ചിക്കാഗോ: ചിക്കാഗോ ആര്‍ച്ച് ബിഷപ്പ് കാര്‍ഡിനല്‍ ഫ്രാന്‍സിസ് ജോര്‍ജ് നമ്മുടെ പുതിയ ദേവാലയം സന്ദര്‍ശിക്കാന്‍ വരുന്നു. നവമ്പര്‍ 23, ഞായറാഴ്ച 10:30 ന് എത്തുന്ന കാര്ദിനലിനു ഊഷ്മളമായ സ്വീകരണമാണ് ഒരുക്കിയിരിക്കുന്നത്. 10:45 ന്റെ ദിവ്യബലിയില്‍ അദ്ദേഹം സഹകാര്മ്മികനായിരിക്കും. ലത്തീന്‍ റീത്തിലുള്ള ചടങ്ങുകള്‍ നമ്മുടെ പള്ളിയില്‍ അനുവാദനീയമാല്ലാത്തത് അധികാരികള്‍ക്ക് വല്ലാത്ത ഒരു പൊല്ലാപ്പായി മാറിയിരിക്കയാണ്. അതിനാലാണ് അദ്ദേഹത്തെ "സഹ" ആക്കിയത്.എന്നാല്‍ കാര്‍ഡിനല്‍ ജോര്‍ജിന്റെ സന്ദര്‍ശനത്തിനു പിറകില്‍ മറ്റു ചില ഉദ്ദേശങ്ങളുമുണ്ട് എന്ന് ചില വിശ്വസനീയ കേന്ദ്രങ്ങളെ ഉദ്ധരിച്ച് ഞങ്ങളുടെ പള്ളിമേട കാവല്‍ പട്ടി റിപ്പോര്ട്ട് ചെയ്യുന്നു. സര്‍ക്കസ് കൂടാരം അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്‌ നേരിട്ടു കാണണമത്രേ. ഞങ്ങളുടെതുള്‍പ്പടെ ഒട്ടനേകം പരാതികള്‍ നമ്മുടെ ഇടവക അംഗങ്ങളില്‍ നിന്നും അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്‌ ഇതിനോടകം കിട്ടിക്കഴിഞ്ഞു. അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ inbox ഫുള്‍ ആണത്രേ. ആയതിനാല്‍ പരാതികളുടെ ശ്രോതസ്സ് നേരിട്ടു കാണുവാനുള്ള ആഗ്രഹമാണ് അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്റെ ഈ സന്ദര്‍ശനത്തിന് പിറകില്‍.
ഈ സര്‍ക്കസ് കൂടാരം കണ്ടു അദ്ദേഹത്തിന്‌ എന്തെങ്കിലും വന്നുഭവിക്കുമോ എന്ന ഭയമാണ് ഈയുള്ളവന്. ബെല്‍ വുഡ് അഗ്നിശമനസേന എന്ത് അടിയന്തിരാവസ്ഥ ക്കും തയ്യാറായി പാര്‍ക്കിംഗ് ലോട്ടില്‍ ഉണ്ടായിരിക്കുമെന്ന വിശ്വാസം ആശ്വാസം പകരുന്നു.
11 comments:
A Chicago Syro Malabar Catholic..
For the public interest of the (1) Syro Malabar Catholics in USA and (2) One Holy and Apostolic nature of the global Catholic Church, the decision of Bishop’s Angandiath need to be condemned by the Church for his wrong doing and the Bishop along with his biased priests need to transfer from USA. The Bishop is really perverting the believers from the truth and the current church authority is leading them to a deserted pasture.
The Church also need to look into the reality of what is going on with Syro Malabar Chicago Diocese and the Bishop Angadiath need to be warned for his wrong doings and order him to remove the VEIL and controversial cross from the ALTAR of the new cathedral Church. Let allow upholding the truth for our future generations.
A parishioner …
Thank you SMC voice for this article.
A very valuable article and it is really good to clear our doubts about the controversial cross and the VEIL of the Syro Malabar Cathedral in Chicago. The exhibit of the Claver cross with the embedded writings is a proof of its Pagan origin. I hope there will be at least one good priest in our cathedral to listen this and act on behalf of worshipers to advice and correct the Bishop. Our bishop, priests and worshippers need to read this for the sake of our faith.
The adoption of pegan cross and forcing worshippers to a wrong direction by the Bishop Angadiath is a very serious sin than the Kerala Bishop’s adoption case. If Vatican is viable to suspend the Kerala Bishop, then same cannon law is very much applicable to Chicago’s Syro Malabar Bishop for his evildoing.
Feeling ashamed after sinning is a sign that the Holy Spirit is giving us grace to repent. Mary Magdalene humbled herself at Jesus' feet. He forgave her without hesitation. Despite Mary Magdalene's grave sins, she received the special blessing from Jesus and she became one of the first missionary of Jesus.
Inaction is not a solution. Bishop Angadiath, we love you, we respect you, please remove the controversial cross and the VEIL from the church and keep the worshipers together and let them lift you as their light.
In the midst of all these issues we all need to vote!! It is our right!!!
We should give a mass petition to Cardinal George.
Obama will solve this problem...
who gives a crap about "syro malabar"? what a waist of time!
http://members.tripod.com/~Berchmans/liturgy.html
(excerpt from an article written by Fr. B.Kodackal; "Syro-Malabar Liturgy: A Book Review" - on Francis Kanichikattil's book To Restore or to Reform? A Critical Study on Current Liturgical Renewal in the Syro-Malabar Church in India, Bangalore, India, Dharmaram Publications, 1992, xix, 230p. This book review was published in Studia Canonica, 29(1995), pp. 547-533.]
Liturgy is essential to the life of the Church. It is through liturgy that the Church expresses herself in the present day situation. Hence reform is inevitable in this area. But some members of the Syro-Malabar Church prefer a total restoration of the old Chaldean Liturgy for their Church, and it has become a major issue in the Church. Those who argue for restoration, want the liturgy to be what it was in the pre-Portuguese period, i.e., they want to bring the Malabar Church back once again to what it was then, a kind of branch of the Chaldean Church. But the Malabar Church in the pre-Portuguese period was Malabar in name only, with no liturgy or spirituality reflecting its rich Indian background. For those who dream about restoring the Chaldean "golden age", just the Latin form of worship is foreign, but the Chaldean form of worship is indigenous to Indian Christians!
The author, in separate chapters, also deals with the mystery aspect of the liturgy, the concepts that the Eucharistic altar as an image of the sepulchre of Christ, the earthly liturgy as an image of the heavenly liturgy and the nave and sanctuary as types of the earth and heaven. East Syrian tradition is Semitic in its basic characteristics, but influenced by the Antiochene tradition. Its liturgy of the Word significantly resembled the Jewish Synagogue service. The use of Bema (a raised platform at the centre of the nave) for the liturgy of the Word, the sanctuary veil, separation of sanctuary from nave, etc. are examples of Semitic traditions.
As the author contends, an extreme conservative attitude developed by a minority group of bishops created a gap between the restorers and reformers which affected considerably the progress of the liturgical renewal. One of the main problems of the Syro-Malabar Church in liturgical matters was its lack of internal administration with a Major Archbishop or a Patriarch as its head and a permanent synod of bishops as other Oriental Churches have. This situation created a great tension in the process of liturgical renewal. Since there was no decision making body, all matters concerning liturgy and discipline had to be referred to Rome; even on matters of less importance, Rome's approval had to be awaited. The parameters of the problem have now changed, because the Syro-Malabar Church was erected as a Major Archiepiscopal Church -- with some form of central administration -- on 16th December 1992 by the Apostolic Constitution Quae maiori of John Paul II (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 85[1993], pp. 398-399).
Regarding the position of the celebrant during the liturgy, the existing situation gives rise to great tension in inter-diocesan relationships. A majority of the dioceses follow the option in which the priest faces the congregation during the whole celebration. In some of the southern dioceses, the bishops impose the second option, in which the priest faces the altar/cross, even though many priests and faithful do not agree with this. The authority to make decisions regarding this remains with the local ordinary. In order to minimise the tension, the author suggests this authority be transferred to each parish, where the parish priest in consultation with the elders of the parish, Palli yogam, could make the decision, depending on the particular situation and tradition of each parish. However, I personally do not support such a step. In my opinion, a parish church is not an individual Church to take such a major option in liturgy. Furthermore, if the bishops and priests of an individual Church cannot reach at an agreement on such important liturgical norms, do we ever experience the unity for which the liturgy itself is celebrated?
The author contends that the reconstruction of the bema at the centre of the nave for the liturgy of the Word, is simply not relevant in the Syro-Malabar liturgy. First of all the bema has no place in the liturgical tradition of the Syro-Malabar Church. The author suggests that the Western Church could be taken as a model in this case, celebrating the introductory rites and the liturgy of the Word at one side of the sanctuary near the rail. Some churches in the Syro-Malabar Rite had a tradition of using the sanctuary veil. The veil was drawn back during the liturgy. The author is of the opinion that this tradition should be restored wherever possible, because it has a deeper meaning in the East Syrian tradition according to its Fathers. According to my observation, most of the Syro-Malabar churches at present do not have sanctuary veils, and installing such veils only makes the liturgy more complicated than making it simple. As the author himself admits, more than external complexities of the celebration or an awesome sense of mystery, what is needed today is a deeper and more personal understanding of, and participation in, the Eucharistic prayers and actions. Concerning the incensing, the author says it is a solemn rite in the Syro-Malabar liturgy, which gives the celebration a sacred splendor. From a practical point of view it is highly necessary that the celebrant priest should have ample time and serenity of mind to perform these rites in gentleness and calm, in the true spirit of the divine worship. If the liturgical text is too long, and its prayers are unintelligible, both the priests and the people may find it difficult to celebrate in true liturgical spirit. Therefore it is better that the Text should be short, and only the relevant and meaningful rites be restored. Those which are restored should be adapted to the mind and taste of the people to whom they are communicated.
Any worship that is not satisfying and not compliance to the “word of God” is baseless and will not last. The Chicago Syro Malabar church filled with opportunist Bishop and his priests. The Bishop lost his credibility among the Indians and Indian Catholics. The church cheated the faithful.
Instead of bringing worshipers together and close to Jesus through meaningful homilies during Sundays, the Chicago diocese is confusing them. Our mass is like a circus without any order and holiness. How Christianity survive if the fence fail to defend.
യെവനൊന്നും ഊരും പേരും ഇല്ലേ....
wow this whole thing is useless!
There was a Diocesan Assembly two weeks ago and the "Syro Malabar Voice" wasn't there.
That means that the creator of this blog is useless with his information. You want action - you should have been at the assembly. BUT NO! Not one person who posted this blog attended the assembly.
Also, a warning. The creator of this blog will be revealed on December 26th 2008 at 5:00 PM through this same blog. From that point, we will know who wrote this blog and who else is involved so they dont have to be scared about anything.
December 26th 2008 at 5:00 PM
Post a Comment