Constitution of Syro-Malabar Hierarchy: A Documental Study, HIRS Publications, Changanacherry 2014, pp. 199, ISBN 13 978-81-87576-82-2.
In this book the author presents the documentation concerning the
historical background and other relevant facts related to the epoch-making event of the erection of Syro-Malabar hierarchy, which revolutionized the fate of the Catholic Church in India. The work provides precise, objective and authentic information concerning the causes of delay in the constitution of Syro-Malabar hierarchy, the choice of the metropolitan see and the rejection of the special status requested for the vicariate apostolic of Kottayam.
General Introduction
With the Synod of Diamper in 1599 the
Eastern hierarchy was suppressed in India and Latin bishops were appointed to
govern the St Thomas Christians. Following the revolt of 1653, known as the Coonan
Cross Oath, the Catholic St Thomas Christians were divided between the
archdiocese of Cranganore under the Portuguese patronage (Padroado) and the vicariate of Malabar (subsequently named
Verapoly) administered by vicars apostolic under the authority of the Sacred
Congregation of Propaganda Fide.
After about three centuries (1599-1886)
of Western governance over the St Thomas Christians, when the Latin hierarchy
was established in India on 1 September 1886, the ancient archdiocese of
Cranganore was definitively suppressed, the vicariate apostolic of Verapoly was
elevated to the status of a metropolitan archdiocese of the Latin Church with
Quilon as its suffragan see and all the Catholic St Thomas Christians became
members of the said archdiocese.[1]
Through the apostolic letter Quod
iampridem of 20 May 1887, Pope Leo XIII separated the Eastern Catholics
from the Latin Christians of the archdiocese of Verapoly and constituted for
them two Syro-Malabar vicariates apostolic, Trichur and Kottayam (later named
Changanacherry),[2] but
the vicars apostolic were still Latins: Charles Lavigne, titular bishop of
Milevum and vicar apostolic of Changanacherry (1887-1896) and Adolf Edwin Medlycott,
titular bishop of Tricomia and vicar apostolic of Trichur (1887-1896).
With the apostolic brief Quae rei
sacrae of 28 July 1896 Pope Leo XIII reorganized the territory, erecting
the three vicariates apostolic of Trichur, Ernakulam and Changanacherry.[3]
Three native priests were appointed as vicars apostolic: John Menacherry,
titular bishop of Parai and vicar apostolic of Trichur, Mathew Makil, titular
bishop of Tralli and vicar apostolic of Changanacherry and Aloysius Pareparambil,
titular bishop of Tiana and vicar apostolic of Ernakulam. The Apostolic Delegate Ladislao Michele
Zaleski consecrated the first three Indian bishops on 25 October 1896 in the
cathedral church of Kandy in Sri Lanka, where he had the residence.
As a
result of Babylonian emigration to South India most probably from the fourth
century on, a distinct endogamous community, named in all important documents
as Southists (recently called Knanaya), originated among the St Thomas
Christians who were sometimes designated as Northists, when there emerged necessity
to distinguish them from the former. When the two vicariates were erected in
1887 there were about 15,000 Southists and 100,000 Northists in the vicariate
of Kottayam (Changanacherry). The antipathy and contrasts between these two
groups intensified due to the attempts of the Southists spearheaded by Mathew
Makil, under the aegis of the Carmelite bishops and missionaries of Verapoly,
for the creation of a separate vicariate for them, governed by a Carmelite
vicar apostolic. In such a difficult situation the appointment of the Southist
priest Mathew Makil as the vicar apostolic of Changanacherry in 1896 provoked
protests and agitations of the Northists, which continued until the erection of
the Southist vicariate of Kottayam on 29 August 1911, with the transfer of
Vicar Apostolic Mathew Makil to the new vicariate of Kottayam and the
appointment of Thomas Kurialacherry as the vicar apostolic of Changanacherry.[4] Thus from 1911 on the
Syro-Malabar Church consisted of four vicariates directly dependent on the
Apostolic See.
Those
who are not very familiar with canon law and the exact juridical nature of vicariates
apostolic at times erroneously consider the erection of Syro-Malabar vicariates
with the appointment of native vicars apostolic as the constitution of Syro-Malabar
hierarchy. Normally vicariates apostolic are temporary ecclesiastical
circumscriptions, especially in mission territories, where the ecclesiastical
situation is not mature enough for the erection of dioceses, because of special
circumstances. The vicars apostolic are titular bishops appointed by the Roman
Pontiff; they directly depend on the Holy See and exercise jurisdiction in the
name of the Roman Pontiff.[5] Hence, in the technical
sense a hierarchy is considered to have been established for a country or for a
sui iuris Church, only when at least
one diocese or eparchy is constituted. Accordingly the Syro-Malabar Church obtained
a hierarchy only on 21 December 1923, when Pope Pius XI erected the
aforementioned four vicariates as dioceses. The precise scope of this book is
to present the historical background and other relevant facts related to the
epoch-making event of the erection of Syro-Malabar hierarchy, which
revolutionized the fate of the Catholic Church in India.
We will
highlight other relevant facts and briefly outline the remaining history of the Syro-Malabar
Church until the erection of hierarchy according to the chronological
progression of events, as brief introductions to each of the documents
presented in this book. We give below some further preliminary considerations
which can help readers to comprehend the documents.
1.Preliminary Considerations
1.1. The Expression Suriani
Suriani
is the Malayalam word for Syriac or Syrian, which was the liturgical language
of the Eastern Christians of India until the introduction of local languages in
1962. Like the expressions “Latin Church” and “Latin Christians” or simply “Latins”,
formerly “Suriani Church”, “Suriani Catholics”, “Suriani Christians” and “Suriani”
were used to indicate the St Thomas Christians and their Church. From the
second half of the nineteenth century on, the terms “Suriani” or “Suriani
Catholics” were consistently used even in the documents and communications of
the Holy See until the name Syro-Malabar became prevalent. Especially after the
Schisms of Rokos (1861-1862) and Mellus (1874-1882) the Holy See avoided the
expression “Chaldean” and preferred the word “Suriani” so as to indicate that
the Indian Eastern Church had no hierarchical connection with the Chaldean
Church. In our English translation we have maintained all the aforementioned
expressions, as they are found in the original documents.
1.2. Roman Pontiffs and the Apostolic See
The
documents presented in this book to some extent cover the history of the Syro-Malabar
Church from 1896 to 1923. During this period the Roman Pontiffs Leo XIII
(1878-1903), St Pius X (1903-1914), Benedict XV (1914-1922) and Pius XI
(1922-1939) who governed the universal Church, were involved in historical
decisions which determined the progress and development of the Syro-Malabar
Church.
At the
time of the appointment of native bishops in 1896, like the other Eastern
Catholic Churches, the Syro-Malabar Church was also under the authority of the
Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide for the Affairs of the Oriental Rite,
erected by Pope Pius IX on 6 January 1862. The Latin and Oriental sections of
Propaganda Fide had the same prefect, but two separate bishops secretaries. The
prefects of Propaganda Fide during the period under our study were: Mieczyslaw
Halka Ledochowski (1892-1902), Girolamo Maria Gotti (1902-1916) and Domenico
Serafini (1916-1918).
On 1
May 1917 by the motu proprio Dei
Providentis Pope Benedict XV erected the ‘Sacred Congregation for the
Oriental Church’ and all the Eastern Catholic Churches, of course including the
Syro-Malabar Church, were placed under its authority. As the Pope himself
decided, the Oriental section of Propaganda Fide ceased to exist on 30 November
1917 and the new Congregation began to function from 1 December 1917. Naturally
the competence over the Syro-Malabar Church passed to the new Congregation, to
which was also transferred in the course of time the pertinent documents
concerning the Eastern Churches. Since at that time the Roman Pontiff himself
was the Prefect of the Oriental Congregation, its administrative head was a
cardinal secretary. During the period of our study the secretaries were: Nicolò
Marini (1917-1922) and Giovanni Tacci Porcelli (1922-1927).
1.3. Apostolic Delegates in India
Four
Apostolic Delegates accomplished their ministry as representatives of the Pope
and the Holy See during the period under consideration. At that time there was
only one Apostolic Delegate for all the countries in the Indian subcontinent,
designated by the general name “East Indies”, which included different
countries in the Indian subcontinent or Southeast Asia. As we have seen above,
when the first Syro-Malabar bishops were appointed in 1896 the Apostolic
Delegate of East Indies was Ladislao Michele Zaleski (1892-1916), titular
archbishop of Thebae (Tebe), who had his headquarters at Kandy in Sri Lanka. On
7 December 1916 Zaleski was transferred and appointed as titular patriarch of
the Latin patriarchate of Antioch (created in 1098), the seat of which was at
the Basilica of St Mary Major in Rome, after the fall of Antioch in 1268. Patriarch
Zaleski was very influential in the Roman Curia and the Holy See highly valued his
opinion on important matters concerning the Indian Church. After Zaleski, Pietro
Fumasoni Biondi (1916-1919) and Pietro Pisani (1019-1924) exercised their
ministry as apostolic delegates in East Indies.
1.4. Scope, Method and Content
The
scope of this work is to make original sources available to scholars concerning
the erection of Syro-Malabar hierarchy with the intention of promoting objective
critical studies. We will present the report (ponenza) presented to the plenary
assembly of the Oriental Congregation held on 3 December 1923 and the summary
attached to it, the decisions of the said assembly and the apostolic
constitution erecting the Syro-Malabar hierarchy.
After
this general introduction and the list of documents with indication of sources,
the book is divided into two parts: the first part presents the English
translation of the documents, while the second part is dedicated to original
texts. In the second part the documents are reproduced in the original language
with the same number and English heading, so that those who wish to consult the
original, can easily do so. Since all the documents are also reproduced in the
original language, this book can be consulted even by non-English speaking
scholars. Footnotes and explanations found in some of the documents are maintained
both in the English translation and in the originals. Footnotes and
explanations added by the Author to the English version are put in square
brackets [ ]. The indexes at the end of this book are based on the English
version alone.
2. Some Fundamental Themes Frequently Treated in the Documents
2.1. The Maturity of the Syro-Malabar Church and the Opportunity of a Stable Hierarchy
After about three centuries of Latin
governance (1599-1896) when the first native bishops were appointed in 1896 the
Syro-Malabar liturgical, spiritual and canonical heritage was in a hybrid
state, which stirred up doubts about the ecclesial nature of this Church and
its maturity for obtaining a stable hierarchy. The Eucharistic liturgy
(Qurbana) existed in a highly latinized form with many modifications, omissions
and interpolations mainly made by the Synod of Diamper (1599) and Bishop
Francis Ros SJ, the first Latin bishop of the St Thomas Christians (1599-1624).[6]
In connection with the holy Qurbana, the Eucharistic bread and wine, the manner
of holy communion, liturgical year and calendar, liturgical vestments,
religious feasts, fast and abstinence, sacred art and architecture, etc were
all modified in tune with the Roman tradition and Western customs.[7]
In accordance with the order of the
provincial council of Goa (1585) and the Synod
of Diamper, the Latin Ritual was translated into Syriac and was introduced in
Malabar. In fact the theology, liturgy and discipline of the sacraments were
completely replaced by those of the Roman tradition. For ordinations,
consecration of churches, blessing of the holy oils and other episcopal ceremonies the Roman
Pontifical was used in the language of Latin, since the Latin bishops did not
know Syriac.[8] The
Divine Office was of East Syrian tradition, but with the modifications and
corrections made by the Synod of Diamper. Almost all the sacramentals,
paraliturgical ceremonies and popular devotions were conducted with Roman
liturgical books translated into Syriac, sometimes with local adaptations.
When the three native vicars apostolic
were appointed in 1896, it was not evident which Pontifical had to be used in
the Syro-Malabar Church for episcopal ceremonies such as ordinations,
consecration of churches and altars, consecration of Chrism (holy Myron) etc. The
first bishops had no doubt or hesitation about the matter; they unanimously
decided to translate the Roman Pontifical into Syriac, since at that time all
other liturgical ceremonies of their Church were in Syriac. However, they did
not succeed to make a standard translation and to get approval from Propaganda
Fide. Consequently they continued to use the Roman Pontifical in Latin language
itself for all episcopal ceremonies.[9]
Similarly there was confusion with regard
to the law to be used in the nascent Syro-Malabar Church, which had no
particular code of canon law. In fact at that time the ecclesial life of the
Church was mainly regulated in accordance with the norms ensuing from the acts
and decrees of the Synod of Diamper (1599), the statutes of Francis Ros SJ
(1606) and the statues of Archbishop Leonard Mellano OCD (1879). Such
liturgical and canonical predicament of the Syro-Malabar Church, especially the
uncertainty concerning the Pontifical and the code of canon law to be applied contributed
to the delay in the constitution of hierarchy.[10]
In spite of the aforementioned problems,
after the appointment of native bishops the Syro-Malabar Church made rapid
progress in every other aspect of ecclesial life. All the apostolic delegates who
exercised their ministry in India at that time unanimously and insistently
pointed out that the Syro-Malabar vicariates were better than most of the Latin
dioceses in East Indies under all respects and asked the Holy See to constitute
the Syro-Malabar hierarchy as early as possible. Thanks also to their efforts,
gradually all doubts about the maturity of the Syro-Malabar Church was cleared
and the Holy See proceeded to the much desired erection of hierarchy.
2.2. The Choice of the Metropolitan See
Another frequently debated question was
the choice of the metropolitan see of the Syro-Malabar Church. Originally the
Apostolic Delegate Fumasoni Biondi and Pietro Pisani proposed the vicariate of
Changanacherry as the metropolitan see, because after the appoint of Mar Thomas
Kurialacherry as vicar apostolic, the said see mounted to the first place as
regards fervent religious life, number of Christian faithful, priestly and
religious vocations, monasteries and convents, educational and charitable
institutions, etc.[11]
On the other hand Ladislao Michele
Zaleski, former apostolic delegate in India and afterwards titular patriarch of
the Latin Patriarchate of Antioch, residing in Rome, persistently insisted that
Ernakulam should be the metropolitan see because of its central geographical
position of the then Syro-Malabar Church and because of its political and
economic importance being a strategic port and the greatest city in Kerala.[12] In the plenary meeting of
3 December 1923 the Cardinals opted for Ernakulam not only because of Zaleski’s
patronage, but also because Ernakulam appeared to be more acceptable to
Kottayam, due to the bitter conflicts and traditional rivalry between Southists
and Northists, especially during the administration of Mar Mathew Makil, when
he was vicar apostolic of Changanacherry (1896-1911).
2.3. The Status of the Southist Vicariate of Kottayam
As we have already indicated, Pope Pius X
created the Southist vicariate of Kottayam on 29 August 1911 through the
apostolic letter “In universi Christiani”. [13] When the eventual constitution of a
stable hierarchy for the Syro-Malabar Church was considered in Rome, the then Southist
vicar apostolic of Kottayam, Mar Alexander Chulaparambil (1914-1951) wrote to the
former and then Apostolic Delegates, authorities of the “Congregation for the
Oriental Church” and to Pope Pius XI
(1922-1939) himself, requesting that the vicariate of Kottayam be elevated to
the status of a diocese immediately subjected to the Holy See or of an
archdiocese without any suffragan see.[14] He claimed such a special
status for Kottayam, independent of the future metropolitan of the Syro-Malabar
Church for the same reasons, for which the separate Southist vicariate was
created in 1911. Patriarch Zaleski and the Apostolic Delegate Pisani were
opposed to granting any special status to Kottayam; only the former Apostolic
Delegate Fumasoni Biondi supported it. The plenary meeting of the Oriental
Congregation held on 3 December 1923 discarded the claims Chulaparambil and unanimously
decided to make the vicariate of Kottayam a normal suffragan diocese of the
metropolitan see of Ernakulam.
[1] Cf. Leo
XIII, Humanae salutis auctor, 1 September 1886, Leonis XIII Pontificis Maximi Acta, vol.
5, Romae 1886, 164-179; IRD, 152-173.
[2] Cf. Leo XIII, Quod iampridem, 20 May 1887, Leonis XIII Pontificis Maximi Acta, vol. VII,
Romae 1888, 106-108; IRD, 190-193.
[3] Leo XIII, Quae rei sacrae, 28 July 1896, Leonis XIII Pontificis Maximi Acta, vol. XVI, Romae 1897, 229-232; IRD, 194-197.
[4] For the history, background and all other details, see P. Pallath
& G. Kanjirakkatt, Origin of the Southist
Vicariat of Kottayam; Acts and Facts, Kottayam 2011.
[5] Cf. CIC 1917, cc. 293-311;
CIC 1983, c. 371 § 1 & 381; An exarchy or exarchate is the oriental equivalent of a vicar apostolic
and an exarch that of a vicar apostolic (cf. CCEO, cc. 311-321).
[6] P. J. Podipara, “The Present Syro-Malabar Liturgy: Menezian or
Rozian?, OCP 23 (1957) 313-322; J. Vellian, “The
Synod of Diamper and the Liturgy of the Syro-Malabar
Church”, in G. Nedungatt, ed., The Synod
of Diamper Revisited, Rome 2001, 175-181 & 185-191; P. Pallath, The Eucharistic Liturgy of the St Thomas
Christians and the Synod of Diamper, Kottayam 2008, 85-154.
[7] Cf. P. Pallath, The
Eucharistic Liturgy of the St Thomas
[8] P. Palalth,
“The Sacraments of the Church
of St Thomas Christians in India Church of St Thomas Syro-Malabar Church”, 181-184 & 190-193.
[9] For details, P. Pallath & J. Kollara, Roman Pontifical into Syriac and the Beginning of Liturgical Reform in
the Syro-Malabar Church: History of the Revision and Publication of the
Chaldean and Syro-Malanbar Pontifical, Kottayam 2012.
[10] The Syro-Malabar hierarchy was constituted thirty-five years after
the erection of the first two vicariates apostolic, while the Syro-Malankara hierarchy
was erected only 3 months after the creation of two oridinariates.
[13] At the time of the constitution of the Syro-Malabar hierarchy in
1923 the Southist vicariate of Kottayam had about 35,000 faithful, 44 churches
including chapels and 43 diocesan priests.
[14] Cf. Documents 2-15-2.20.https://archive.org/details/ConstitutionOfSyroMalabarHierarchyADocumentalStudy
