Jacobite Syrians have been governed by native Bishops consecrated by
Bishops sent by the Patriarch of Antioch, or at least always received
and recognised as such. In exigent circumstances, the native Bishops
themselves, before their death, consecrated their successors by the
imposition of hands. Immediately after the defection, they chose
Archdeacon Thomas as their spiritual leader. He was thus the first
Metran or native Bishop, having been formally ordained after twelve
years of independent rule by Mar Gregory from Antioch, with whose
name the revival of Jacobitism in Malabar is associated. The Metran
assumed the title of Mar Thomas I. He belonged to the family that
traced its descent from the Pakalomattom family, held in high respect
and great veneration as one of the Brahman families, the members of
which are supposed to have been converted and ordained as priests
by the apostle himself. Members of the same family continued to hold
the Metranship till about the year 1815, when the family is supposed
to have become extinct. This hereditary succession is supposed
by some to be a relic of the Nestorian practice. It may, however,
be explained in another way. The earliest converts were high-caste
Hindus, amongst whom an Anandravan (brother or nephew) succeeded to
the family estates and titles in pursuance of the joint family system
as current in Malabar. The succession of a brother or a nephew might,
therefore, be quite as much a relic of the Hindu custom. The Metrans
possessed properties. They were, therefore, interested in securing the
succession of their Anandravans, so that their properties might not
pass to a different family. Mar Thomas I was succeeded by his brother
Mar Thomas II, on whose death his nephew became Metran under the title
of Mar Thomas III. He held office only for ten days. Mar Thomas IV,
who succeeded him, presided over the church till 1728. Thomas III and
IV are said to have been consecrated by Bishop John, a scholar of great
repute, who, with one Bishop Basil, came from Antioch in 1685. During
the régime of Mar Thomas IV, and of his nephew Thomas V, Mar Gabriel,
a Nestorian Bishop, appeared on the scene in 1708. He seems to have
been a man without any definite creed, as he proclaimed himself a
Nestorian, a Jacobite, or a Romanist, according as one or the other
best suited his interests. He had his own friends and admirers among
the Syrians, with whose support he ruled over a few churches in the
north till 1731. The consecration of Mar Thomas V by Mar Thomas IV
was felt to be invalid, and, to remedy the defect, the assistance
of the Dutch was sought; but, being disappointed, the Christians had
recourse to a Jewish merchant named Ezekiel, who undertook to convey
their message to the Patriarch of Antioch. He brought from Bassorah
one Mar Ivanius, who was a man of fiery temper. He interfered with
the images in the churches. This led to quarrels with the Metran,
and he had forthwith to quit the State. Through the Dutch authorities
at Cochin, a fresh requisition was sent to the Patriarch of Antioch,
who sent out three Bishops named Basil, John, and Gregory. Their
arrival caused fresh troubles, owing to the difficulty of paying the
large sum claimed by them as passage money. In 1761, Mar Thomas V,
supposed to have died in 1765, consecrated his nephew Mar Thomas
VI. About this time, Gregory consecrated one Kurilos, the leader
of a faction that resisted the rule of Thomas VI. The disputes and
quarrels which followed were ended with the flight of Kurilos, who
founded the See of Anjoor in the north of Cochin and became the first
Bishop of Tholiyur. Through the kind intercession of the Maharaja of
Travancore, Thomas VI underwent formal consecration at the hands of
the Bishops from Antioch, and took the title of Dionysius I, known
also as Dionysius the Great. In 1775, the great Carmelite father Paoli
visited Mar Dionysius, and tried to persuade him to submit to Rome. It
is said that he agreed to the proposal, on condition of his being
recognised as Metropolitan of all the Syrians in Malabar, but nothing
came of it. A few years after this, the struggle for supremacy between
the Dutch and the English had ended in the triumph of the latter,
who evinced a good deal of interest in the Syrian Christians, and,
in 1805, the Madras Government deputed Dr. Kerr to study the history
of the Malabar Church. In 1809, Dr. Buchanan visited Mar Dionysius,
and broached the question of a union of the Syrian Church with
the Church of England. The proposal, however, did not find favour
with the Metropolitan, or his congregation. Mar Dionysius died in
1808. Before his death, he had consecrated Thomas Kathanar as Thomas
VIII. He died in 1816. His successor, Thomas IX, was weak and old,
and he was displaced by Ittoop Ramban, known as Pulikot Dionysius or
Dionysius II. He enjoyed the confidence and good-will of Colonel Munro,
the British Resident, through whose good offices a seminary had been
built at Kottayam in 1813 for the education of Syrian youths. He died
in 1818. Philixenos, who had succeeded Kurilos as Bishop of Tholiyur,
now consecrated Punnathara Dionysius, or Dionysius III.
We have now to refer to an important incident in the history of the
Jacobite Syrians. Through the influence of the British Resident,
and in the hope of effecting the union proposed by Dr. Buchanan,
the Church Mission Society commenced their labours in 1816. The
English Missionaries began their work under favourable circumstances,
and the most cordial relations existed between the Syrians and the
missionaries for some years, so much so that the latter frequently
visited the Syrian churches, and even preached sermons. On the death
of Dionysius III in 1825, or as some say 1827, Cheppat Dionysius
consecrated by Mar Philixenos again, succeeded as Metropolitan under
the title of Dionysius IV. During his régime, there grew up among the
Syrians a party, who suspected that the missionaries were using their
influence with the Metropolitan, and secretly endeavouring to bring
the Syrians under the Protestant Church. The conservative party of
Syrians stoutly opposed the movement. They petitioned the Patriarch of
Antioch, who at once sent out a Bishop named Athanasius. On arrival
in 1825, a large number of Syrians flocked to him. He even went to
the length of threatening Mar Dionysius with excommunication. But the
Protestant missionaries and the British Resident came to the rescue
of the Metropolitan, and exercised their influence with the ruler
of Travancore, who forthwith deported Athanasius. The deportation
of Athanasius strengthened the position of the missionaries. The
British Resident, and through his influence the native ruler, often
rendered them the most unqualified support. The missionaries who
superintended the education of the Syrian students in the seminary,
having begun to teach them doctrines contrary to those of the Jacobite
Church, the cordiality and friendship that had existed between the
missionaries and the Metropolitan gradually gave place to distrust
and suspicion. The party that clung to the time-honoured traditions
and practices of their church soon fanned the flame of discord, and
snapped asunder the ties of friendship that had bound the Metropolitan
to the missionaries. Bishop Wilson of Calcutta proceeded to Travancore
to see if a reconciliation could be effected. But his attempts in this
direction proved fruitless, because the Syrians could not accept his
proposal to adopt important changes affecting their spiritual and
temporal concerns, such as doing away with prayers for the dead,
the revision of their liturgy, the management of church funds,
etc., and the Syrians finally parted company with the missionaries
in 1838. Soon after this, disputes arose in regard to the funds and
endowments of the seminary, but they were soon settled by arbitration
in 1840, and the properties were divided between the Metropolitan and
the missionaries. The missionaries had friends among the Jacobites,
some of whom became members of the Church of England.
The Syrians were rather distressed, because they thought that
the consecration of their Metropolitan by Mar Philixenos was
insufficient. They therefore memorialised the Patriarch of
Antioch. There grew up also a party hostile to the Metropolitan,
and they sent to Antioch a Syrian Christian named Mathew. His
arrival at Antioch was most opportune. The Patriarch was looking
out for a proper man. Mathew was therefore welcomed, and treated
very kindly. He was consecrated as Metropolitan by the Patriarch
himself in 1842, and sent out with the necessary credentials. He
arrived in 1843 as Metropolitan of Malankara under the title of
Mathew Anastatius, and advanced his claims to the headship of the
Church, but Mar Dionysius resisted him, and sent an appeal to the
Patriarch of Antioch, in which he denounced Mathew as one who had
enlisted his sympathies with the Protestant missionaries. Upon this,
the Patriarch sent out one Cyril with power to expel Mathew, and,
with the connivance of Mar Dionysius, Cyril cut the gordian knot by
appointing himself as Metropolitan of Malabar. Disputes arising,
a committee was appointed to examine the claims of Athanasius and
Cyril. The credentials of Cyril were proved to be forged, whereupon
Athanasius was duly installed in his office in 1862, and Cyril fled
the country. Cyril having failed, the Patriarch sent another Bishop
named Stephanos, who contributed his mite towards widening the breach,
and, on the British Resident having ordered the Bishop to quit the
country, an appeal was preferred to the Court of Directors, who
insisted on a policy of non-interference. This bestirred Mar Cyril,
who reappeared on the scene, and fanned the flame of discord. Being
ordered to leave Mar Athanasius unmolested, he and his friends sent
one Joseph to Antioch, who returned with fresh credentials in 1866,
assumed the title of Dionysius V, claimed the office of Metropolitan,
and applied to the Travancore Government for assistance. Adopting
a policy of non-interference, the darbar referred him to the Law
Courts, in case he could not come to terms with Mar Athanasius. The
Patriarch of Antioch himself visited Cochin and Travancore in 1874,
and presided over a Synod which met at Mulanthurutha in the Cochin
State. Resolutions affirming the supremacy of Antioch, recognising Mar
Dionysius as the accredited Metropolitan of Malabar, and condemning
Mathew Athanasius as a schismatic, were passed by the members of the
assembly, and the Patriarch returned to Mardin in 1876. This, however,
did not mend matters, and the two parties launched themselves into a
protracted law suit in 1879, which ended in favour of Mar Dionysius
in 1889. Mar Athanasius, who had taken up an independent position,
died in 1875, and his cousin, whom he had consecrated, succeeded as
Metropolitan under the title of Mar Thomas Anastatius. He died in
1893, and Titus Mar Thoma, consecrated likewise by his predecessor,
presides over the Reformed Party of Jacobite Syrians, who prefer to
be called St. Thomas' Syrians. We have thus traced the history of the
Jacobite Syrians from 1653, and shown how they separated themselves
into two parties, now represented by the Jacobite Syrians under
Mar Dionysius, owing allegiance to the Patriarch of Antioch, and the
Reformed Syrians or St. Thomas' Syrians owning Titus Mar Thoma as their
supreme spiritual head. Thus, while the Jacobite Syrians have accepted
and acknowledged the ecclesiastical supremacy of the Patriarch of
Antioch, the St. Thomas' Syrians, maintaining that the Jacobite creed
was introduced into Malabar only in the seventeenth century after a
section of the church had shaken off the Roman supremacy, uphold the
ecclesiastical autonomy of the church, whereby the supreme control
of the spiritual and temporal affairs of the church is declared to be
in the hands of the Metropolitan of Malabar. The St. Thomas' Syrians
hold that the consecration of a Bishop by, or with the sanction of the
Patriarch of Babylon, Alexandria or Antioch, gives no more validity
or sanctity to that office than consecration by the Metropolitan of
Malabar, the supreme head of the church in Malabar, inasmuch as this
church is as ancient and apostolic as any other, being founded by the
apostle St. Thomas; while the Jacobites hold that the consecration of
a Bishop is not valid, unless it be done with the sanction of their
Patriarch. The St. Thomas' Syrians have, however, no objection to
receiving consecration from the head of any other episcopal apostolic
church, but they consider that such consecrations do not in any way
subject their church to the supremacy of that prelate or church.
Both the Latins and the Romo-Syrians use the liturgy of the Church
of Rome, the former using the Latin, and the latter the Syriac
language. It is believed by some that the Christians of St. Thomas
formerly used the liturgy of St. Adæus, East Syrian, Edessa, but that
it was almost completely assimilated to the Roman liturgy by Portuguese
Jesuits at the Synod of Diamper in 1599. The Chaldæan Syrians also use
the Roman liturgy, with the following points of difference in practice,
communicated to me by their present ecclesiastical head:--(1) They
perform marriage ceremonies on Sundays, instead of week days as the
Romo-Syrians do. (2) While reading the Gospel, their priests turn
to the congregation, whereas the Romo-Syrian priests turn to the
altar. (3) Their priests bless the congregation in the middle of
the mass, a practice not in vogue among the Romo-Syrians. (4) They
use two kinds of consecrated oil in baptism, which does away with
the necessity of confirmation. The Romo-Syrians, on the other hand,
use only one kind of oil, and hence they have to be subsequently
confirmed by one of their Bishops.
The liturgy used by the Jacobite Syrians and the St. Thomas' Syrians
is the same, viz., that of St. James. The St. Thomas' Syrians have,
however, made some changes by deleting certain passages from it. [A
recent writer observes that "a service which I attended at the quaint
old Syrian church at Kottayam, which glories in the possession of
one of the three ancient stone crosses in India, closely resembled,
as far as my memory serves me, one which I attended many years ago at
Antioch, except that the non-sacramental portions of the mass were
read in Malayalam instead of in Arabic, the sacramental words alone
being in both cases spoken in the ancient Syriac tongue.] In regard to
doctrine and practice, the following points may be noted:--(1) While
the Jacobite Syrians look upon the Holy Bible as the main authority in
matters of doctrine, practice, and ritual, they do not allow the Bible
to be interpreted except with the help of the traditions of the church,
the writings of the early Fathers, and the decrees of the Holy Synods
of the undivided Christian period; but the St. Thomas' Syrians believe
that the Holy Bible is unique and supreme in such matters. (2) While
the Jacobites have faith in the efficacy and necessity of prayers,
charities, etc., for the benefit of departed souls, of the invocation
of the Virgin Mary and the Saints in divine worship, of pilgrimages,
and of confessing sins to, and obtaining absolution from priests, the
St. Thomas' Syrians regard these and similar practices as unscriptural,
tending not to the edification of believers, but to the drawing away
of the minds of believers from the vital and real spiritual truths
of the Christian Revelation. (3) While the Jacobites administer the
Lord's Supper to the laity and the non-celebrating clergy in the
form of consecrated bread dipped in consecrated wine, and regard it
a sin to administer the elements separately after having united them
in token of Christ's resurrection, the St. Thomas' Syrians admit
the laity to both the elements after the act of uniting them. (4)
While the Jacobite Syrians allow marriage ceremonies on Sundays,
on the plea that, being of the nature of a sacrament, they ought to
be celebrated on Sundays, and that Christ himself had taken part in a
marriage festival on the Sabbath day, the St. Thomas' Syrians prohibit
such celebrations on Sundays as unscriptural, the Sabbath being
set apart for rest and religious exercises. (5) While the Jacobites
believe that the mass is as much a memorial of Christ's oblation on
the cross as it is an unbloody sacrifice offered for the remission
of the sins of the living and of the faithful dead, the St. Thomas'
Syrians observe it as a commemoration of Christ's sacrifice on the
cross. (6) The Jacobites venerate the cross and the relics of Saints,
while the St. Thomas' Syrians regard the practice as idolatry. (7)
The Jacobites perform mass for the dead, while the St. Thomas' Syrians
regard it as unscriptural. (8) With the Jacobites, remarriage, marriage
of widows, and marriage after admission to full priesthood, reduce a
priest to the status of a layman, and one united in any such marriage
is not permitted to perform priestly functions, whereas priests of
the St. Thomas' Syrian party are allowed to contract such marriages
without forfeiture of their priestly rights. (9) The Jacobite Syrians
believe in the efficacy of infant baptism, and acknowledge baptismal
regeneration, while the St. Thomas' Syrians, who also baptise infants,
deny the doctrine of regeneration in baptism, and regard the ceremony
as a mere external sign of admission to church communion. (10) The
Jacobites observe special fasts, and abstain from certain articles
of food during such fasts, while the St. Thomas' Syrians regard the
practice as superstitious.
The Jacobite Syrian priests are not paid any fixed salary, but are
supported by voluntary contributions in the shape of fees for baptism,
marriages, funerals, etc. The Romo-Syrian and Latin priests are paid
fixed salaries, besides the above perquisites. The Syrian priests
are called Kathanars, while the Latin priests go by the name of
Padres. For the Jacobite Syrians, the morone or holy oil required
for baptism, consecration of churches, ordination of priests, etc.,
has to be obtained from Antioch. The churches under Rome get it from
Rome. Unlike the Catholic clergy, the Jacobite clergy, except their
Metropolitan and the Rambans, are allowed to marry.
The generality of Syrians of the present day trace their descent from
the higher orders of the Hindu society, and the observance by many of
them of certain customs prevalent more or less among high-caste Hindus
bears out this fact. It is no doubt very curious that, in spite of
their having been Christians for centuries together, they still retain
the traditions of their Hindu forefathers. It may sound very strange,
but it is none the less true, that caste prejudices which influence
their Hindu brethren in all social and domestic relations obtain
to some extent among some sections of the Syrian Christians, but,
with the spread of a better knowledge of the teachings of Christ, the
progress of English education, and contact with European Christians,
caste observances are gradually dying out. The following relics of
old customs may, however, be noted:--
(1) Some Christians make offerings to Hindu temples with as much
reverence as they do in their own churches.
Some non-Brahman Hindus likewise make offerings to Christian churches.
(2) Some sections of Syrians have faith in horoscopes, and get them
cast for new-born babies, just as Hindus do.
(3) On the wedding day, the bridegroom ties round the neck of the bride
a tali (small ornament made of gold). This custom is prevalent among
all classes of Native Christians. On the death of their husbands,
some even remove the tali to indicate widowhood, as is the custom
among the Brahmans.
(4) When a person dies, his or her children, if any, and near
relatives, observe pula (death pollution) for a period ranging from
ten to fifteen days. The observance imposes abstinence from animal
food. The pula ends with a religious ceremony in the church, with
feasting friends and relatives in the house, and feeding the poor,
according to one's means. Sradha, or anniversary ceremony for the soul
of the dead, is performed with services in the church and feasts in
the house.
(5) In rural parts especially, the Onam festival of the Malayali
Hindus is celebrated with great éclat, with feasting, making presents
of cloths to children and relatives, out-door and in-door games, etc.
(6) Vishu, or new-year's day, is likewise a gala day, when presents
of small coins are made to children, relatives, and the poor.
(7) The ceremony of first feeding a child with rice (annaprasanam
or chorunu of the Hindus) is celebrated generally in the sixth month
after birth. Parents often make vows to have the ceremony done in a
particular church, as Hindu parents take their children to particular
temples in fulfilment of special vows.
(8) The Syrians do not admit within their premises low-castes, e.g.,
Pulayans, Paraiyans, etc., even after the conversion of the latter
to Christianity. They enforce even distance pollution, though not
quite to the same extent as Malayali Hindus do. Iluvans are allowed
admission to their houses, but are not allowed to cook their meals. In
some parts, they are not even allowed to enter the houses of Syrians.
There are no intermarriages between Syrians of the various
denominations and Latin Catholics. Under very exceptional
circumstances, a Romo-Syrian contracts a marriage with one of
Latin rite, and vice versâ, but this entails many difficulties
and disabilities on the issues. Among the Latins themselves, there
are, again, no intermarriages between the communities of the seven
hundred, the five hundred, and the three hundred. The difference of
cult and creed has led to the prohibition of marriages between the
Romo-Syrians and Jacobite Syrians. The Jacobite Syrians properly so
called, St. Thomas' Syrians, and the Syro-Protestants do, however,
intermarry. The Southerners and Northerners do not intermarry; any
conjugal ties effected between them subject the former to some kind of
social excommunication. This exclusiveness, as we have already said,
is claimed on the score of their descent from the early colonists
from Syria. The Syrians in general, and the Jacobite Syrians in
particular, are greater stricklers to customs than other classes of
Native Christians.
We have already referred to the privileges granted to the Syrians by
the Hindu kings in early times. They not only occupied a very high
position in the social scale, but also enjoyed at different times the
rare distinction of forming a section of the body-guard of the king and
the militia of the country. Education has of late made great progress
among them. The public service has now been thrown open to them, so
that those who have had the benefit of higher education now hold some
of the important posts in the State. In enterprises of all kinds, they
are considerably ahead of their Hindu and Musalman brethren, so that
we see them take very kindly to commerce, manufacture, agriculture,
etc.; in fact, in every walk of life, they are making their mark by
their industry and enterprise. [209]