-- Tom Varkey
Come on Claver fanatics, let’s face it.
You guys are not willing to obey the Gospel according to Jesus. You only believe in the Gospel according to Powathil, Pallickaparambil, Angadiath, and the latest Gospel writer, Fr. Joji Kaniampadical. You adamantly refuse to obey Jesus' words in Jn. 3:14 that we "must lift up the Son of Man like Moses lifted up the bronze serpent". Your faith based on such erroneous Gospel is seriously flawed, no doubt about it. Paul says in 2 Cor. 5:7: "We live by faith not by sight." It is absolutely certain that you don't live by faith because your faith is not even based on the right Gospel.So let's try some logic. If Dagon (an idol god) could not survive in the presence of the shadow of the Crucifix (the Ark of the LORD) that was to come in the future (1 Sam. 5:3-4), what makes you think your idols (the Mar Thoma Cross and the Veil) can survive in the presence of the real thing which the Crucifix is? No wonder Paul says in Rom. 1:22: "Claiming to be wise, they became fools." In Coppell, you have already proved yourself who you are. I strongly recommend you to abstain from proving once again who you are in Garland to save you some embarrassment. But if you are not convinced, go ahead. We the followers of the Crucifix are not totally opposed to see some drama which will once again prove to be entertaining. A drama that will be played out the end of which will be the same as that of the drama we read in 1 Sam. 5:3-4. A drama in which you guys will fall flat on your face in utter defeat just as Dagon, the pagan God did in 1 Sam. 5:3-4. Or more recently, the drama you guys played in Coppell at the end of which also, you guys fell flat on your face.
Since you don’t seem to be convinced, let me give you one more episode of this drama from the Bible. For this let me take you to Mt. Carmel. You can follow along with me in 1 Kings 18:22-40. Here also the pagan god Baal tried to survive in the presence of the living God (who was going to reveal Himself later on in the New Testament through Jn. 3:14 asking us to “lift up the Son of Man just as Moses lifted up the bronze serpent”). The stage was set and the script was flawlessly composed by Prophet Elijah. The plot was for Baal and Yehovah to make fire descend from heaven on the fire places that was set aside respectively for both Baal and Yehovah. The drama began very dramatically (no pun intended). The prophets of Baal lined up one by one and they called upon their pagan god Baal for fire to come down from heaven and light the fire place. Even after almost eight hours of calling out at the top of their voices, there was no action. So Elijah enters the scene and asks the prophets of Baal to “Shout louder … Perhaps he [Baal] is sleeping.” But no action still. Then Elijah calls out to the living God (the same God of Jn. 3:14) for fire to descend. To everyone’s surprise, in no time Yehovah answered the prayer of Elijah and consumed the water and the firewood and even the stones by the fire place. It was very interesting and entertaining, indeed.
But the real plot was yet to come. The bet with King Ahab was that Prophet Elijah would kill all the prophets of Baal if they could not make fire descend on the fire place after praying to their pagan god Baal. So Elijah killed all 450 prophets of Baal. This is what I call an action-studded drama. I think we had a drama equally entertaining in Coppell that lasted for more than 8 months not merely 8 hours. The followers of the Crucifix didn’t kill anyone because our Savior has told us not to kill but to love but the drama was very much entertaining. More importantly, the point has been once again made clear. An idol or a shadow of the real thing is no match for the living God or the ultimate reality behind the shadow. Mar Thoma Cross is now the shadow as you all know. It has been proved ineffective in Coppell beyond all doubt.
Under these circumstances, it is very foolish to once again try to prove what has been disproved not once, not twice but several times. The point has been in proved in 1 Sam. 5:3-4, in 1 Kings 18:22-40 and in its latest episode in Coppell. So, my sincere advice to you, Fr. Joji is: “Don’t even think of disproving the time-honored eternal truth of God – Idols are absolutely no match to the living God.” By the same token, Mar Thoma Cross and Veil are no match to the Crucifix. But if you are still not convinced, go ahead. Make my day. Continue to push your meaningless idol, the Mar Thoma Cross on the people of the Garland Church. You will soon prove once again in the process what you guys really are – fools. What Paul said in Rom. 1:22 will once again be proved beyond all doubt: “Claiming to be wise, they became fools.” You will find out who the real Yehovah is when you will be crushed under his almighty power. Reason: Because “God has placed all things under his feet … [including your Mar Thoma Cross and Veil to be crushed under His feet] (Eph. 1:22).
So Fr. Joji, please do not repeat in Garland the same mistake Bishop Angadiath made in Coppell – for your own sake and for God’s sake. Praise be to the glorious Crucifix of Jesus Christ in which alone we take pride and boast (Gal. 6:14).
14 comments:
korangan is back with full power....
IN GOD WE TRUST
America is the only celebrated country founded on Christian principles. Even a single $ bill portrays that. The faithful have all the rights to question and to remove the pagan cross from our church alter. Bishop Angadiath and his parasite priests have no unilateral power to install a viri and the pagan cross of their unbelief in the church altar. One day the Chicago diocese needs to pay a huge price for her wrong doing against her own faithful in USA.
We need a clean Garland church without any man made stupid creations inside. Fr. Joji. Shame on you! You should not come down to a dog stage that eats its own omit back.
Therefore we urge the Bishop Angadiath to deviate from his VIRI and MAR-THOMA cross agenda and request to leave the Garland church to the faithful. We do not want a VIRI and pagan cross in our church.
WE WANT ONLY THE CRUCIFIX IN OUR ALTAR.
അങ്ങാടിയത്ത് തന്റെ വ്യക്തിപരമായ വിശ്വാസം വിശ്വാസികളുടെമേല് അടിച്ച് ഏല്പ്പിക്കുകയാണ്......
സഭാധികാരികള് ഇവിടെ സഭാനേതൃത്വ ഗൂണ്ടായിസമാണ് നടത്തുന്നത്.
മെത്രാനും കൂട്ടരും ഇവിടെ കാട്ടിക്കൂട്ടുന്നത് ecclesiastical ഫാസിസം ആണ്.
ബഹുഭൂരിപക്ഷ ജനവികാരങ്ങളെ കാറ്റില് പറത്തി, അതിന് പുല്ലിന്റെ പോലും വില വയ്ക്കാതെ, തന്റെ വ്യക്തിപരമായ വിശ്വാസം വെറും തൊപ്പിയുടെയും വടിയുടെയും ബലത്തില് വിശ്വാസികളുടെമേല് അടിച്ച് ഏല്പ്പിക്കുകയാണ് അങ്ങാടിയത്ത്.
അദ്ദേഹത്തെയും അദ്ദേഹത്തിന് ഓശാന പാടുന്നവരെയും സഭാ-സമുദായ ദ്രോഹികളായി മാത്രമെ ഞങ്ങള് കാണുന്നുള്ളൂ.
ഞങ്ങള് സഭാ വിരോധികളോ, പുരോഹിത വിരോധികളോ അല്ല. പ്രത്യുത, സഭാസ്നേഹികളാണ് എന്നതില് അഭിമാനം കൊള്ളുന്നു.
ഞങ്ങള് യുദ്ധം ചെയ്യുന്നത് സഭാധികാരികളുടെ പൊതുജനവിരുദ്ധ നിലപാടുകള്ക്കും, നടപടികള്ക്കുമെതിരെയാണ്.
Don't mess with Garland
Garland ക്ലാവര് വാദികളില് തന്തക്കു പിറന്നു സ്വന്തം അമ്മയുടെ മാമ്മം കുടിച്ചു വളര്ന്ന ഒരുത്തനുമുല്ല
എങ്കിലും അത് സമ്മതിച്ചുകൊടുത്ത് അടങ്ങിയൊതുങ്ങിക്കൂടാന് അവര് തയ്യാറല്ല.
അധികാരികളുടെ ആസനം കഴുകി മുത്തി അധികാരക്കസേരയില് കടന്നു കൂടാന് ശ്രമിക്കുന്ന ഈ തെണ്ടിപ്പരിഷകള്ക്ക് നാണം എന്നൊന്ന് ദൈവം തമ്പുരാന് കൊടുത്തിട്ടില്ല.
കോപ്പെലിലെ ദേവാലയ വെഞ്ചരിപ്പ്
കര്മ്മങ്ങള്ക്ക് ശേഷം ബിഷപ് നടത്തിയ പ്രഭാഷണത്തില് പറഞ്ഞ ചില സംഗതികള് അവിടെ കൂടിയിരുന്ന ഭക്ത ജനങ്ങളെ ഞെട്ടിക്കുന്നതായിരുന്നു.
കൊപ്പെലില് തനിക്കു തെറ്റ് പറ്റിയെന്നു അദ്ദേഹം പരസ്യമായി ഏറ്റുപറഞ്ഞു.
അദ്ദേഹം സമൂഹത്തോട് അതിന് മാപ്പ് ചോദിക്കുകയും ചെയ്തു.
എന്നാല് ഇതിനു ശേഷം നടത്തിയ പ്രസ്താവനയാണ് ഭക്തജനങ്ങളെ ഒന്നാകെ ഞെട്ടിച്ചത്.
"ഇനി അമേരിക്കയിലെ ഒരു പള്ളികളിലും മാര്തോമകുരിശും അള്ത്താരവിരിയും തൂക്കണമെന്നു ഞാന് നിര്ബന്ധം പിടിക്കുകയില്ല. കേരളത്തിലെ സഭയില് ഇതിനെപ്പറ്റി തീരുമാനമാകാത്തതിനാല് ആണ് ഈ പുതിയ തീരുമാനം."
ഗാര്ലാന്ഡ് പള്ളിയില് അള്ത്താരയില് ക്രൂശിത രൂപം മാത്രം വെച്ചാല് മതി!
അങ്ങാടിത്ത് പിതാവേ എന്തിനാണ് കളള രാഷ്ട്രീയം പളളിയുടെ ഉളളില്.
LISTEN TO THE FIRST POPE, ST. PETER
http://marthoma-margam.blogspot.com/
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''.
To be continued.......
Contd....
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.
To be continued.......
Contd....
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.
ഹലോ ടോം Varkey; Claver ഇല്ലായ്മ ചെയണമെങ്കില് ആദൃമെ അങ്ങോടി പിതാവിന്റെ തലയിലെയും വടിയിലെയും അരയിലെയും മറ്റും മാറ്റിക്കായിരുന്നേങ്കില് നന്നായിരുന്നേനേ!
Your blogs are read by many migrants in Chennai who are fighting against SMC imposition for the last 30years. Yor situation is a lesson for all those who sit on the fence. Your fight is our inspiration. Let us co ordinate and fight to save our Church.
P.C.Joseph(p.chacko.joseph@gmail.com)
Battle for Garland: Can (An Uncircumcised) Bishop Defy and Defeat the Living God of the Armies of Israel? -- Tom Varkey
More than 2000 years ago, a very similar question was asked and answered beyond all doubt through the battle that took place in the Valley of Elah. Here the face-off was between David and Goliath who was an uncircumcised Philistine who challenged the living God of the armies of Israel. Even though David was no match for Goliath both in terms of physical strength and in terms of weapons, within a few seconds after the battle was kicked off, Goliath fell to the ground like a huge tree succumbing to the destructive force of a powerful tornado. And everyone learned what should have been an unforgettable lesson never to be forgotten: Nobody can defy and defeat the armies of the living God of Israel. Unfortunately most of us seem to have forgotten the lesson that should have been for ever etched on the minds of every Christian after that battle in the Valley of Elah about which we read in 1 Sam. 17. As we head into the Battle for Garland, it is good for us to refresh ourselves with this story and keep its lesson in mind.
In this context it is helpful to know what a circumcision is within the context of the New Testament. In the Old Testament, it meant the chopping off of the foreskin of the male genitalia when a Jew accepted the God of the Bible. But in the New Testament it has a different meaning described in Col. 2:11. Here it is described as “the putting off of the sinful nature … a circumcision done by Christ.” Such a circumcision is the characteristic feature of every true Christian. Without this circumcision performed by Christ in the heart of a Christian, he will be lusting after the desires of this world. In Gal. 6:14-15 we read that it is through the Cross of Jesus Christ that we are crucified to the world and the world to us. We have to deny the world and all its pleasures and enticements and temptations including all idols. This happens when we are circumcised by Christ as described above and we become a new creation in Christ. This is a true circumcision that every Christian must undergo in order to become a new creation in Christ. The mere fact that a Syro-Malabar Bishop or priest holds on to the Mar Thoma Cross is an indication that such a circumcision has not taken place in him. For anyone including a Syro-Malabar Bishop, for this to happen, he must abandon anything that stands opposed to the Crucifix like the Mar Thoma Cross. The Mar Thoma Cross is an idol that prevents him from embracing the Crucifix by which Paul says “one is crucified to the world” which means giving up the temptations and pleasures of this world.
Dear Blogger, this is Part 2 of the 3 Part Article "Battle for Garland ..."
When somebody clings to the Mar Thoma Cross, it is an indication that he is against the Cross of Jesus Christ which is the Crucifix. Unfortunately, as long as this is true, he can never die to the world because the Crucifix is absolutely instrumental for a Christian to die to the world and all the evil that it stands for. That is why God asks us in Js. 4:4: “… don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God?” In the case of the claver fanatics, not only that they are not accepting the Cross of Jesus Christ which the Crucifix is, but they are also determined to replace it with their idol – the “Mar Thoma Cross” which is nothing but an idol which can be defined as anything that competes with God for accepting worship which is reserved only for the true and Living God. In other words, what Jeremiah says in Jer. 2:13 is true of every Syro-Malabar Catholic who is embracing the Mar Thoma Cross: “My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns [wells], broken cisterns [wells] that cannot hold water.” By forsaking the Crucifix, they are committing both these sins at the same time.
As long as they do not accept the Crucifix and seek to replace it with their idolatrous “Mar Thoma Cross”, they will be guilty of both the above sins described in Jer. 2:13. Of course as God says in this passage, by doing this, they can never hold the living water which is the Holy Spirit (Jn. 7:37). And since they cannot hold the Holy Spirit, they have no connection with Jesus Christ as we read in Rom. 8:9: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.” As long as a Christian does not have the Holy Spirit in him, there is no difference between him and an uncircumcised Philistine in the Old Testament. And as it was proved in the battle between David and Goliath more than 2000 years ago, an uncircumcised philistine can never prevail over the living God of the armies of Israel.
Dear Blogger, this is Part 3 of the 3 Part Article "Battle for Garland ..."
As Paul says in Gal. 6:16 “those who follow the above rule are the new Israel”. In other words whoever gives up the temptations and enticements of the world by espousing themselves to the Crucifix are the new Israel of God . And those who cling on to idols such as the Mar Thoma Cross are the Philistines in the New Testament. Like Goliath, they can never even in their wildest dreams imagine prevailing over the Living God of the armies of the new Israel who the devotees of the Crucifix are. The reason why David easily prevailed over Goliath was the fact that the Living God of the armies of Israel was residing within David just as Jesus Christ lives in every true Christian as we read in Jn. 14:23: “… We will come to him and make our home with him.”
When we understand these truths, it is easy to see who is going to be the easy winner in Garland in the upcoming battle there for the Crucifix. As long Bishop Mar Angadiath and Fr. Joji who have not only abandoned the Crucifix but are trying to replace it with an idol in its place, they will always remain in the place of Goliath who was an uncircumcised Philistine since they have abandoned the very instrument by which a Christian can hope to become “crucified to the world and the world to them” through the circumcision administered by Jesus Christ as described by Paul in Gal. 6:14-15. And they can never in a million years hope to defeat those who have been circumcised by Christ through the embracing of the Crucifix by which “they have been crucified to the world and the world to them”. Clearly, the battle is between David and Goliath and the winner will undoubtedly be those who stand for the Crucifix as was David 2000 years ago.
Praise be to the most precious Crucifix of Jesus Christ on which He hung for the redemption of the world.
Post a Comment