Rome and this group later on came to become the Orthodox Church of India. A few details of this story are explained under.
When the Portuguese landed in India thy met the Christians of St.Thomas there and they felt satisfied that their centuries’-old dream of discovering India and eastern Christians had been fulfilled. They set great hopes on St.Thomas Christians. These Christians too on their part experienced a spontaneous relief and joy at the arrival of powerful Christians from the West and desired the new comer’s help to strengthen their own privileged existence in India. So the new comer’s were enthusiastically welcomed by the Church of St.Thomas. When Vasco-da- Gama arrived at Cochin on his second voyage (1502) infact, a delegation of Thomas Christians went and met him and implored protection.
The cordial and intimate relation established thus, continued for two decades. However, when the Portuguese penetrating into the interiors of the St.Thomas Christians and into their Churches, knew that these Christians were neither subject to Rome, nor were in that Church traditions. To their dismay they found that these Christians were followers of the East Syrian Church, and its bishops looked after them, and the Patriarch in Babylonia was considered their ecclesiastical supreme. Moreover they thought, as the East Syrian Church is Nestorian, Indian Christians also is of that sect, which to the norm of the Roman Catholicism is heretical. Since Pope of Rome through ‘padroado’ privileges had granted to the Portuguese crown sovereign rights over the eastern lands which come under their sway, the Portuguese thought, that is their right, according to which the Thomas Christians be under their control and to achieve this aim, the Portuguese worked cleverly among the Church of the Thomas Christians for one and a half century.

THE EAST SYRIAN BISHOPS PRESENCE AND ENCOUNTERS WITH PORTUGUESE
When the Portuguese came, the Church of St.Thomas was following the traditions of the East Syrian Church. There were about a dozen bishops from that Church, among the St.Thomas Christians in the 16th century. From a letter of 5 East Syrian bishops, written to their Patriarch in Babylon (in 1504), it is known that there were in Malabar about thirty thousand families of St.Thomas Christians their co-religionists; they have begun to build new churches, and that they were prosperous in every respect and living in peace and security. They also say that St.Thomas was martyred at Mylapore and there was a monastery. The letter too admits the arrival of the Portuguese and friendly relationship between them and the St.Thomas Christians. Among these East Syrian bishops Mar Jacob, the last one, lived and led the Church of St.Thomas till his death in 1552 AD. After the death of this last bishop the Roman Catholics tightened their efforts of subduing the Church of St. Thomas and for that, they directed their energy in the direction of terminating the fresh arrivals of bishops from Babylon. Even if some had come disguised they were caught and subjected to destruction or tortured to embrace Roman Catholicism so that they might become helpful to achieve the Romanization of the Church of St.Thomas. Two or three bishops did arrive from the East Syrian Church after the death of Mar Jacob but they were harassed to be so and Mar Abraham was one among them, who led the Thomas Christians till the last year of the 16th century.

THE PLACE OF UDAYAMPEROOR IN SUB DURING THOMAS UNDER ROME
Immediately after the death of this bishop Mar Abraham St.Thomas Christians were forced to meet in a famous synod, best known as the Synod of Udayamperoor (1599) and declared that they were under Rome there on.
Among all efforts that were undertaken to subdue the Thomas Christians by the Roman Catholics during the Portuguese colonialism and through the Portuguese, the efforts of the Jesuits – a religious order that had been framed in the tensive context of reformation in Europe – deserve special mention. For, their endeavours, in the direction of enforcing Roman Catholicism upon the Church of St.Thomas, were remarkable. It was due to their effort a clergy training centre was established at Vaipikotta to train St.Thomas Christians’ clergy in Oriental style. Moreover, the major architects behind the convocation, deliberations, decrees’ framing and decrees’ execution of the so called Fake Udayamperoor Synod 1599 – which once for all made the Church of Thomas Christians succumbed to Rome – were these Jesuits of Vaipikotta Seminary. Apart from these the administration of the Church of St.Thomas was also entrusted with them as a tribute to the gesuits excellent service of subding them following the Udayamperoor Synod. Till 1653 three bishops from the Jesuits ruled over this church executing the decrees of that Synod and thus enforced the Malabar Church to be a part of Roman Catholicism.
However the Synod of Udayamperoor was the culminating point in the high handed process of making the church of St.Thomas part of the Roman Catholic Church, subject to Portuguese administrative control. The convoker, presider, decrees’ frame and executer etc. all were done by the Roman Catholic archbishop Dom Alexios Menezis of Goa, who infact, had no right at all, to do anything of that sort in the church of St.Thomas. The synod was held for eight days. Almost all of the decrees were framed not in the synod after due discussion but before 15 days or more of the meeting. Many of the decrees were framed after the Synod as the archbishop desired. The synodal decrees were passed by threats and terrorizing methods, and autocratically as desired by the archbishop and his coccus. The synodal decrees were aimed at the total transformation of the church of St.Thomas with the Roman Catholics, in faith, church polity, church discipline etc. It decreed the supremo for the church of St.Thomas - the pope of Rome. The Patriarch of Babylon was condemned as heretic and contact with him declared highly perilous inviting dangers.

THE IMPACT OF UDAYAMPEROOR
The faith of the Malabar church must be as per the norms laid by the council of Trent. The priests should keep compulsory celibacy and the Malabar church is divided into parishes with parish priest directly appointed by the Portuguese church authorities. Besides, the church is required to abandon the many errors which have crept into its life from the Indian milieu. All Syriac books are to be handed over for burning so that no memory of East Syrian connections do remain.
Though the whole process of the so called the Synod of Udayamperoor had been condemned by recent scholarships both ecclesiastical and secular, yet the impact of it upon the Thomas Christians was decisive. Roman Catholicism was firmly established on the St. Thomas Christians and the Synod was a turning point in the history of the Malabar Church. After the synod these events followed immediately.
Appointment of a Latin bishop over the Church of St.Thomas.
Suppression of the Metropolitan status of Angamali and bringing of it as a subordinate under Goa.
Padroado of the Portuguese was extended over the Thomas Christians.
The Thomas Christians’ protest and Restoration of the Metropolitan status to Angamali and change of the place to Crangannore under the Latin bishop Roz.

Francis Roz was the first Portuguese Latin-Roman Catholic bishop over the Thomas Christians soon after the subduing of the Thomas Christians under Rome through the Udayamperoor Synod. Since he had been the main architect behind the success of Udayamperoor he was given the privilege of ruling over the Thomas Christians for 24 years. During the time according to the principles directed by Udayamperoor synod he tried his best to Romanize and Latinize the Thomas Christians in worship, administrative systems, customs, discipline, etc. He centralized in himself all authority reducing almost all to nothing the powers of the archdeacon, Palliyogams and Kathanars of the St. Thomas’ Church. The same continued to occur during the episcopates of two successors Stephen Britto (1624-1641) and Francis Garzia (1641-1659).
Archdeacon George of the Cross, who had suffered endlessly under Roz and Britto died in 1640 and was succeeded by his nephew archdeacon Thomas Parambil. This Thomas was not in tune with the archbishop Garzia. This incumbent tried his best, by using both ecclesiastical and civil powers, to suppress the archdeacon. Meanwhile the archdeacon had corresponded secretly for bishops from South-West Asian churches. A man named Ahatalla arrived and he was made captive by the Portuguese at Mylapore. From detention, he was brought to Cochin in chains on his way to Goa or to somewhere else to be sent away or destroyed by the Portuguese. At once under Archdeacon the Thomas Christians reacted asking release of Ahatalla thinking that he was sent to them at their request by some South-West Asian churches. But, all appeals for his release were failures.
The news spread that he was drowned by the Portuguese. The tension mounted and reached its apex under the leadership of the Archdeacon against the Portuguese, Roman Catholics, Jesuits and Garzia, at an Oath called Coonen Cross on Friday, January3,1653, at Mattanchery near Kochi,. This is the Coonen Cross Oath, the famous freedom declaration event of the Church of the St.Thomas Christians. At once all connections with the Portuguese Roman Catholics, Jesuits and archbishop Garzia were rejected declaring that “till the end that neither the Thomas Christians nor their progenies never do obey the church of Rome or the Portuguese or Jesuits save their Archdeacon Thomas”; also added that the Francis metran should be rejected similar like any other church superiors from the Roman side.
All historians agree that during the Oath practically the whole body of the Thomas Christians joined in against Roman Catholic’s supremacy. That after the Oath too, for some considerable time there were very few people ready to co-operate with Garzia. One view is that he had only about 200 laymen and 15 to 20 clergy with him from the St.Thomas Christians.
The Coonen Cross event was a great victory for the Archdeacon Thomas and for his church. It was a powerful expression of the will and determination of the Thomas Christians, who wanted to re-establish their freedom, identity, dignity and venerable heritage, rejection at the same time of all those things imposed upon them by the colonial powers religiously and politically.
Their leaders assembled at Edapally where four councilors – Parambil Chandy, Kadavil Chandy, Vengoor Gheevarghese and Anjilimoottil IttyThoman were appointed to help archdeacon in his church administration. This was followed by a general meeting at Allangad on May 22, 1653 where Archdeacon Thomas was elevated to the status of bishop with the title MarThoma by laying on of hands of 12 leading priests of the Church of St.Thomas at the unanimous consent of the Church.
Being troubled by the effects of the Coonen Cross, Garzia, Portuguese and the Goan authorities tried their best to pacify and then to suppress the event, and to bring the community under chaos, and again under Roman Catholic control. But their efforts were in vain. In this situation, Goan authorities requested direct Roman papal intervention in the affair. Now Rome, seeing the obtained favourable opportunity at its disposal cleverly well acted immediately despatching two batches of Carmelite missions, one under Hyacinth and another headed by Joseph Sebastiani. The latter arrived Malabar in 1657 and the former a year later. Portuguese, Goan authorities and Garzia lent full supports to these missions. Moreover the Raja of Cochin and his subordinate petty rajas also at the command of the colonial power, lent their political and economical supports. Sebastiani visiting many churches of St.Thomas Christians and making good use of local rajas’ supports and by spending huge amount of bribery, to please these rajas and other reactionary elements and forcefully entering into churches of the Thomas Christians took control of them. In the meantime archbishop Garzia, bribing 3 among the four councilors of MarThoma caused them to defect from MarThoma’s side and to scandalize against him, joining the Roman side. Thereafter using these former adherents of MarThoma Sebastiani questioned and scandalized the episcopal position of Mar Thoma as illegitimate and invalid and constantly and publicly accused MarThoma as bishop only in name. Many who thus accustomed to hear frequently from the enemies of MarThoma and particularly from the cousin brother Parambil Chandy of MarThoma, as well as from the other two defected councillors disliked MarThoma and joined for Rome.
In January 1658 Sebestiani made a hurried visit to Rome to get himself consecrated as bishop very sectetly and returned to Malabar and thereafter presented himself before the Thomas Christians as the legitimate and valid bishop unlike Mar Thoma. The Portuguese and the Goan authorities would have opposed theis move of Sebastini as he became a bishop without their consent. But they kept silent because of two reasons: Archbishop Garzia was almost all at the eve of his life so he could not do anything to reconcile the revolted Thomas Christians; moreover, the Goan and Portuguese authorities were unable to control the situation of trouble in Malabar. So they kept silent and supported Sebastiani to act whatever he liked to. Sebastiani as bishop excommunicating Mar Thoma forced into the churches of the latter with the political force and huge sum of money. Parambil Chandy also assisted him. Thus 2/3 of the Churches of St. Thomas Christians were brought once again under the control of Rome. The betrayal of Parambil Chandy, Kadavil Chandi and Vengoor Gheevarghese was disastrous to Mar Thoma and most advantageous to the success of Roman Catholicism once again among the St.Thomas Christians. Supported by the Portuguese, the Kings of Cochin and Vadakkankur and others, Mar Thoma was prohibited entry into their territories. Mar Thoma had people all over there. But in a prohibition condition all over, he could not enter and guide his adherents. The net result, due to all adverse conditions, was all in favour of Rome’s victory. The position of Mar Thoma became highly precarious year by year.
In such a situation things were moving on the Dutch captured Cochin and ended the Portuguese rule in 1663. Sebastiani too ordered to quit. Caught up in such a dilemma he decided to confer episcopal position on Parambil Chandy in retribution to his loyalty to Rome and to deception of his associates. Parambil Chandy was consecrated bishop ceremonially but Sebastiani made it sure that Chandy would remain loyal to Rome and not join with his nephew – Mar Thoma. Before his consecration, he was pressed to curse the latter publicly. Further he was taken before the Dutch authorities at Cochin to Vow again and to make sure that he remains faithful to Rome during the Dutch dominion. Thus closing all possibilities of future re-union of the St.Thomas Christians and clearly dividing it into two, and placing it in a state of conflicting condition Sebastiani left Malabar. Moreover, before his departure he got assurance from the Dutch that they do support Chandy and his people and not Mar Thoma and his adherents. Indeed during the Dutch colonialism Mar Thoma did not get much advantage from them. Although they did not persecute openly the adherents of Mar Thoma and followers. But they were left to be remained silently as an ignored one, without any support from the Dutch. This ignored situation prevailed all through till the end of 18th century.
In such a discarded and disappointed condition Mar Thoma bishops lived and guided the anti-Roman Thomas Christians. From 1665 they began contact with the West Syrian Patriarchate. But that connection was not of much usefulness to them as it was desired then. This affair will be traced in the forthcoming another section of this study.
From the above given story of the St.Thomas Christians during the Portuguese colonial period it is obvious these points.
WHO IS THE VICTOR
It was the Portuguese mission associated with colonialism and militant Roman Catholicism enforced the ancient Church of St.Thomas to come under the Roman Catholic church. When they refused to surrender to that forced submission they were not allowed to continue in a state of united but also were subjected in a divided conflicting condition. If a group desired to move freely, they were too not allowed to go on that way peacefully. The original causers of divisions and quarrels within the church of St.Thomas Christians were the Roman Catholics and their tradition of such quarrelling was faithfully handed over to their partisans who joined with them from the St.Thomas Christians.
The church of St.Thomas Christians founded by St.Thomas was connected with the Church of East Syria till the 16th century. In that sense it was an independent church. The Portuguese action in converting that church to Roman was totally unjustified. Rome’s claim of universal church and universal jurisdiction are not accepted by any Eastern Church. This is a unilateral claim which is being advanced with Rome’s money by making uniat, churches with members from Eastern Churches. As for the church of Malabar, it is out of ignorance of Church history and incapability to hold on its own, that it happened to fall into the state of uniat church from 1599 AD. But after over half century, in 1653 when an opportunity arose, the community almost as a whole abandoned that servitude. Rome now used non-Portuguese European missionaries and did everything in its power to gain the loss. Even then about half of the people did not follow or yield to Rome. Though this section did not have adequate knowledge of theology and church history, yet it maintained its Eastern character and ecclesiastical freedom, which a section joined from the Thomas Christians with Rome from 1653, did not represent or enjoy. This was their most deplorable situation then onwards till now. It was Rome’s greediness for power and the utilization of money in that direction the cause behind divisions every where among Christian churches. This was what had happened in the affair of the church of St.Thomas in the 16th and 17th centuries in India. The consequences of the betrayal of a section of the Thomas Christians who had rejoined with Rome were visible while one looks into their tribulations they suffered from 1657 on till now under the servitude of Rome. But their opponents from then on till now had enjoyed the freedom though underwent tribulations initially. So the difference between the Thomas Christians with Rome and the Thomas Christians apart from Rome is decisive and incompatible. If one is under the servitude of Rome the other is fully an independent one; if one is slave the other is free. Let the reader assess who of those is really the best and the victor the betrayer or the betrayed?
The Roman Catholic Church could have helped enormously the church of St.Thomas out of its larger resources provided had it had a larger and committed vision of Christianity. Indeed in the 16th century the Indian church was in need of help. Indian Christians befriended with the Portuguese in that sense of mutual help. But seeing the plight of it the Roman Catholics through the Portuguese colonial dominance attempted to bring it under their suzerainty. This was typically the expression of the type of the Western culture of the time from which the Roman Catholicism was not free. Hence the events like the Coonen Cross Oath and divisions within the St.Thomas Christians and through all such events the Indian Church had challenged the concept of Roman Catholicism’s sovereignty. But it is very unfortunate to say that a section within the Indian Church did not realize at all the far reaching importance of those events which took place in their own history as self expressions of their own self-awareness.
VARIOUS CONDITIONS OF THE ST.THOMAS CHRISTIANS IN THE 16th and 17th CENTURIES
Before concluding this section of the history of the St.Thomas Christians in the 16th and 17th centuries, it is relevant to note here a few things on the church conditions of the St.Thomas Christians during the period. Till 1599 what was their position is detailed first: “The life of St.Thomas Christians had been leading spanned two worlds: the geographical, political and social world of Kerala; and the ecclesiastical world of the East Syrian”. It was the East Syrian bishops governed them, whose faith, worship, church laws they shared in. But this does not mean that church had no identity of its own. It had an Indian one. All the 16th century evidences are unanimous that the church identity of the Thomas Christians was with the East Syrian Church. Therefore, the doctrinal position was East Syrian. Similar is the case in Liturgy and church disciplines. The texts of the Eucharistic celebration were the liturgy of St. Adai and St. Mari. In “Hail Mary” they did not use the words “O! Mother of God”, instead they used “mother of Christ”. Similarly auricular confession before a priest was not in vogue. There were traditions of married and celibate clergy but no compulsory celibacy.
To carry out the ministry of the church they had East Syrian bishops, local clergy and palliyogams. Apart from them, there was an archdeacon the senior most priest, who had according to the tradition the sole administration of the church in the presence and longer absence of the East Syrian bishops, who were occasional visitors. Their church Supremo was the Catholicos – Patriarch of the East Syrian Church who resided at Gezarta in Iraq. Apart from these they also had a large number of indigenous traditions some of which though the Udayamperoor synod tried to modify considering as due to bad influences from non-Christians contacts, yet most of them continued to prevail thereafter.
Till the above said Synod the church condition of these Christians was East Syrian and this was replaced with the Roman Catholicism. Instead of the Catholicos-Patriarch Pope of Rome became their supreme and instead of the East Syrian bishop’s presence the Latin regime and bishops. The archdeacon’s office though present was weakened with the introduction of the Latin bishopric and its regime and the real issue of clash was between the powers and offices of the Latin bishop and that of the archdeacon.
The liturgy of Adai and Mari continued to prevail with modification because although the Udayamperoor Synod had instructed to modify the liturgy in accordance with the Latin custom that was not worked out due to stern opposition of the St.Thomas Christians. So archbishop Roz had to reintroduce, as the Rozian statute ignoring norms of Udayamperoor, several prevailed customs including the ancient liturgy.
During 16th and 17th centuries the Thomas Christians had no connection whatsoever either with the Antiochene Syrians or with the Antiochene Syrians in Tigrith. Same is the case with regard to the Roman Catholics till their enforced dominion over these Christians through the Udayamperoor synod.
The life-style of the Thomas Christians during 16th and17th centuries is of unique importance, and it has been briefly stated by eminent luminaries as “Indian in culture, Christian in religion and Oriental in worship”.
Their church life did bear the characteristics of an early church which had its origin and growth outside the Grace-Roman world. There was no tightly centralized administrative structure of a monarchical pattern. The territorial administrative system which developed after the diocesan pattern within the eastern and western Roman empires did not exist in the Church setup of the St.Thomas Christians in India. Their fidelity to the Law of Thomas (Thomayude Margam) was the touch stone of their authenticity and Orthodoxy. It was this indigenous church life style the Roman Catholics drastically changed following the event of the year 1599 to that of Roman Catholicism.
What the Portuguese saw , while they arrived into the midst of St.Thomas Christian’s was that socially and culturally these Indian Christians were very much integrated into the wider Hindu community and they kept on many of the Hindu Namboothiri social customs and practices. They had a position of privilege in Indian Society accepted and later on granted by the local rulers. Since majority of the Thomas Christian’s were having been from high Hindu social standing they continued the social organization and life they lived before conversion and due to this there was no social dislocation between the Christians and the Hindu high caste community. Christians shared with the Hindus especially the Brahmins very many of the social customs and practices such as connected with birth, adolescence, marriage, death etc. Hence they are considered next to Brahmins or equals, in sharing names they had similarities with the Nayars also. In dress, food habits occupations, feastivities, ornaments wearing similarities are much more. There were instances of inter-marriages between Christians and Nairs in Kerala. Religious harmony was the rule of the land. Mutual toleration and respect were the outcome of the same. The Hindu temples, Christian churches and even Mosques co-existed nearby sharing and worshipping. No restrictions or prohibitions prevailed on, that the Hindu alone or Christian alone attend functions therein; and the Hindu went to Christian churches and participated in festivities, similar like the case with the Christians too. Christians used Hindu style torches, umbrellas, banners, bells, elephants, processional regalia etc and shared all these with the Hindus too during festivities in temples actively participating with presence. Thus from the very beginning the Indian Christians were an indigenous community having the deeply rooted social and community life with the Indians.
Their food was frugal consisting of boiled rice and curries, mostly vegetables; they rarely ate meat, beef and pork never. Alcoholic drinks were considered unbecoming to their sound social status. During social feasts they eat with fingers squatting on long mattresses, their plates being plantain leaves right side folded into two, which was shared also by the high caste Hindus of the country as privilegious.
They distinguished themselves in such professions as agriculture, trade and military service. They cleared forests and drained marshy places to cultivate paddy, coconut etc. They were the proprietors of pepper and master of public weighing office. They were the finest soldiers in the whole of Malabar. Hindu kings constructed churches for them and endowed them with tax-free lands in order to secure their military services. For their services certain families had a position of privilege in society and certain honorific titles had been conferred on, such as Tharakan, Muthalali, Menon, Panicker, Vaidyan etc. A commonest name of the Christians was Nasrani Mappila. Many served kings also as ministers and councilors.
The Thomas Christians were a highly cultivated and disciplined people both in body and mind. They had elaborated rules of etiquette. Not only for any private life but also for public disciplines these were highly utilized. The modesty of the St.Thomas Christians’ women was proverbial.
Although they respected other religions as the means of others salvation yet, they preserved their Christian faith intact. And they were distinguishable as Christians among the non-Christian people. It is a fact that they did not attempt much to effect a synthesis between their faith and the philosophy of the Hindu religion as the Greek Christians had tried. This may be due to their broader vision of communal harmony and spirit of tolerance, which are typical Indian contribution to the Christian vision. “Outside the church there is salvation” is the life experience out of the encounters of the church of St.Thomas in India due to its co-existence with classical non-Christian religions in India. This positive attitude was also due to their theology which is Antiochene.
At the heart of the Antiochene theology which influenced the Thomas Christian till the 16th century period, was the emphasis on the full humanity of Jesus Christ. The reality of Jesus’ humanity and its kinship with the rest of humankind is of utmost importance in their theology. Contrary to the Augustinian teaching on original sin and human nature, they emphasized human freedom and the responsibilities and obligations of Christian faith. It is possible for such a theology to develop a positive attitude to other religions and cultures. An emphasis on the full humanity of Jesus Christ, an appreciation of human freedom and responsibility, a positive attitude to other religions and cultures and a strong affirmation of the independence and freedom of the Indian Church were some of the salient features of the Indian Christian theology and ecclesiology in the early period. This is what the Latin missionaries found to be heretical within the St.Thomas Christians and what the present day historians of Indian Christian theology failed to notice.
Here above it is seen how St.Thomas Christians lived and encountered in the 16th and 17th centuries. Till the end of 16th century they lived ecclesiastically in closer allegiance with the East Syrian Christianity and thus were their story while one looks back at least to the 4th century or even backwards. This is explained in the forthcoming section of this narration.
==========================
Before the Portuguese arrival

THE THOMAS CHRISTIANS BEFORE THE PORTUGUESE ARRIVAL

With regard to the church status of the Indian St.Thomas Christians before the Portuguese’ arrivals, it is admitted unanimously by all the classical historians that it was in close connection with the East Syrian Christianity. Apart from the evidences available in the 16th century almost all the evidences from 4th century, at the least, admit the above said facts. Out of the study of these evidences it can be held these. One, the expansion of Christianity in the East, especially in India was not the work of Hellenistic Christian missionaries from Antioch or from any parts within the former Roman Empire, not a linear progression from Antioch. It was the work of Jewish Christian missionaries such as Adai in Edessa, Aggai and Mari in Persia and Thomas in India. In the East Syrian Tradition, St.Thomas is their great Apostle. The Christian churches thus formed were ecclesiastically independent of Antioch or any other centre in the West. It is difficult to present the pre-Portuguese history of St.Thomas Christians in India as a connected story due to lack of sufficient historical records. But we get certain glimpses of the life of them in the writings of foreign visitors, sometimes in the traditions preserved in India and East Syria, occasionally in casual references by Indian writers, and in a few monuments and inscriptions. Out of these the following outline could be drafted.

TRAVELERS’ RECORD
The first truly circumstantial and historical mention of a church of St.Thomas in our modern India is made by Western travelers of the lower Middle Ages. They are Marcopolo (1298), John of Monte Corvino (1293), Friar Odoric (1325), John de Maringolly (1349) and Nicolo Conti (c.1440). All these mention about a church or shrine of St.Thomas in India or Mylapur. Similar is the case with reference to the nature of Christianity that it was East Syrian. Marcopolo is emphatic in the above said emphases. It is from the account of John Maringolli that one hears, for the first time, the name addressed to these Indian Christians as St.Thomas Christians.
However, the first unquestionable historical evidence of an Indian church and of its relation with the East Syrian church is of Cosmos the Alexandrine traveler. Cosmos who traveled the countries beyond the Red sea between 520-530 gives in his Christian Topography well organized Christian churches in Ceylon, Malabar, Calliana, and Socotra with bishops appointed from Persia. What Cosmos intends out of his book was to give a picture that the Persian church had spread all over Asia. Although among them there were Persian immigrants yet most of those churches were of native origins. The Indian church was not a daughter church of the East Syrian Church. Because they themselves admit that the Indian Church had a separate apostolic origin that is out of the apostolic labours of St.Thomas.

MIGRATION OF EAST SYRIANS TO KERALA
Apart from the ecclesiastical relationship that had been established with the East Syrian church, there were at least two important waves of immigration of Persian Christians to India one in the 4th century and the other in the 9th, which strengthened the already existing communities in India. The tradition about the first immigration is this: those 72 families of Persian Christians under the leadership of a merchant Thomas including deacons, priests and a bishop migrated and settled at Kodungalloor, and Cheraman Perumal, the King of Malabar invested them with royal privileges, land and other things inscribed on copper plates. They also built a town Mahadevarpattanam near Kodungallur. Since these Christians tried to preserve their ethnic separation even now they are known as the southist among the St. Thomas Christians or Cnanaya Christians. They are now in a divided condition, a group adheres with the Roman Catholics and exists as part within the Syro-Malabar Church and another group stands with the West Syrian Church with an archbishop. Each of the group’s centre is Kottayam.
Though the ecclesiastical relation between the Indian Christians and the East Syrians existed even before the arrival of the colony of the first immigrants, the arrival not only strengthened the existing Kerala Christian community but also influenced its liturgical life. It is said that it was consequent on the arrival of Thomas C’nai that the Christians of Malabar accepted the rites and ceremonies of the Syrian Church. This may not be a complete acceptance of the Syrian rites and ceremonies because there were indigenous traditions in the Indian church. However it is most likely that the arrival was the beginning of Syrian influence on the liturgical life and practice of the Indian Church.
The second migration is dated in the year AD823 and the tradition claims that the Christian immigrants rebuilt the town of Quilon in AD825 from which date the Malayalam era is reckoned.
The Syrian colony was led by two saintly bishops Mar Sapor and Mar Prot with Sabrisho. Till the Synod of Udayamperoor there was churches among the Thomas Christians built in the name of these saintly bishops. The Synod, considering these bishops Nestorian, ordered to convert those churches into the names of All Saints. There are innumerable ancient churches among the St.Thomas Christians in the names of All Saints which are clear indication that those churches were formerly the churches of Mar Sapor and Mar Prot. This evidence alone is enough to prove that the Indian Christians between 9th century and 1599 were part of the East Syrian Church.
The contemporary evidence to the arrival of this second colony of Persian Christians is available in five copper plates which are still in existence – three in the Catholicate palace Kottayam and two with the Mar Thoma church at Tiruvalla. These plates contain records of grants made to the Christians in Quilon by the kings. Among these grants certain rights are reserved in perpetuity to the Christians in Quilon. Most important of these is the guardianship of steelyard, the weights and the royal stamp. The church is given land let out under certain conditions and also certain families of lower cast are assigned for the maintenance of the church. The Christians have the sole responsibility of administering justice in their territory. The Christians are to enjoy protection from the Venata militia called six hundred and from the Jewish and Manigramman leaders. In the light of the royal grants the picture which emerges is important. The Christians are clearly a well-established community, accepted and highly respected. The granting of responsibility for the weights and measures is an unusual sign of confidence; it may indicate that the immigrants had a higher level of mathematical and commercial competence than the Indians among whom they had settled.
There are also certain inscriptions and monuments surviving from this period, which speak of the connection between the Indian church and the Persian church. The monuments consists of five carved stone Crosses (known as St.Thomas Crosses), which have been discovered in South India, the first at St.Thomas Mount near Madras and others at Kottayam and some other places in Kerala. They are Persian Crosses and are dated 7th or 8th century.

WITNESS OF PERSIAN SOURCES
From Cosmos’ account, it was observed that there was well-organized Christian church in India hierarchically connected with the East Syrian Church. The two immigrations from the East Syrian Church to Kerala suggest frequent contacts existed between the Indian and East Syrian Christians. Though small in number, the Indian Christians from the earlier centuries of Christian era were not completely an isolated group from fellow Christians in Alexandria and Persia. We know of a certain Pantaenus – an Alexandrine scholar, who visited India in the 2nd century. But we have no evidence of any church relationship which the Indian church entered into with the church in Alexandria. But in the case of the East Syrian or Persian church, there came into existence some sort of church relationship between it and the Indian church from a very early date, though it is difficult to say when this relationship was established. One may wonder why the Indian church came to establish a relationship with the Persian church and not with others. A possible explanation is both East Syria and India claimed St.Thomas as their apostle and in that sense they had a common apostolic origin. Hence, they were proud of their Thomistic origin and decided to be in that family.
The Indian church claimed St.Thomas as their founder and the East Syrians had a special relationship with St.Thomas as it was he who sent Addai to Edessa, and Aggai and Mari who evangelized Persia were the disciples of Addai. Edessa and Persia always unquestionably upheld St.Thomas as the apostle of India. However, we also have to note that according to certain traditions existing in India St.Thomas, on his way to India embarked at Basra, in the Persian Gulf. In all probability, St.Thomas might have preached in Basra and its neighborhood; and thus they claimed him as the founder of their church.

The first contact of the Indian church was with the church in Basra (Fars), the name of Thomas linking them together. The available evidence indicates that this relationship of the Indian church with the church in Basra existed at least from the 3rd century. The chronicle of Seert an important East Syrian document belonging to the 7th century mentions that Dudi, bishop of Basra in the Persian Gulf, an eminent doctor, left his see between AD 295 – 300 and went to India where he evangelized many people.

When the Episcopal hierarchy of the East Syrian Church was fully centralized and organized by the beginning of the 5th century (410) the bishopric of Rewardashir was elevated to a metropolitanate and given jurisdiction over relations with India. Rewardashir was strategically located on the direct sea route to India near the head of the Persian Gulf on its eastern side and the province included Basra. This arrangement continued till the 7th century when Patriarch Ishoyahb II (628-43) appointed a metropolitan for India separately. The reason might have been the increase of Christians in India. Mingana mentions that between 6 and 12 suffragan bishops were also consecrated for India and the metropolitan of India outranked that of China and that China outranked that of Central Asia. Metropolitans of distant sees such as India, China and Samarkhand were exempted from attending the general Synod of the Church because of the great distance. Instead, they had to write a letter to the Patriarch declaring their allegiance to him and informing him of the stat of their province.

According to Mingana, the 5th century opens with an Indian Christianity, which was in such a state of development that she was able to send her priests to be educated in the best schools of the East Syrian church, and to assist the doctors of that church in the revision of the ancient Syriac translations of the Pauline epistles. He says, “In a precious Colophon to his commentary on the epistle to the Romans, Isshodad writes as follows: This epistle has been translated from Greek into Syriac by Mar Komai, with the help of Daniel the priest, the Indian.”
During the patriarchate of Ishoyahab III (650-60), there arose a rift between him and the Metropolitan Simon of Rewardashir. It is reflected in a letter of the former addressed to the latter which has come down to us in which related to Indian church 3 things could be noted.
Metropolitan Simon in his opposition to the patriarch was violating the canons as he had closed the door of Episcopal succession in the face of many people of India
Consequently the Episcopal succession has been interrupted in India and the country, has since sat in darkness..
Simon’s negligence has affected not only India that extends from the borders of the Persian Empire to the country, which is called Kalah, which is a distance of one thousand and two hundred parasangs, but also his own Fars. This letter is an important evidence that the Indian church was in close relation with Persian church under the East Syrian Patriarch.
While the great East Syrian Patriarch Timothy I (779-823) was ruling over the church three incidents happened also bear witness to the fact that the Indian church was looked after by the East Syrian Patriarchate.
The Patriarch, in a letter written to the monks of the Maron monastery in reply to the controversy concerning the use of the words “Crucified for us” in the Trisagion, says “in all countries of Babylon, of Persia, and of Assyria and in all countries of sunrise, that is to say- among the Indians, the Chinese, the Tibetans, the Turks, and in all provinces under the jurisdiction of this Patriarchal See there is no use of “Crucified for us”.
In a letter written by Patriarch Timothy to Hanon Isho of Sarbas shows that during those times the monks of the Persian church were being criss crossing as missionaries to India and China.
This Patriarch had finally reconciled with him the rebellious metropolitan of Rewardhashir, who disagreed to obey the patriarchal suzerainty over his diocese saying that Rewardashir is the See of Thomas and not that of Mari.
Mingana notes that there is a lectionary composed at Crangannore in 1301 at the archives of the Vatican Library. The document gives the information that the lectionary was composed in the days of the East Syrian Patriarch Yahb Alaha V and of the Indian metropolitan Mar Jacob. The compiler refers to Mar Jacob as the leader of the Holy Indian church by occupying the See of the Apostle St. Thomas, and to himself as deacon Zachariah. It is clear from this that the reference to the “see of St. Thomas” had been in use in those times and that the Indian church functioned then under the jurisdiction of the East Syrian Patriarch.
A few words on the East-Syrian church with which the Indian Church had centuries’ relations, is needed. Hence this is treated lender the Section 3.6
POSSIBLE CONCLUSIONS
The connection of the Indian church goes back to the second century itself or even to the apostolic period because of the connection of St. Thomas both with India and Persia. If the book – Acts of the Apostle Thomas – a second century Syriac writing, about which we will refer in the next section of this study, originated in Edessan circle has testified that the relics of St. Thomas were deposited in Edessa as the result of it had been carried to there from Mylapore it is a strong evidence of an earlier connection between the Indian Church and the East Syrian church.
By and large Christianity in India till 1599 belonged to the East Syrian church. Its supreme head was the Catholicos- Patriarch of Babylon. It had no relation what so ever with the churches and sees in the Roman Empire. India had bishops and enjoyed metropolitan status and the latter resided in Kodungallur, Angamali, or Bombay. Moreover, the bishops always had been East Syrian and never Indian origin.
Though we do not have details of the extension of Indian Christianity, it will be a great mistake to think that it in the early and medieval periods was only found in South India. There are solid grounds for believing that fairly large Christian community existed in north India and western coast of India from very early times. The majority of these were undoubtedly Indians by blood and ancestry. However, the majority of its faithful was concentrated in Kerala more precisely between Palayur in the north and Quilon in the South. There were strong but scattered Syrian Christian communities along the West Coast, in Goa, Saimur (Chaul), Thana, Sopara, Gujrat and Sind. The east west of Mylapore had also such a Christian community close to the shrine of St.Thomas.
All sources of information available from the early and medieval periods point to the fact that there were scattered communities of St.Thomas Christians in different parts of the Indian continent. This was achieved especially due to the connection of the Indian church with the East Syrian Church, which in its missionary outreach was a church without comparison.
The church of India has never had a definite native ecclesiastical language. It was Syriac, their language. It is held that it was the lingua franca from eastern Persia to western India until the 7th century. The early Syrian Christians being converts from Jews, might also have had a love for Syriac. From the 4th century onwards the Persian influence was felt more and more in the liturgical life of St.Thomas Christians, which certainly have affected contrarily against the development of any native language of South India as conducive to the ecclesiastical use. If one looks at the Malayalam decrees of Udayamperoor it is evidently char that the kind of Malayalam prevailed was rough and uncultured.
It is also true that the Thomas Christian enjoyed a Sound Social Status and lived truly an appreciable indigeneous life. Style in full identity with the non-christian natives. They lived in harmony and mutual respect with non- Christian religious Communities. But in church matters the Thomas Christian were the followers of the East-Syrian Church and its characteristics.
The Persian Connection of the Thomas Christian was beneficial to the latter to a limited extent especially for the fact that this connection opened the small Indian Christian Community to a larger Christian world. But many see this relation as disastrous and compromising the independent and indigeneous growth of the community. A tighter control of Persian Church over the St.Thomas Church adversely affected the Spontaneous growth of the Original Community into a genuine Indian Church with its Indian patterns of thought, worship, life-style, etc. It meant that the Thomas Christian had to lead a life not in one world but in twos at the same time. This was somewhat an artificial and unnatural kind of life. The core element of Christian life remained Foreign, adapted only peripherally that too in a Country which possessed a rich cultures, philosophy, and spiritual tradition. Hence with the coming of the Vasco da Gama era these Christian had to undergo various tribulations, divisions and further foregnizations from time to time.
==========================
Apostolic origin

ST. THOMAS CHRISTIANS ORIGIN

The Church of the St. Thomas Christians is an ancient Christian Church and an apostolic Church originated out of the evangelical endeavours can be utilized and analysed.
The living community of St. Thomas Christians in south India and their traditions.
The witness of the Tomb of St. Thomas at Mylapore and its traditions.
The tradition of the East Syrian Christianity and the tradition of the Universal Christianity (Graeco-Roman).
The testimony of Fathers.
The Liturgical Traditions.
Ancient writings and legends -Acta Thoma.
The Portuguese witness of the 16th Century.
Opinions of Historians.

The Church of St .Thomas Christians and their traditions about their origin

The traditions current among the St.Thomas Christian of India is this with regard to their origin. St. Thomas one among the 12 apostles of Christ after visiting Socotra came to Muzris (Kondungallore/Cranganore) on the Periyar estuary, north of Cochin in about AD 52. He preached to the Jewish colony and made converts. He converted natives of sound social and religious standings and established Christian communities at seven places namely: Maliankara (Kodungallore), Palayur, Paravur(Kottakavu), Gokamangalam(Kokamangalam ie at present Pallipuram in Cherthala taluk of Alappuzha district in Kerala), Niranam(Trippaleswaram), Chayal (Nilackal) and Kollam(Quilon).

He also appointed leaders from the leading families from whom he had converts to look after and lead the church. Those families were Kalli, Kaliankal, Shankarapuri and Pakalomattam.

From Kerala St.Thomas proceeded to the eastern parts of south India where also he had converts and then on he moved as far as to Malacca and China. Later returning to India he was martyred and buried at Mylapur (near Madras) in AD 72. His mortal remains are entombed at Mylapur now known as St. Thomas Mount (This was well-known from 3rd cent AD onwards on the basis of written evidences as the burial place of the apostle).

This above said is the substance of the tradition presented and transmitted by the living community of the St.Thomas Christian of India about their apostolic origin. Details of this can be found in a few folk songs like Ramban Pattu, Veeradiyan Pattu, Margam Kali Pattu etc. These they used to sing during festival occasions and these songs now exist in written records. The Portuguese, who were present among them in the 16th cent have clearly attested to the tomb of the apostle at Mylapore. Moreover the tradition of the East Syrian Christianity, with whom the St.Thomas Christians, had very close relationship till 16th century, and Christianity in the Graeco Roman world was that, St. Thomas was the martyred in India. The non-Christian neighbours of the Thomas Christians also testify to the truth of this tradition.

The Liveliness of the St.Thomas Tradition

A few important aspects of this tradition which draws our serious attention are these: The Seven places where St. Thomas had established Christian communities are even now seeable and locatable. In almost all these place there are strong presence of St. Thomas Christian communities with their tradition, apart from the stories how they were subsequently diffused into other and surrounding localities.
Similarly the port where the apostle landed in Kerala, the places where he preached and did miracles and made coverts the leading families whom he baptized and appointed as caretaker of his communities, the site where he met martyrdom are traceable, lively and important. So all these are still lively parts of the ancient tradition. Those places where St.Thomas established churches again attract our attention. Because all those places lay located not only in or near the former Jewish colonies but also in important trading centres near the sea or on back lagoons or river shores (eg, Kodungallur, Niranam, Palayur, Gakamangalam,Kollam etc). The leading families from whom the apostle had coverts and appointment as leaders exist even now with their hereditary claims from generations.
Therefore all the local, physical and circumstantial evidences are in favour of the tradition witnessed by the St. Thomas Christians. It is important to note that there is no rival tradition in the church of the Thomas Christians in Kerala with regard to its origin and there to no other country in the world which claims that St. Thomas is their apostle and died there.

In the absence of such claims and due to the presence of the living community of the Thomas Christians in Kerala along with the presence of the burial place of the apostle at Mylapur from centuries, it is just to admit the prevailing claim that out of the evangelical works of St. Thomas the church of the St. Thomas Christians in India had its origin. The St. Thomas Christians holds their apostolic origin as an article of their church.

The Tomb of St Thomas at Mylapur

This is another unquestionable and strong witness to the Indian apostoliate of St.Thomas than any other in that respect. Moreover to the vestige of the Thomas tradition this is an evidence of unique importance. In almost all every century (Commencing from the 3rd century till 16th) we have one or more testimonies to the existence of the St.Thomas tomb in India. According to all the early documents St.Thomas worked and died in India. From the 7th century the place in India was identified as Calamina or Qalimaya. In the 12-14 centuries it is in Calamina or Myluph or in Meilan. From that time onwards undoubtedly it was identified as the present Mylapur.

Various Testimonies to the Tomb

According to all traditions (Indian, East Syrian, Graeco-Roman, Mylapur etc.) St. Thomas met a martyr’s death and that event according to the traditions found within the St.Thomas Christians of India and Mylapur was at Mylapur in the Pandiyan kingdom. The Thomas Christians used to go on pilgrimage to this tomb from time immemorial. Other testimonies from the 3rd century are these:

The 3rd century Syrian writing the Acts of Apostle Judas Thomas (Acta Thoma), says that the apostle worked in India and met death on the top of a hill in the kingdom of Mazdai. It was from there a part of the bones was taken to Edessa by a Syrian merchant called Khabin and a church was built in Edessa in the name of the Apostle. St Ephrem testifies to this fact and he has composed a lot of hymns on St. Thomas on his mission in India, martyrdom and removal of bones to Edessa etc, in the 4th century.

About the shrine and church of St.Thomas at Edessa there is information from Egeria’s pilgrimage diary in the end of the 4th century.

St. John Chrysostum merely says that the site of St.Thomas tomb is as much known as the sites of the tomb of St. Peter, St.Paul and St.John, although he does not give definite indication of its location.

Gregory of Tours (AD 594) gives an account of the monastery of St.Thomas in India based on the report he had heard from a monk called Theodore who had visited that monastery.

In 841 Suleiman a Muslim traveller mentions Bethuma (House of Thomas), which can be reached in 10 days from Quilon.

Pseudo-Sophronins (AD 7th Century) seems do be the first to indicate the place name ‘Calamina’ where St. Thomas was martyred and buried.

Isidore of Seville (AD 636) and many others following him echo this tradition and all of them definitely say that Calamina is a city in India.

Ishoyahb bishop of Saba (ie. Nisibis) (AD 1187-1222) attests that the body of St. Thomas the apostle is in India. While Solomon his contemporary specifies the place as Mayluph- a city in the land of the Indians.
At the end of the cent. Marcopolo, the Venitian traveller visited India and wrote (AD 1293): “It is in this province of (Maabar) which is styled the greater India at the gulf between Ceylon and the mainland that the body of Messer St. Thomas lies at a certain town having no great population”.

The Arab Christian historian Amr Ibn Matte wrote in 1340: “Thomas’ tomb is on the island of Meilan in India, on the right hand of the alter in his monastery”

John Marignolli (AD1349) John of Monte Corvino(1291), Oderick(1325), Nicolo Conti(1440) all refer to the church of St. Thomas at Mylapur and to the presence of his tomb.

In 1504 four East – Syrian bishops who arrived in Kerala while writing a letter to their patriarch clearly say that Mylapur was the house of the holy Apostle Thomas and their letter clearly shows that they knew where Mylapur is:” in the province of Silan which is one of the province of India”.

When the Portuguese reached India in 1498 the St. Thomas Christians of that country were unanimous on the point that the apostle St. Thomas suffered martyrdom and buried at Mylapur. The same the Portuguese also admitted since 1517, when during their investigation interviewed many natives around Mylapur who were mostly non-christians. The People conveyed to the Portuguese their common belief that St.Thomas had been buried there and that Christian settlements existed in the vicinity.

Thus all the above evidences confirm the time-honoured tradition of the Thomas Christians of India which by all means undeniable evidences do the apostolate of St. Thomas in India.

The Tradition of the East Syrian and Meditteranean Christianities About the Apostolate of St.Thomas

The Portuguese arrived in South India met the Thomas Christians who maintained very close contact with the East Syrian Christianity from time immemorial. Now what was the attitude of this Christianity with regard to the origin of Christianity in India? Before the arrival of the Portuguese there had prevailed a view about the apostolate of St.Thomas within the ancient Christian world which was around the Meditteranean Sea which could be named in another way as the Greek-Roman Christian worlds. Here we analyse these two views.

The Tradition of the East Syrian Church on St.Thomas and His Apostolate

Similar to the Indian tradition it is the strong tradition of the Eastern Christianity especially that of the East Syrian Church that St.Thomas was the apostle of Christianity in India. From the 3rd Cent onwards their writings are full with this information. Mingana’s observation in this regard is quite interestive and worth noting here. He writes, “It is the constant tradition of the Eastern Church that the Apostle Thomas evangelized India; and there is no historian, no poet, no breviary, no liturgy, and no writer of anykind who having the opportunity of speaking of Thomas does not associate his name with India. Some writer’s mention also Parthia and Persia among the lands evangelized by him, but all of them are unanimous in the matter of India”. “For them” Mingana continues that “India means St.Thomas and St.Thomas means India and, they are in such a way synonymous”. Moreover, he is emphatic, that for the East Syrians India is well-known and while they refer to it, it is always our modern India.

The earliest available record and a detailed account of St.Thomas’ travel and missionary work in India from the side of Syrian Christianity is the book: The Acts of Judas Thomas written in Syriac by an Edessan Syrian Christian around AD 200. The account is a lively one and it ends with this note. “The Acts of Judas Thomas are completed which he wrought in the land of the Indians fulfilling the Command of Him(Jesus), to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen”.

We shall detail the account of this book under the proceeding subtitle in this same chapter. What we, want to notice here is this. So far, this book was considered non-canonical or unorthodox production. But modern scholarship has denied such allegations telling that this book was Orthodox and of historical value. For them this book belonged to an authentic tradition of the Syrian Christianity till 4th Century. What is represented in this book as the acts of St.Thomas is a very imaginative reconstruction of the world of Thomas, his travels and works in India. But these are not mere imagination. There are truths in it and are of historical value reflecting the history of the origin of Christianity in India. If so, this is the first and a detailed account about the origin of Christianity in India according to Syrian Christianity.

Another example of the evidence from the Syrian Christianity for the Indian apostolate of Thomas is “Teaching of the Apostles”, a Syriac book written on AD 250, which underlines the prevailed tradition in this way: “India and all its countries and those bordering on it, even to the farthest Sea, received the Apostle’s Hand of Priesthood from Judas Thomas, who was Guide and Ruler in the Church which he built and ministered there”.

Among the East Syrian writers the most important is St.Ephrem (4th C.AD), who lived in Edessa, the centre of Syrian Christianity, for sometime and was a great hymn writer. While Ephrem was in Edessa, it was the resting place of the bones of St.Thomas, which was brought from India by a Syrian merchant and an annual festival on July 3rd was celebrated there Commemorating the martyrdom of St.Thomas. Ephrem has composed several hymns in honour of St Thomas with the themes of his preaching of the Gospel in India, his martyrdom there, bringing of his bones to Edessa, the honour that the church in Edessa got due to the depositing of the apostle’s bones, the miracles brought at the shrine etc.

What Ephrem in his hymns had attested are not his mere personal imaginations purely as a poet but these are the assent and tradition of the whole Syrian Christianity especially at Edessa. Most of these hymns were sung thereafter in the liturgy of this church for which undoubtedly its Christian people had given most emphatic support with due consideration that those were facts with reference to St.Thomas.

From the above observation what is clear in the Syrian church’s position with regard to the origin of Indian Christianity: 1. That the tradition of the Syrian Christianity especially East Syrian was always that St. Thomas was the founder of Christianity in India he was martyred there, buried there and a part of his mortal remains were later carried on to Edessa; and 2. that their tradition was never that the Indian Christianity was founded by the missionary efforts of the East Syrian church. Because some modern writers like Brown, Firth etc have ventured ignoring this fact, to state that the Indian Christianity was founded by the East Syrian Christianity and their missionaries or thorough immigration of their people into India.

The Acts of Judas Thomas

It is told above this as the earliest available record and a detailed account of St.Thomas travel and missionary works in India from the side of the Syrian Christianity. In 13 chapters it is narrated.

According to this book to the portion of Judas Thomas India fell as the field of his mission which Thomas refused all along saying to Christ: Lord! Send me anywhere but not to India. As the result Thomas was sold to a merchant called Abban from India, who was looking for a carpenter for his king Gundaphorous to build him a palace. They travelled and reached at Andrapolis and then India. Having met the king, Thomas undertook to build the palace for the king and received money. But Thomas instead of building the palace distributed the money on the poor. King knowing this made enquiries for which Thomas answers were that he had built the palace in heaven which the king will not be able to see now but only after death. Thereupon the infuriated king caught both Thomas and Abban and imprisoned. The king’s brother Gad died at this time and went to heaven, where angels took him to a beautiful palace which he desired to have. But the angels told, that is built by Thomas for his brother Gundaphorous. Now Gad with permission from angels returned to Gundaphorous to buy for him the place and as Gundaphorous came to know about such a beautifully built palace for him by Thomas he became very sad for imprisoning him and immediately released both those at his order. Not only that, the king became Christian along with his relatives and people. Thomas continued his mission and converted many not only in this kingdom but also in another kingdom that of Mazdai in another part of India. Here the apostle met a martyr’s death and entombed

The Acts describes the miraculous activities of Thomas in India before and after his death. The intention of the book is that St. Thomas, according to the command of his master-Lord Jesus Christ- had fulfilled his mission of proclaiming the gospel to the Indians. Who is the author of this Acts and to what purpose this was wrote etc, were disputes so far among scholars. But now the modern scholarship has admitted these facts:
It is the earliest available record and detailed account about St. Thomas mission in India from the side of the Syrian Christianity.
The allegation that the book is unorthodox is not accepted by the modern scholarship. Their opinion is this book belonged to an authentic tradition, which had prevailed till 4th century within the Syrian Christianity.
The Acts is a very imaginative reconstruction of the world of Judas Thomas in India. It is neither fiction nor history but it is both. It contains truth and fiction written in very lively narrative form to reflect both theology of the East Syrian Christianity and the history of the origins of Christianity in India.

Now the historians have accepted that the King Gundaphorous mentioned in the Acts was a historical figure an Indo-Parthian King, because of availability of coins with his name. According to this account Thomas mission was a genuine Indian mission and the book is sufficient enough to prove the fact that the Indian Christianity had its origin out of the labours of St. Thomas and he was martyred and entombed there. So he is the Apostle of India.

The Tradition of the Graeco-Roman Christianity
Among the non-East Syrian Fathers and writers, especially those belonging to the Graeco-Roman world, Gregory of Nzianzus, Ambrose, Jerome (4th Century AD) hold that St.Thomas preached in India and established Church there. Origen, Clementinc Recognition, Eusebius of Caesaria, Rufinus of Aquileia and Socrates say the Thomas worked in Parthia. Here we are not to see any contradiction as the Parthian empire extended up to north India at that time. By the end of the 4th Cent, the Western sources sre more or less unanimous that St.Thomas worked in India. Among these come to St.Thomas St.Gaudentius bishop of Brescia (AD 410-27), St.Paulines bishop of Nola (AD353-431) St. Bede the Venerable (673-735), Gregory of Tours (538-93), Isirdore of Seville (636), etc.

Cosmos an Alexandrine traveller in the 6th century also states that there was Christianity in India which was definitely The Thomas Christians.
In brief a number of fragmentary passages in the writings of Fathers and writers belonging from the 3rd Century speaks in unambiguous terms that St.Thomas is the apostle of India. From the 4th Century the major churches in the Graeco-Roman Christian world are unanimous in their witnessing to the above tradition. To state a few.


Eusebius of Caesaria
Quoting Origen he writes in his Ecclesiastical History thus:” When the Holy apostles of Our Saviour were scattered all over the world, Thomas, the tradition has it, obtained as his possession Parthia…”During this period Parthia was extended to the North West India. Persian tradition too claims Thomas as the apostle of Persia.
Jerome
He writes about India, the route to India, its people especially the Brahmins. When he writes about Christian and the apostles, he mentions Thomas also: “He was indeed at one and the same time with the Apostles during the forty days…. He dwelt in all places; with Thomas in India, with Peter in Rome, with each apostolic man in each and all countries.”
Gregory of Naziansus
Gregory says that even though the apostles were strangers to the places they went, they took real efforts to go to the respective places allotted to them. He wrote: What? Were not the Apostles Strangers amidst the many nations and countries over which they spread themselves, that the Gospel might penetrate into all Parts…? Peter indeed may have belonged to India…Thomas with Judea, Marks with Italy…

Ambrose of Milan
Ambrose had much informations about India, its geography and its people. He knew of Muzris(Cranganore) and the river Ganga. He also relates Thomas with India when he writes: “Even those kingdoms which were shut out by rugged mountains become accessible to them as India to Thomas…”

Gregory of Tours
Gregory says about the martyrdom of Thomas in India and of a monastery there. “Thomas the Apostle according to the history of his passion, is declared to have suffered in India. After a long time his blessed body was taken to a city which… called Edessa in Syria. In that Indian place where he first rested, there is a monastery and a church”.

Isidore of Saville
He had a good knowledge about India. He writes that the apostle Thomas preached the Gospel to Parthians and Indians. He also says that Thomas was martyred in Calamina and was buried there.
Cosmos the Alexandrine Traveller
Though Cosmos do not state about the St.Thomas’ Apostolate, he was the first reliable historical evidence of an Indian church on the West coast of India. In Ceylon, Malabar and Kalyan he saw Christians who were definitely out of the evangelistic labours of St.Thomas. Moreover, they had a bishop at Kalyan, who was appointed from Persia.
The Testimony of Liturgical Traditions of Ancient Churches
The unanimous testimony of the Fathers and writers of the early centuries, a few of which lited earlier, confirm that the Indian Christianity was due to the apostolate of St.Thomas.
Since “liturgy is the official form of worship which celebrates the faith of the churches, it forms an essential part of the early traditions of churches” The Church universal values the early liturgical traditions of the Churches as authentic sources of the authentic Christian tradition. The major earlier liturgical traditions of the Eastern and western Churches confirm the tradition of the Indian apostolate of St.Thomas.
The East Syrian liturgical tradition, the common heritage of the churches founded by St.Thomas and his disciples, give great importance to the feasts of St.Thomas. July 3rd according to this tradition is the commemoration day of St.Thomas, which in the Indian Tradition known as the feast of DUKRANA. According to syraic manuscript of 1443, it has the following: “July 3… St.Thomas who was pierced with a lance in India. His body is at Urhai (Edessa) having been brought there by a merchant Khabin. A great festival”.
In the liturgy of the Syro-Malabar church for the feast of Dukrana there is a prayer: “St.Thomas built a palace in heaven, beautified it richly, furnished it with all good things and invited the King and people of India to dwell in it and enjoy the bliss.”
The liturgy of the Indian Orthodox church also confirms that St.Thomas was killed by an evil man while involved in preaching in South India on July 3rd and his mortal remains were carried away to Urhai and placed there by a devotee who came from there.
The Martyrology and liturgical calendar of the Roman Church too associate the Church in India with Apostle Thomas. According to the Roman martyrology known after the St.George the martyrdom of St Thomas is commemorated on 21 st December. It refers to the removal of his relics as well to Edessa.
According to the Roman Breviary Thomas was martyred at Calamina, pierced with lances.
The Byzantine liturgical tradition too refers the martyrdom by lance.
The Menologion of the Greek Church commemorates the martyrdom of St.Thomas in India on the 6th of October. It is stated that the apostle was led to a hillock where, he was killed with a lance by the Indians.
The Alexandrine tradition also follows the date of the Byzantine Calendar for the feast of St.Thomas and calls him the apostle of India.
The Portuguese Witness of the 16th Century
When the Portuguese arrived in South India they met in Kerala the so called St.Thomas Christians. With them, thereafter they had deep contacts for more than one and a centuries. Moreover entirely due to their efforts that the Thomas Christian were forcefully brought under the Roman Church through an arbitrary meeting which met at Udayamperoor in 1599. Therefore, the Portuguese information about the Thomas Christians, their traditions, the tomb of St.Thomas at Mylapur etc. are of immense importance for assessing the origin of Christianity in India.(For Portuguese sources see A M Mundadan, History of Christianity in India, Vol.1, Banglore:TPI, 1984,4-5,377).
As the Thomas Christians came in closer contacts with the Portuguese, these Indian Christian told to the Portuguese their oral traditions about their origin. Making ample use of these and similar other sources the inquisitive Portuguese wrote down their accounts in the form of letters, reports, depositions, and well-composed histories. These are today the richest, and perhaps the earliest written sources of the Indian tradition on the apostolate of St. Thomas and his tomb.
The Portuguese also went to Mylapur and settled there from 1517 and collected all informations about the tomb of St. Thomas not only from the Christians but also from the natives. Today all these are a wealth of information in various Portuguese documents.
According to the Portuguese What one can have about the origin of Christianity in India could be summarized under these three points:
That St. Thomas is the apostle of India. 2. That out of his labour the socalled church of St. Thomas Christians had its origin in India; and; 3. That the apostle met a martyr’s death at Mylapur where also he was entombed at a place which they excavated in 152.
Opinions of Historians
The general consensus of opinion among scholars about the origin of Christianity in India is that the foundations of it in India were laid by St. Thomas, the apostle. Almost all serious historians do not subscribe to the view that Christianity in India had its origin out of the missionary works of the East Syrian church or of the Roman Catholic Church. Because these church themselves never had made any such unique claim. Instead what they always had said was that it was due to the apostolic labours of St. Thomas. Two evidences to this are : 1. The living church of the St. Thomas Christians with their tradition, and ; 2. The presence of the tomb of St. Thomas at Mylapur and its witnesses

Other evidences which support these are two:
There were frequent trade contacts between India and Middle East, Greek and Rome even before the time of Christ. So it was possible for St. Thomas Thomas to come to India.
The presence of the Jewish settlements in South India even before the Christian era has proven without doubt. There prevailed the presence of an active trade relation between Jews in Israel and South India. Cranganore, Palur, Paravoor etc where St Thomas established Christian Communities were also Jewish settlements and were great trading centres. It was the presence of the Jews invited Thomas to those places, where he as the result of his labours established Christianity.
Conclusion
Therefore “The age-old Consciousness of the church of St.Thomas Christians-that their origin as Christians is from the mission of St.Thomas the apostle in India- Stands sufficiently justified”.
Hereafter we move on to trace how the orthodox Thomas Christians after 1653 moved as an independent church encountering all oppositions which came before them from the Roman Catholics. How did they come in contact with the West Syrian Christianity?
==========================
19th century

The Orthodox from the 19th Century

Background

By the dawn of the 19th cent. the British had established themselves in India and Kerala had come under their sway. The Kerala of today included then the 3 regions of Travancore, Cochin and Malabar. The first two of them were native states each ruled by its own King, and the third included the territories of Samuthiri of Kozhikode which the British had annexed to the Madras province of British India. The two native states had accepted the political Legemony of the British. A resident on them was appointed to preserve the interest of British East India Company and later on of the British Crown.

The first two residents were Col. Colin Macaulay and Col. John Munro. They were Anglican Christians of evangelical persuation, who at their heart interested in the advancement of Christianity in the Indian Sub Continent. They befriended with Christian communities of the Kerala regions, both Roman and the Orthodox. In this policy the decisively departed from the tradition of the Portuguese and the Dutch. Of these two earlier powers the Portuguese were Roman Catholics and the Dutch were Protestants who had oppressed and ignored the Orthodox. The Orthodox at that time was infact in a condition deserving real assistance. These Br