In The Light Of The Synod Of Diamper

If we examine the proceedings and the decisions of the Synod of Diamper (1599) convened by the Portuguese Bishop Menezis, we can understand many things that prevailed before, among the St. Thomas Christians. 1 In fact Menezis convened the synod exploiting the autonomous Church assemblies of each locality and the participation of the believers in them. In the order issued for convening the synod, Menezis made it clear that, as was the custom of this Church from ancient days, four significant persons representing each assembly should attend the synod, and that the decisions – both spiritual and temporal _ taken by the Synod would be binding on the people. Obeying the order, 793 persons participated including 133 ministers (Presbyters) and 660 believers. 2

Menezis succeeded in bringing our Church under Portuguese control by this Synod. Before that, bishops from the Persian and the Babylonian Churches came here on request from the Indian Church to give spiritual leadership, but never with the support of the Persian Kings, whose power was declining. The freedom that they allowed in their Churches was allowed here too. But Menezis and other Portuguese bishops came here with the object of seizing all powers of the Church with the support of the Portuguese Kings. To attain that object, with the help of the native Kings, they convened the Synod of Diamper through which they attempted to make our independent Church dance to their tunes, and we see that they succeeded in their attempt to a great extent.

1. Portuguese ways imposed

Soon after the synod of Diamper, the Roman administrative system was imposed on the Malankara Church. Not only were the Church assemblies deprived of their autonomy, but they were declared as the parishes of the Roman Church, and the bishop appointed ‘Vicars’ to rule these parishes. The Portuguese bishop himself paid them a salary and the vicars started imposing the Roman faith and customs on the Malankara Church, which gradually lost its own faith and independence. The principle of collective responsibility shared by the minister and the believers gave way to the rule by the Vicars (hierarchy) of the Roman Church. Consequently the faithful became mere ‘laity’ under the ‘vicars’ and were forced to accept the Roman faith unquestioningly. The Jesuits could keep on with these Roman reforms with the support of the native Kings. They managed things in such a way that the Malankara Church became economically dependent on the Roman Church; Economic dependence infused Roman faith into the people.

Besides this, the Jathikku Karthavyan (the leader of the caste) who was accepted as the national leader, and who ruled this Church, was reduced to the position of the ‘Arch-deacon’ (equal to the Vicar

8 replies on “In The Light Of The Synod Of Diamper”

“The true Christians of Kerala … were called Puthenkoor”.

Please let’s have some objectivity, and more importantly, some accuracy.

The Puthenkoor were so called because they eventually adopted a New Rite—the West Syriac one. They weren’t any “truer” than the Pazhayakoor.

The Pazhayakoor retained the old rite (with Catholic modifications)—the East Syriac one.

Both are Christian. And interestingly, the Pazhayakoor, even though Romanized, are closer to our Nestorian ancestors (in a Christological sense), than us miaphysite “Jacobites”. Yet, we have the gaul to claim *we’re* the original ones.

Let’s grow up.

It’s easy to demonize the Portuguese, but let’s remember that our native rulers (the archdeacons) were no saints (much like our current “rulers”). They took advantage of their position and power, and did not well serve the outlying dioceses. The Catholics sent priests to all dioceses, and stopped some of the corrupt practices that our priests of old had engaged in. That is they *helped* us. Of course, they also tried to control us. So they were, like the British, both good and bad. For example, black magic and other pagan influences were common in ancient times. Aren’t we glad that the Catholics helped put an end to that? Our archdeacons certainly didn’t do anything.

Simply demonizing the Catholics of the 16/17th centuries is over-easy and lacking in substance, and ignores many of the good things they did to re-establish the faith in a people who were, in many respects, only borderline Christians (engaged in polygamy, priests who were more concerned with maintaining commerce than practicing the rites, etc.). They even built many Churches for us — in the old days, do you even know how many Churches we had? A very small number. What does that say about our ancient piety!?

What’s the result of this anti-Catholic propaganda: to this day, Orthodox people feel more closer to the Mar Thomites (who are heretics) than to their actual brothers, the Catholics and the Jacobites.

Let’s stop the irresponsible distortion of history.

Let’s write in a more responsible, intellectually sophisticated manner, that amplifies truth and attenuates noise.

@ John Mathew

Since you basic education of Indian Church history is through English books written by Catholics, it’s of no hope lecturing to you.

The Catholics do not divulge anything about the atrocities they have committed. To learn that first you have to learn Malayalam and start reading books written by your own faction.

How easy it is for them to paint the arch-deacons awful, and hide the horrendous crimes committed by the Portuguese. In NSC network, the garbage committed by Portuguese, is often admitted in one-liners, and all the other rubbish about the Arch-Deacon and his party in paragraphs.

Basically you are wasted; and only well read, what the Catholics do offer. Also not even a pinch of effort has gone into reading the Puthenkoor books like, the Niranam Ghrandavary or the Three Volume books, Malankara Nasranikal by ZM Paret.

Read those and use common sense to discern and bisect based on your logic and then come to conclusions.

Interesting. There is no mention of apostle Thomas in all these exchanges. Is it pertinent to ask what did he teach the folks in keralam at that time? Did he come to keralam to convert locals or he carried a message from Jesus exclusively meant for the resident trading Jews and other Romans. One seems to forget that conversion was not a Jewish idea and Thomas was a Jew to begin with. How come he converted Hindus to Christianity and that too Brahmins? Were there any Brahmins in Keralam at that time. History says that keralam was wholly or partly Buddhist and Jains and they have no Brahmins. Before commenting on the Portuguese one must get the history correct. To me the Portuguese attempted and succeeded in removing among other things the basic Jewishness of the Thomas Christian faith. Remember those were the times of inquisition in Europe and there was always an antisemitic feeling among Europeans. This needs to be studied and understood. By the by the Portuguese carried out an inquisition in Goa. Although I have no authentic texts to quote from there is a place in front of the Se Cathedral in old Goa which is reputed to be the site of inquisition and there is a strong belief that certain keralam believers were also subjected to the inquisition.
My comments are slightly off the mark I know but these issues require to be pursued. B.George. Nagpur.

Please read the following site

It means that before the synad of diampar There was nestorian christians in kerala

The books reported hertic by the synad reveals that Christians in kerala including Knanaya were nestorians

That means that Kerala christians were under nestorian belief

The only nestorian church since 4th centuary was under the catholicos of celutia cetafone (persian church)

The caldian petriarch was nestorian and that is why these books were live in kerala christian churches up to 1599.

When persian church disintegrate due to muslim conquest they sought the help of Roman catholics since 1400 (about)

that is how the caldian patriarch was consecreted by pope
since 1400

That was not known to kerala chridstians because, the hertic books were live since 1599.

they were strictly nestorians still the synad of diampar (1599)

That means the ancient st thomas christians were under the nestorian catholicos of celutia

They were neither under pope nor under patriarch of antioch

If we claim that kerala christians were under the patriarch of untioch since Kana thoma (3rd centuary) we may have to accept that the patriarch of antioch was under nestorian creed is it true?

If we claim that kerala christians were under pope we may have to accept that pope was under nestorian creed. Is it true

Then you think and come to a conclusion

Alexis de Menzes wanted to reform the Syrian church which was in total disarray relating to true Christian doctrines, financial management and management of church properties.The crisis arose because of the selfishness and greed of Archdeacon George . He did not want to lose his power and income from Church and its properties. He instigated some families to oppose Menzes who wanted to bring Syrian churches under the international Roman Church. As a matter of fact, Menzes wanted to construct more churches and to give financial assistance to poor Syrian Christians. But George spread the rumour that Menzes would take away Church properties, and church money. Menzes did not
know Malayalam and George fully exploited it by spreading false rumours against Menzes. That is how he rallied ignorant masses against Menzes which resulted in the Coonen Cross episode.
The colleges set up by the Jesuits and Franciscans at Kodungalloe, Vaippicottaq and Kochi taught Latin and Portuguese to many hundreds of young Malayalis, and in this way they represent the beginning of the great educational movement which was later to make Kerala the most literate region of all India. Not only the local Christians, but also many of the Hindu prominent families were influenced by this early Western education. As K.M.Panikkar says, ” The later Rajahs of Cochin conversed fluently in Portuguese,and often corresponded directly in that language. In fact, all the establishments of British supremacy in Kerala, Portuguese continued to be the diplomatic language of the Kerala rulers.” But George using cunnig tactics caused a split in the Church. It was all his greed for position, money and church properties.The same split we see today for church properties and power.

St. Thomas Christians oppose the decisions of the Synod of Diamper to claim higher caste status on par with Nairs and Nambbodiris. . There are two features of upper castes that are conspicuously absent in Syrian community to claim upper caste status at the time of the Synod. The Nairs practiced matrinelal system and their line of descent was traced from the common female ancestress, and it was not a man’s own children, but his sister’s sons who were his heirs. Syrian Christians at the time of the Synod were not practicing matrinileal system because they were all converts from various unouchable castes and subcastes. Nambudiri Brahmins are called dvijas meaning “twice born”. A Nambudiri is born once in the womb of his mother and again during the Upanayana when he learns the Gayatri Mantra. It is at this stage the sacred thread or poonool ceremony is conducted and Nambudiri boys were allowed to wear the thread. Since the Syrians at the time of the Synod were not having matrineleal system they were not Nair converts and since the Syrians were not wearing sacred thread they were not Nambudiris. So it goes without saying that all the decisions of the Synod were to remove the evil customs, beliefs and rituals of untouchable Hindus which were being followed by Syrian Christians because they were untouchable converts. . Pariahs and Pulayas believed in transmigration and they offer even today flowers and sacrifices (vavu bali) to dead souls thinking they would continue to bless them in transmigrated status ..Exorcism, astrology, marriage customs are similar to Hindu Pariahs and Pulayas and that is why the Synod wanted to civilize Syrian Christians. Christians were asked to believe in resurrection and not trtansmigration. In dress, Hindu women were not allowed to cover their breasts, and that was the common practice not merely of untouchables from whom Syrians were converted, but even among caste Hindus such as Nambbodiris and Nairs. When Syrian immigrants married lower caste women, they were almost naked except a small piece of loin cloth to cover the genital area. So, like the Arab immigrants in Malabar, they stitched a collarless shirt called Chatta (Tamil word for shirt) and a long piece of single cloth to cover the bottom portion from navel to calf called Mundu ( a Tamil word for dhoty) and the excess cloth was not cut off to avoid waste but frilled and tucked at the back. . Most of the maid servants and poor women in huts all over Kerala wear chatta and mundu, since they cannot afford a sari. Arab immigrants gave their untouchable wives of Malabar a chatta with sleeves known as kuppayam. A shawl was also given to their wives to put it on shoulder or to cover the head. . The Synod wanted to civilize Syrian Christians because they wee all from untouchable castes. In the initial stage, a few West Asia immigrants would have married some untouchable women, like Anglo-Indians, but at a later stage it was mass marriage among untouchables who had become Christians. That is why they retained all the rituals of untouchable Hindus. Read Thurston’s customs. beliefs, marriage (Tali tying) of untouchables such as Pariahs, Pulayas, Mukkuvas, Kuravas and Ezhavas. Then we will understand how the Synod wanted to civilize , modernise, and above all, Christianize them. Syrians who came from that stock. Archdeacon George and his nephew wanted to retain Church property and money under their personal control. So they instigated the illiterate Christian masses to rise agains Archbishop Menzes who wanted to regulate church adminstration and revnue by keeping proper records like othe Churches in Kochi area. Today there is a trend among a small group of Syrians to steal the identity of Namboodiris and Nairs to claim superior caste status, and with this sinister motive they attack the good deeds of Archbishop Menzes. . False identity claiming Namboodirii and Nair caste will boomerang, for Nairs and Nambbodiris do not accept Syrians as converted from their castes. They ridicule and pooh-pooh these insane claims, ignoring historical and demographic evidences.

@ John Mathew
Puthenkkor and other labels came only after the Portuguese elevated Syrian Christians from their low status. The Synod of Dampier gives the picture of the status of Syrian converts. The Portuguese priests were shocked to see the total ignorance of Syrians in matters relating to Christian doctrines, beliefs and liturgy. Since the Syrians were converted from Hinduism they were still retaining many Hindu beliefs. Persian priests were not coming regularly and illiterate, ignorant local priests were in charge of churches. What is more, the converted Syrians were following a corrupt form of Nestorianism, Alexis de Menzes wanted to train them to become real Christians by following real Christian beliefs. Till then Syrians believed in transmigration of souls, fatalism, practiced polygamy like the Hindus and kept Hindu idols in churches. Archbishop Menezes made baptism compulsory, and they were instructed to attend Mass to be attended with reverence. All heretical books were either burnt or destroyed. Book burning was not directed against Syrian Christians. It was an organized movement to stamp out heresy. Book burning was often part of the Inquisition, which was composed of ecclesiastical tribunals of the Catholic church set up to investigate heresy. In England and Europe, thousands of books, including the translated Bibles of the Protestants were burnt.
The Portuguese were glad to see Christians in a foreign country where they were strangers. So they freed them fro Hindu rulers, Brahmins and Nayar jenmis, and made them planters by giving large estates, traders, soldiers and top officers in Portugfuese Kochi, because the Raja of Kochi was a subservient servant of the Portuguese.

1. Your observation: The Portuguese bishop himself paid them a salary and the vicars started imposing the Roman faith and customs on the Malankara Church, which gradually lost its own faith and independence.
My observation: I agree with most of the observations except a few.
Actually the Portuguese and their king were helping the Malabar Church financially. From the time of Mar Yacob, the bishop of Angamaly we were in cordial relations with the Portuguese and the Jesuit fathers who came later. Tradition says that in AD 1504 our Archdeacon and the then Bishop met Vasco Da Gama and asked their King’s protection against the moors who were harassing them at that period of time obstructing their trade by influencing the kings of Malabar, handed over the scepter of the Villarvattom King Thoma and subjected themselves to the Portuguese King. We had Catholic Chaldean Archbishops at Angamaly from AD 1555 (Mar Yousef Sulaqa and Mar Abraham), means we had been in full direct communion with the Catholic Church when all these incidents took place. Then there is no question of imposing Roman faith, because we already had the Roman faith. Before AD 1555, we used to have Nestorian Bishops, so can we say we had Nestorian faith? What was our faith before AD 1555? Nestorian or Jacobite or Catholic? Which of these faiths is the true one? How we will decide? If we had the Nestorian faith before AD 1555, can we conclude that, it is the true one? Let us not forget that the Antiochean Church also was part of the undivided Catholic Church at least until the Council of Chalcedon in AD 451. So then to which side the St Thomas Christians of Malabar Join; Catholic or Orthodox or Nestorian? The answer is; even in AD 1653, during the time of the Coonan cross oath we (including the Archdeacon) had no intention to break away from the Catholic Church. Our grievance was that the Jesuits and Archbishop Garcia did not obey the Pope, by deporting a Patriarch sent by him (Pope) and also by not allowing congregations other than Jesuits to work in Malabar which was against the Roman pontiff’s order of 1636. The faith full and priests saw them (the Jesuits and Archbishop Garcia) as heretics and enemies of the Roman Church by disobeying the Pope. (Manifesto issued and exposed in public places by the St Thomas Christians after the Coonan Cross Oath. One copy is in the Roman Society of Jesuit Archives in Goa 68-1, f. 102.-. Also the letter wrote by cattanars and people after the oath to the captain of Cochin-Original is in the Historical Archives of Goa LM 25, f.121). Then what was our own faith up to AD 1665, when the Puthencoor faction accepted the Antiochean faith and rite? Definitely it was catholic faith.
2. Your observation; Gradually the Jesuits managed to impose the western culture and the Roman faith on the St. Thomas Christians of Malankara.

My observation; I agree that they tried to impose western culture, but they did not succeed much in that. Even now we have many of our elderly women wearing mundu, chatta and mekkamothiram (large ear ring). Most men still use mundu and some still use Juba. The Diamper synod banned piercing of body as part of fashion. The women still continue piercing earlobes for wearing rings. In fact the men did stop piercing their earlobes and wearing kadukkan. Many other practices related to marriage such as use of Thali and Pudava still we have. Still we have practices like chatham, pulakuli etc. The synod in fact did some good things also. As to the faith we already had the catholic faith from the time we accepted the Mar Thoma margam. The acceptance of West Syrian or Nestorian bishops did not change our catholic faith, since they did not dare to teach their faith to us. After all there is not much difference between these faiths. The Nestorians say that there are two distinct persons in Christ- Man and God. So they say that Mary is mother of Christ and not of God. So they don’t give any veneration to Mary. But remember many of the churches founded by Thoma Sleeha were in the name of St. Mary, such as the churches of Niranam. Whereas the Jacobites say that there are two natures in Christ- Man and God and both are confused into one nature. This is called Monophysitism. Recently I have seen on the Indian Jacobite Website site that they are rejecting this accusation. Whereas the Catholic Church also say that there are two natures in Christ- Man and God and both are present in one person Jesus Christ, but not confused but united. Are these a very big issues to keep the faithful divided? But both Catholics and Orthodox believe in Theotokos (Mother of God).In fact the divisions are not based on theological issues, but political, national and other issues.

3. Your observation; Garcia, the next Arch bishop, even threatened to kill the Arch-deacon.
My observation: There is no evidence or witness to prove the first part of this argument. Where did you find this father Cherian?
4. Your observation: The agreement was repealed.
My Observation: In fact that agreement was never repealed. Bishop Garcia was Co-Adjuter Bishop during the last days of Bishop Britto, and Archbishop Britto was in poor health to visit parishes. So the visits during this period were done by Bishop Garcia. The said agreement was between Archbishop Britto and Archdeacon George. So what we can say is that Bishop Garcia did not respect the agreement between the other two parties. When Archbishop Britto died on 3rd December 1641, Bishop Garcia immediately took charge as Archbishop. At the same time Archdeacon Thomas demanded that Garcia should affix his seal on the agreement between his uncle (Archdeacon George) and the former Archbishop Britto, which Archbishop Garcia refused to do. Means the agreement was never repealed but actually not respected or agreed to by the new Archbishop.

5. Your observation: The clash became intense, till Arch-deacon Thomas and majority of the people threw off the Roman Yoke by the historic oath of Coonan Cross at Mattanchery (1653).
My observation: The so called Coonan cross oath was that ‘we would not any longer obey Archbishop Garcia and nor would have anything to do with the Paulists’ (The Jesuits from St Paul Seminary Goa) and will recognize Archdeacon Thomas as the Governor of their Church’. There was no intention to throw their allegiance to the Pope. On the contrary our grievance was that the Jesuits and Archbishop Garcia did not obey the Pope, by deporting a Patriarch sent by him (Pope) and also by not allowing congregations other than Jesuits to work in Malabar which was against the Roman pontiff’s order of 1636. The faith full and priests saw them (the Jesuits and Archbishop Garcia) as heretics and enemies of the Roman Church by disobeying the Pope. (Manifesto issued and exposed in public places by the St Thomas Christians after the Coonan Cross Oath. One copy is in the Archives of the Roman Society of Jesuits in Goa 68-1, f. 102.-. Also the letter wrote by cattanars and people after the oath to the captain of Cochin-Original is in the Historical Archives of Goa LM 25, f.121).
6. Your observation: growth of the Church became stunted.
My observation: Until 16th century there was no growth in our Church, except by the growth of population by reproduction. There was no missionary work and evangelization.

7. Your observation: The reformists exploited the situation and they encouraged the revolt of the faithful against the ministers, and thus the idea of’ Congregationalism’ developed in the Church.
My observation: This is a baseless argument. Were there any reformists? Were there any revolts against ministers? Was there congregationalism? Does Fr. Cherian have anything to prove these?
8. Your observation: stopped all other publications.
My observation: In fact there were no publications. All documents were written and that also mostly on palm leaves. Then what publication? Can you mention the name of any one publication that was there at that period?

8. Your observation: 1. The arch deacon wrote to various Churches with the eastern tradition for help to continue the apostolic succession through proper ordination. 2. It was then that the Malankara Christians threw off the Roman yoke by the “Oath of Coonan Cross” and ordained Archdeacon Thomas as Bishop

My observation: Malankara Christians do not have any power to ordain a Bishop. To ordain a Bishop at least one Bishop should be available to give the apostolic succession. It is true that after his usurpation as a bishop he wrote to various churches of eastern tradition for help, because he knew himself that he is not yet a Bishop. At a meeting at Edapally church he also demanded the Apostolic Commissary Fr Joseph Sebastiani of the Catholic Church to consecrate him as a Bishop. Even Fr. P. C. Cherian calls him Archdeacon and not Bishop, means he also admits the fact that Archdeacon Thomas officiated as a false (vyaja) Bishop right from 22 May 1653 up to 1665 (almost 12 years), exercising all the powers of a Bishop including ordination and other sacraments. What about the ordinations he did? Did the candidates become priests or false priests? What about the about the marriages conducted by these false priests and the false Bishop? Were those marriages valid? No surprise then, when people refused to get their marriages conducted by these false priests. There is no surprise then, when most people abandoned him. Before the Coonan cross oath (in 1648 or 1649) he had also written to the Pope in detail about his grievances, but his letters reached there, only in 1665.

9. Your observation: Metropolitan Ahathulla was sent to Malankara, but the Portuguese executed him.

My observation: The story of execution is absolutely false. Metropolitan Ahatullah was a catholic Archbishop. His see was Nicomedia, Homs and Damascus. He was born in AD 1590, a native of Aleppo Syria. Probably in 1631, he joined the Catholic Church, while at Aleppo by the work of Latin missionaries there. Again he renewed the catholic profession of faith, before the Holy office at Rome in 1632. On 3 January 1653, he was sent to Goa. At Goa he was kept in the close custody of the Professed House of the Jesuits. No one was allowed to speak to him. This caused people to believe that he was murdered. Actually he was sent to Lisbon in the ship ‘Nossa Senhora Da Graca’ and reached Lisbon on 14 July 1653. The Portugal King ordered to send him to Rome. On his way to Rome he died in Paris on 26 March 1654, and is buried at the Jerusalem chapel of the Cordeliena Church. The death register of this church has some note about him; “The most illustrious and most reverend Lord John, Patriarch of Antioch, whom the most reverend Archbishop of Myra was conducting to Rome died. He was buried with his Patriarchal dress in a grave at Jerusalem chapel. His pastoral staff, which is an Indian cane, is kept in the sacristy of the Monastery”. (Reference: ‘St Thomas Christian revolution in 1653’ by J Kollamparambil)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *