This article was sent as a comment by an anonymous person. In the interest of public service we are publishing it. Thank you Mr. Anonymous.
(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.
5 comments:
It seems like some of the issues facing the Syro Malabar Diocese and its Chicago cathedral (e.g., the thirusheela, cross, etc. ) have been going on for years and are still controversial and not yet settled by the Vatican and Major Archbishop of the Syro Malabar Church.
Nonetheless, what is most bothersome, at least in the Chicago diocese, is the secrecy and lack of discussion with the faithful of the diocese.
It is obvious that the thirusheela at the Bellwood cathedral seems to have been placed almost as an afterthought (i.e., not in the original design of the cathedral) - this is evident in its circular shape and in the distracting long wires holding it up. The church should at least consider redesigning the thirusheela to make it more fitting for the cathedral.
Another informative article from The Indian Express (06-29-1997)
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19970629/18050293.html
War of the priests
Bonnie James
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The simmering feud in Kerala's Syro-Malabar Church, a constituent of the Catholic Church, over the reform of its liturgy, is nearing a flashpoint. While the priests stand divided over the issue, a good majority of the nearly 30 lakh laity of the Church, spread over four archdioceses and eight dioceses in Kerala and nine dioceses in the other States, remain silent spectators to the unfolding of events.
The warring factions in the Church could be described as the traditionalists and the reformists. The traditionalists maintain that the Syro-Malabar Church is a daughter-Church of the Chaldean Church with headquarters in Baghdad. They are for the adoption of the whole East Syrian (Chaldean) liturgy said to be prevalent in the Church in Kerala from the fifth century to the 16th century when the Latin Church established its sway with the advent of the Portuguese.
``How could our Church founded in 52 AD by Christ's disciple St Thomas, the apostle, become the daughter-Church of the Chaldean Church which was established only in the fifth century?'' is the question posed by the reformists. They vehemently oppose the blind restoration of the Chaldean liturgy and stand for the adaptation of the liturgy in keeping with the spirit of renewal mooted by the Second Vatican Council. They are also for adapting the life and practices of the Church according to the rich Indian heritage.
While the traditionalists are led by the Changanassery Archbishop Joseph Powathil the reformists do not have a single person as leader has the Archdiocese of Ernakulam, the seat of the Major Archbishop of the Church, as their base.
Although the fracas between the `bipolar' power centres of the Church has been there for several years there is a peculiar feature. Only the reformists were airing their grievances publicly through forums like the Liturgical Action Committee (LAC) and the Priests' Action Council (PAC) as they felt that `their legitimate wishes were being ignored' by the authorities concerned.
Surprisingly, barring a couple of occasions, the traditionalists never expressed their views in public. The reformists allege that this was because they were `sure' that the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, the official wing of Vatican that looks after the affairs of the Syro-Malabar Church, `was on their side'.
The protests staged by the LAC and PAC during the Bishops' Synod held at Kochi from June 9 to 21 have, however, changed the scene completely. While a LAC delegation prevented the bishops from dispersing for lunch for an hour, the PAC move saw the religious heads being forced to grant an audience.
The traditionalist faction, which disapproved of the actions of their rivals demanded the Synod condemn the incidents. The bishops unanimously termed the actions of the LAC and PAC `unfortunate and against the spirit of the Church' and decided to take steps to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. Neither group has made any comments after this.
The Vatican cannot afford to dismiss the p oblem in the Syro-Malabar Church as one over subtleties and nuances. The credibility of the Oriental Congregation itself has come under a cloud. ``It is a sad fact that several priests of the Church have lost faith in the Congregation,'' said Archbishop Vithayathil, the Apostolic Administrator of the Church.
The reformists have been accusing the congregation of `taking a partisan attitude' in the issue and `promoting' the traditionalists in a bid to `enforce' the Chaldean liturgy, ignoring the feelings of `a majority' of the priests, the religious and the faithful.
On the other hand, the traditionalists, who are ``convinced that the liturgical heritage of the Church is East Syrian and the Catholic Church wants its restoration and preservation'' considers the attack on the congregation ``tantamount to attacking the Pope''.
Whatever the pros and cons of the issue, one thing is clear. The Oriental Congregation had contributed its share to deepen the fissures by declaring `some' bishops as the savior pars or those with `superior intelligence'. This only served to accelerate the pace of distancing between the bishops.There are a host of issues on which the rival factions hold divergent views.
One of the most controversial points is whether to celebrate the Holy Mass with the priest facing the people or facing the altar. As of now, both styles prevail in the Church. While it is Mass facing the people in the reformist belt, priests face the altar in the region where the traditionalists' writ runs.
According to Thrissur Archbishop Jacob Thoomkuzhy, although facing the altar has been in practice for many centuries in the East and the West, the original mode of the eucharist celebration was `around the altar,' the Mass being the commemoration of the Last Supper. This is the rationale for the Mass facing people.
On the other hand, the Mass facing altar is said to be an eastern liturgical practice wherein the theology of Pilgrim-Church demands that the celebrant should stand at the head of the congregation and lead the people of God to the Lord who comes from the East at the end of the world.
According to the reformists, the traditionalists are for the removal of the crucifix and abolition of prayers like Rosary and Way of the Cross among other things and for the introduction of `Chaldean vestiges' like the Persian Cross, sanctuary veil and `Bema,' (a separate table to be placed in the front or in the middle of the aisle).
``The crucifix has disappeared from many convents which easily succumbed to the Chaldean propaganda,'' says noted religious scholar Prof. Scaria Zacharia. The crucifix, a matter of great religious and emotional attachment is being replaced by what is called the `Mar Thoma Cross'. The reformists contend that this cross is the Manichean Cross, a symbol of a heretic Church of a non-Catholic origin, which has since become defunct.
Archbishop Powathil has reiterated time and again that the Syro-Malabar Church belongs to the Syriac brand of the Christian tradition. According to him the Persian Church and the Indian Church of St Thomas share the same liturgy.
He feels that the Church is at the moment passing through a period of an identity crisis, the after-effect of centuries of latinisation. ``A re-discovery of the genuine ecclesiastical identity is an urgent need,'' he maintains. Although Vatican appointed a Pontifical Commission headed by Archbishop Thomas A. White to study the issues, its report is yet to be published. Reformists allege that the traditionalists and the Oriental Congregation colluded to bury the commission's report which in fact had `assessed the ground reality very well and favoured the reformist stand'.
The reformists, however, trust that the commission report led to the process of elevating the Syro-Malabar Church into an autonomous Church. In January 1993, Antony Cardinal Padiyara was made its first Major Archbishop and Archbishop Abraham Kattumana the Papal Delegate to pave way for full autonomy.
But, the unexpected demise of Archbishop Kattumana the day he submitted an interim report to the Pope set the clock back. The reformists believe that the present crisis in the Church would have been resolved if his report was followed.
It was late in 1996 that the LAC and PAC stepped up their campaign against the traditionalists. The reason was the `news' about the `resignation' of Major Archbishop Padiyara and the `imminent appointment' of Archbishop Powathil in his place.
A group of reformist priests even took out a protest procession for the first time in the recent history of the Church. It is believed that the Vatican State Secretariat, the apex body in the power structure of the Vatican, intervened to study the situation and instructed the posting of someone else to avert a grave crisis in the Church. This was how the Apostolic Administrator entered the scene as Antony Cardinal Padiyara stepped down in December 1996.
This being the situation, some developments in the Synod, seem to hold the potential to signal the beginning of the peace process. The Synod is said to have reached some conclusions to implement `uniformity' in the celebration of the Holy Mass and submit the same for the consideration of the Holy See.
Further, the Synod has also decided to convey to Rome, the desire to elect the Major Archbishop through `consensus' and to appeal to the Pope for being granted the rights pertaining to the appointment of bishops and liturgy.
Although the bishops seem to have reached a consensus on certain controversial liturgical matters, no such accord exists.
Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
Please do not make false accusations about the Syro Malabar Church.
I think going to Syro Malabar church (Especially those who are following Powathil Heresy) is waste of time.... by seeing Back of the priest...... Pulling the curtain like in the drama hall...... and bowing in front of "Tamara Kurisu / claver kurisu (Marthoma Kurisu)".
You can see this same Tamara Kurisu in Orthodox churches... Jacobite Churches etc..... Since we cannot accept all these foolish things.... We strongly believe that Real Catholic Belief is in Latin Rite only and decided to go to Latin churches in USA........!!!
As every one knows that Our former Pontinfical Delegate Late Arch Bishop Abraham Kattumana was totally against all these foolish activities initiated by Powathil & Group..... That is why they bursted crackers & distributed sweets in Vadavathoor Seminary in Kottayam after hearing the news about sad demise of Arch Bishop Kattumana in Rome.
If our bishops & preists in Syro Malar diocese blindly following all these foolish chadian liturgy... We will stand with Latin Liturgy.... and in future Syro will become a Big "ZERO"
A Group from Changanasserry Arch Diocese..........
We need some one like Mar Abraham Kattumana, who was open to ideas and wanted to avoid politics in church. At times I feel our church is a political corporation.
Post a Comment