CHAPTER V SOCIAL AND CULTURAL AFTER-EFFECTS OF THE SYNOD

Transcription

1 CHAPTER V 160 SOCIAL AND CULTURAL AFTER-EFFECTS OF THE SYNOD The Canons of the Synod y6f Diamper in'ark a turning point in the history of the St. /Thomas Christians in Kerala. They mark the fulfillment of thej^portuguese authorities to make t ' the St. Thomas Christians conform to the Western manners and modes as practiced in the Roman Catholic Church. 'The Portuguese government and clergy pledged themselves to vindicate the Pope's supremacy and extend his authority in every part of their colonies. Finding that the Syrian Church had no strong secular protection, they tried at first to impose Roman Catholicism upon the Syrian Church by friendly means. This failing, they set watch in all foreign ports to prevent the arrival of bishops from Syria. Having thus reduced the Syrian Church to the position of a widow, Menezes, Archbishop of Goa visited Malabar and assumed charge of this bishopric. Securing the support of the Portuguese authorities and their native allies, Menezes convened a meeting of the Syrian Christians at Diamper in 1599 and forcibly converted the whole diocese in to the Church of Rome"'. The 'Synodo Diocesano' with 'Jornada', written by Gouvea, is a real treasure of Malabar Church history since we have hardly any other account so detailed or vivid for that period. It gives a fairly good account of many of the customs and practices of the Christians of Kerala during the pre- Portuguese period. But since it has been written compiled mainly with the purpose of eulogizing the Portuguese and

2 161 missionaries and missionary efforts of Portugal, it lias exaggerated in many cases the abuses and beliefs prevalent in Malabar. So one who relies only or mainly on the decrees and accounts of the Diamper Synod for the history of the customs and tradition and beliefs in vogue in Malabar during \6^^ century might be exposed to serious error of judgments. For instance the St. Thomas Christians did not practice many of the alleged beliefs, rites and rituals that were condemned by the Synod. Geddes gives an account of the doctrines of the Malabar Church prior the Synod of Diamper. The following were the main elements of faith of the St. Thomas Christians according to Geddes^: Not to adore Images To hold but Three Sacraments, Baptism, The Eucharist, and Order. To make no use of Oils in the sacraments like Baptism. To have had no knowledge of Confirmation or Extreme Unction To abhor Auricular Confession To allow priests to marry. As the St. Thomas Christians were devotedly attached toward the Patriarch of Babylon, they abhorred the Pope and the Church of Rome The Thomas Christians were ignorant of the doctrines of the Catholic Church with regard to the Holy Eucharist They didn't have the knowledge of the doctrine of Transubstantiation. Rather they maintained the spiritual presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament. They don't believe in purgatory.

3 162 They knew nothing of the intercession of the saints. They believed that the souls of the dead are in state of happiness, but they wouldn't appear in the presence of God till after the general resurrection and the last Judgment. Of masses and prayers for the dead, they knew nothing. They denied Matrimony to be a Sacrament. They appear to have held two Orders, Priesthood and Deaconate; and though they have since been multiplied, after the example of Rome, yet all the inferior Orders are included in the Deaconate and conferred together. In all question of doctrine, they appealed to the authority of Sacred Scripture as decisive and not, like the Roman Catholics, to any traditions of the Fathers, or decisions of the Church, or interpretations of the priests. Regarding the number of Sacraments, the St. Thomas Christians didn't have the knowledge of seven Sacraments rather they had only three. But the Acts of the Synod of Diamper gives a different picture regarding the faith and discipline of the St. Thomas Christians. Almost all the Acts of this Synod were passed in accordance with the spirit of the Council of Trent that ended in 1564 A. D. The Council of Trent, the revival of the Court of Inquisition and the establishment of the Society of Jesus were the chief weapons by which the growth of Protestantism was arrested in Europe and other countries of the world. When Protestant Revolution started in Germany under the leadership of Martin Luther in 1517 and while it shook the whole of Western Christendom, it was not at all felt in the Malabar Church till the coming of the Jesuits in the latter part of the

4 century. Though the Malabar Church did not profit much from the general Renaissance movement of Europe the situation in Kerala Church was much better than its counterpart in Europe. Of course, the Synod effectively removed some of the abuses arising out of the ignorance of the people. The new ideology based on egalitarian principles and Western liberalism emanating from Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian civilization which underlies the spirit of the decrees of the Diamper Synod, was the major influence for the emergence of the present culture of Kerala. In the arrested society of traditional Kerala Syrians, the challenges posed by new ideology and religious discipline of the Roman Catholic Church was stimulating and acted like a catalyst for all round changes^. John Ochanthuruth was an ardent admirer of Archbishop Menezes and eulogized his activities. Hence his evaluation of the Synod of Diamper is to be taken with a pinch of salt. He argues the Oath of Coonan Cross and subsequent split was only a reactionary response to the new historical changes that were inevitable. The Pre- Diamper Church of Kerala was passive and did not pose any challenges to the existing degenerated cultural ethos and hence there was no encounter of cultures. On the contrary, the Nestorian Christianity that prevailed in Kerala was almost submerged into the local Hindu culture and lost its identity, except its name and nominal glory of the past. Menezes attacked the pagan customs and practices of the Kerala Christians and he encouraged the idea that all men and women are equal in the sight of God. From the strict Tridentine perspective Menezes was convinced of that the future of Christianity in Kerala lay with the enforcement of spirituality of modern devotion, sacramental life and sovereignty of Roman

5 164 Pontiff. To him they were the fuel and engine of Roman Catholicism. He achieved the Catholicization of the Nestorian Church of Kerala through the Synod of Diamper'*. The Synod of Diamper is the culminating in the process of making the Church of Malabar part of the Roman Catholic Christendom. Archbishop De Menezes' interference and the Synod of Diamper were harbingers of drastic changes that would adversely affect the autonomy of the 'St. Thomas See of India'^. Three standpoints adopted by historians about the Synod: 1) Justifying the Synod as a whole Till the recent publication of the doctoral thesis of Jonas Thaliath, the Roman Catholic historians fully justified the summoning and functioning of the Synod of Diamper. They were following Antonio de Gouvea, the admirer and biographer of Archbishop Menezes, who wrote 'Jornado'. ii) Critical Arguing that it proved beneficial to the Church of Malabar, their arguments can be summarized thus: There was hardly anyone in the Church of Malabar who had any objection to admitting the supremacy of the Pope of Rome. All the bishops who guided the Church in the 16"' century had acknowledged this fact they opposed only the unauthorized Portuguese endeavor to bring the Church under Goan Administration. The Portuguese activities in this regard were not done with the permission of Rome.

6 165 The reforms that the Synod carried out in worship, faith and discipline were necessary for the Church at that time. The church had begun to work out many of them under the leadership of the Eastern bishops. In that situation there was no need for the Synod of Diamper to be held ignoring the history of the church and violating its customs. In any case, the Synod has not been formally approved by Rome. Therefore, the way is left open for the Church to unite, in the way the Church existed before the Synod, but accepting necessary reforms. ill) Rejecting the Synod The non-catholic Christians, including the Protestants and the Orthodox, maintain in general these standpoints: The pre- Portuguese Church of India was not Roman Catholic. The Malabar Church was purely under the jurisdiction of the East Syrian Church, which was independent of the Roman or the West Syrian (Antiochean) Church. Ever since the coming of the Portujguese, many efforts were made to subjugate the Church under the Portuguese jurisdiction and whereby under the Roman Catholic Church. It is also to be noted that there was a section of people in the Church who would have joined Rome. At the same time, there was a considerable section of the people in the Church who would resist the move. The Roman Catholic authors assume Rome's supremacy as basic to Church membership. But the Churches of the East, and the Churches of the Reformation of the 16th

7 166 century in the Catholic Church, have not accepted this argument. There is no doubt that a Church cut off from the rest of Christendom stood in need of reform in the 16'*' century. On that ground it is not necessary to plead that the Synod of Diamper was the only solution to the problem^. Michael Geddes, La Croze and James Hough represent the protestant view of the Synod of Diamper and its decrees. Hough offers the following comments: "The acts decrees of the Synod of Diamper are of inconsiderable value, as an historic record of the faith practice both of the Romans and Syrian Churches at the close of the 16th century. No Romanist can dispute an exposition of the religious tenets which was drawn up with so much care by an Archbishop of his church, and that, too, for the express purpose of establishing his religion in India: an exposition which was also published to the world with the sanction of the highest Papal authorities in Europe. And with respect to the Syrians, these decrees contain the best, indeed, it may be said, the only account extant of the doctrines and customs of this church at the time of their publication. The vicissitudes through which that injured people have since passed; the unsparing hand with which the Archbishop afterwards committed to the flames, every document he could find that contained a sentiment opposed to the pretensions and tenets of Rome. The numerous variations that have since been introduced into their creed as ritual: these and other causes, have combined to render it very difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain the character of their church, at that early period of her history, seeing that the only knowledge we have of their creed and practices at that time is and

8 167 derived from the history of this Synod, Dr. Geddes has justly remarked, that Menezes, by composing the acts and decrees in question, was 'instrumental in letting the world know more of the orthodoxy of that Apostolic church,than its like they would ever have known of it otherwise'. And that, therefore, 'we have reason to bless providence for bringing so good an end out of his evil designs; but we have no reason at all to thank him for it, who intended nothing less than the making of such a happy discovery'". George Cathanar C. J. agrees with him when he remarks: "The Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Diamper are of no inconsiderable value, as an historic record of the faith and practice of both of the Roman and Syrian Churches at the close of the 16"^ century. With respect to the Syrians, these decrees contain the best, indeed, it may be said the only account extant of the doctrines and customs of their Church at the time of publication". As the only source of knowledge regarding the faith, practices and discipline of the Thomas Christians derived from the history of this Synod, Geddes has justly remarked that Menezes, by composing the Acts and Decrees was instrumental in letting the world known more of the Orthodoxy of that Apostolical Church, than its like they would ever have known to otherwise; and that, therefore, we have reason to bless Providence for bringing so good an end out of his evil design; but that we have no reason at all to thank him for it, who intended nothing less than the making of such a happy discovery"^. All the changes were introduced by the use of force. Archbishop brought about a change which not even the Holy See in the Plentitude of its authority has effected anywhere in

9 168 the world; history does not record such sweeping changes in the rites, ceremonies and customs of a Church in any part of the world'". Bernad opined that two great evils have resulted from the Synod of Diamper. First, as Portuguese bishops were introduced by force, the Malabar Church became victim to dissensions and disunions of which she had been complaining to the Holy See ever since that time. The material innovations made in the Chaldean Rite has produced the present rite of Malabar, which is, to say the least, a mutilated and deformed rite. An evil greater than this is that the Menezian decrees have helped the Protestants to affirm that long before the Reformation began, an Apostolic Church that held the doctrines of the Reformers had existed far away in South India. The decrees of the Synod of Diamper say that the Supremacy of the Pope, the real presence of our Lord in the Holy Eucharist and the Sacraments of Confession and Confirmation were unknown in the Malabar Church before the Synod of Diamper. This exactly what the Protestants try to establish". I Krishna Chaitanya, the famous historian, evaluates the Portuguese domination in India as an explosive infiltration of Colonial Europe into the history of the West Coast of India and their period of domination sowed the ve omous_jeeds of religious. fanaticism into the secular soil of India. Nature or title of the Synod Regarding the title, there is no unanimity of opinion among the historians. Some Roman Catholic historians, considering the Malabar Church as an integral Province of the Catholic Christendom, prefer to call it a Provincial Synod. However, Jonas Thaliath concluded that "any Synod celebrated

10 169 for the St. Thomas Christian Church in 1599 by its legitimate prelate, according to the sacred canons, is to be considered a 'Diocesan Synod' and not a 'Provincial Council''''^ Some of the Portuguese documents of the 16''' and 17"" centuries described it as Provincial Council. Stephen de Britto, the Rector of the Seminary at Vaippincotta, wrote a letter to Claudius Acquaviva the General of the Society of Jesus on January 3, 1600 A. D. The writer says, "His Excellency Menezes conducted the Provincial Council most peacefully and with all agreeing"'''. Gouvea admits that before the arrival of the Portuguese the Church of Malabar was a Metropolitan See with some suffragan bishops'^. At the dawn of the 16th century there were five bishops in Malabar and the division of territory among them is not known. The Metropolitan seat seems to have been Kodungallor (Cranganore)'^. After the death of Mar Jacob in 1550 there seems to have been no bishop in Malabar till the coming of Mar Joseph and Mar Elias in They ministered to the needs of the St. Thomas Christians but not within definitely demarcated areas. The need of such delimitation was not felt as Mar Elias left Malabar before long for good. Mar Joseph was soon accused of heresy and was taken to Lisbon and Mar Abraham came in his stead. Circumstances forced Mar Abraham to abandon Cranganore, which was on the coast where the Portuguese had a fortress and fixed his seat in the interior of Angamale that was the center of the St. Thomas Christians. From 1569 Mar Abraham was the only metropolitan in Malabar till his death in From the Portuguese official documents, we find repeatedly the term 'Province' was used in connection with the church of the St. Thomas Christians. For instance, in the letter of Mar Abraham to Pope Gregory XIII dated January

11 170 13, 1584, he makes mention more than once of the 'Province of the St. Thomas Christians''^. In a brief of Pope Clement VIII to the Archbishop of Goa dated January 27, 1595, when the Church of Angamale is spoken of, the expression 'Diocese and Province' is repeated three times'^. So the community of St. Thomas Christians was considered as constituting an undivided ecclesiastical province of the Roman Church by the Portuguese authorities. The Synod should be considered as a diocesan Synod as it is clear from the convocatory letter and in the proceedings of the Synod''. It is so entitled in almost all the editions of the decrees that immediately or subsequently appeared. The great majority of references in the correspondence of the period spoke of it as a diocesan Synod. Thaliath argues that the Synod summoned by Mar Abraham at Angamale in 1583 with the support of the Jesuits of Vaippincotta was always spoken of as a diocesan Synod, although the whole of the St. Thomas Christian community was represented in it. Hence he concludes that the Synod of Diamper of 1599 was a diocesan Synod for the simple reasons that although the whole of the province of St. Thomas was represented in it, nevertheless nobody exercised legislative power there except Menezes who claimed to be the legitimate administrator of the vacant dioceses. Even though the real administrator of the church, Archdeacon, was present in the Synod, he was considered just one of the priests taking part in the Synod and had no legislative power, the Archbishop being the sole lawgiver. It is not a Synod of the whole Church, as it is not properly represented. All the parishes of the Malabar church were not duly represented in the Synod.

12 The Legitimacy of the Synod 171. The Synod of Diamper, though attended by the representatives of the local Christians did not express the genuine wishes of the Kerala Christians. There were many restrictions that prevented the participants from expressing their views on every subject. The haste with which decrees were passed and the mode of procedure were severely criticized by natives and foreigners. Roz who assisted Menezes in the Synod in a letter (dated 27"' December) criticized the procedure adopted in the Synod. John Campori, another eye-witness of the Synod, wrote to Rome on the P' of January 1604, "... jmd much of what read, was done, in such a hurry and confusion that the Christians did not understand nor consequently accept ifsj/' Many of the St. Thomas Christians look down upon the Synod of Diamper as a cruel encroachment by the western imperialists on the religious and social life of the native Christians. At the same time some consider Archbishop as a great social and religious reformer who tried to purge out the pagan evils and abuses that had crept in the St. Thomas Christian community. Sab^a Raphy is full of praise for Menezes; "The decrees passed in the Synod against caste system, untouchability, polygamy bhara - devata worship, slavery, sorcery and the like were the first of its kind. Dom Menezes, convener and Chairman of the Synod, is to be rightly, top listed, among the social reformers of Kerala". Jonas Thaliath denies the legitimacy of the convocations of the Synod on three factors: 1. Archbishop Menezes had no legitimate title to convoke the Synod.

13 Those who had the right to attend the Synod were not formally invited. 3. Those who should have been excluded were present in the Synod^\ Menezes claims his legitimacy to convoke the Synod on the basis of the briefs issued by Pope Clement VIII on January 27, In the convocatory letter sent by Menezes on May 14, 1599 from Chanotta, as given by Gouvea in Synodo Diocesano, we read, "we give you, one and all to understand, that the Most Holy Father Pope Clement VIII, our Lord Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ upon earth, now presiding over the Church of God, sent two briefs addressed to Us; the first on January 27, 1595 and the other on the 21"' of the same month of January 1597, in which... he commanded Us, on the death of the Archbishop Mar Abraham to take possession of this Church and bishopric and not to suffer any bishop or prelate coming from Babylon to enter therein, as has been hither to the custom;... and to appoint a governor or vicar apostolic for the abovesaid bishopric, who could rule it in temporal as well as spiritual affairs, until such time as the Holy Roman Church shall provide the bishopric with a bishop and proper pastor"^^. The convocatory letter proceeds to recount how Menezes tried to execute the apostolic mandates; how after the death of Mar Abraham he wanted to nominate a governor for the vacant see in virtue of the above said briefs and then adds: "Besides the same was incumbent on Us by right, as the said Church had no chapter to take care of it during the vacancy of the see and as we are the Metropolitan of all the Churches in India and Primate thereof, and of all the Orient"^^.

14 173 Menezes had convoked the Synod on the basis of two briefs issued by the Pope Clement VIII and Menezes's capacity as the Metropolitan of the vacant suffragan See of Angamale that was without Cathedral Chapter. Pope had entrusted the whole government of the Church to Menezes on the death of Mar Abraham. The briefs gave authority Menezes to appoint an administrator to govern the Church until Rome provides a bishop. Hence Menezes strongly believed that Menezes alone would govern the Church until he appointed a governor and that even after the appointment of the governor or administrator, he could still continue to direct the affairs of the Church. This would be possible only on the supposition that the administrator would be entirely subordinate to the Archbishop in the government of the Church. In the inaugural speech he says that, "he was celebrating this Holy Synod by virtue of the two briefs of the Holy father Pope Clement VIII Our Lord, by which His Holiness had entrusted him with the government of this church"^^. Thus Menezes claimed that he is the Metropolitan of all India and Primate of the entire East and also of Angamale. "We are the Metropolitan of all the churches in India and Primate thereof and of all the Orients"^^ (Convocatory Letter). He also explicitly mentioned that he was the Metropolitan of Angamale as it was a suffragan church (Inaugural address). And to legitimize the convocations of the Synod, Menezes refers to the fact that the entire government of the church of Angamale is invested in him in his capacity of Metropolitan, without any limitations or restrictions. Gouvea, the historian of Menezes's travels and deeds, mentioned the events of the Synod. Next he said that he was conducting the Synod by virtue of a brief of the Holy Father Clement VIII that entrusted him with that

15 174 church on the death of Archbishop Mar Abraham; the brief was thus read and then translated into Malayalam. Besides, he was also Metropolitan and Primate of the entire East, and as such was entitled to see to the spiritual needs of vacant sees, which had no chapter to govern them, such as the present one^^. Thus Menezes convoked the Synod of Diamper based on: i) Two Briefs of the Pope Clement VIII & ii) His capacity as metropolitan of a vacant suffragan diocese devoid of Cathedral chapter. By both these titles, the entire government of the Malabar church had devolved on him and consequently by the faculty to celebrate the Diocesan Synod which was vested on nim But when we study the history of a few decades prior to the Synod with regard to the relations between the Malabar church and the Roman Catholic church, we understand that several steps were already taken in the provincial councils of Goa to subjugate the Malabar church under the jurisdiction of the diocese of Goa. Ever since the imposition of Portuguese Padroado over the Malabar church and the establishment of Latin Diocese Cochin the Portuguese authorities at Goa made many efforts to establish the Latin supremacy over the Syrian Christians. Till 1534 there were no Episcopal seats in India except those of the Malabar Church. But with the establishment of the Latin diocese in India, conflicting interests slowly began to appear and color the mutual relations of the Portuguese and St. Thomas Christians. In 1534 Goa was separated from all and erected as a suffragan diocese of Funchal, which had till then jurisdiction over all the places that the Portuguese should explore either in the West or in the East. Its territory extended

16 175 from the Cape of Good Hope to India and China including adjacent islands^'. On February 4, 1558 Goa was raised to an archbishopric with metropolitan rights over Cochin and Malacca that were dismembered from Goa and constituted as suffragan dioceses the very same day. The diocese of Cochin was co extensive with the diocese of Angamale and it was a question of only a few miles to the centers of St. Thomas Christians. In 1553, Chaldean Patriarch Sulaqa accepted the supremacy of the Pope of Rome and the Pope granted him jurisdiction over Calcutta and the whole of India. After the tragic death of Sulaqa, Ebedjesus succeeded to the Patriarchate and he sent Mar Joseph and Mar Elias to Malabar along with two Dominican priests. But the Portuguese authorities did not allow them to pass in, to Malabar. They were first detained in Mozambique and theft at Bassein in Salsette. The attitude of the Portuguese of the time is fully reflected in a letter written to the king of Portugal on November 20, 1557 by Antony do Porto, the Franciscan superior of the convent at Bassein where the two bishops were confined". There he says, "I counseled them to the best of my ability and showed them by reasons that it was not proper that they should go to Malabar and one of the reasons which I gave them and which they understood well was that no bishop should enter the diocese of another to deal with the flocks; and that the Bishop of Goa was the Bishop of Malabar as well as of the whole of India and of all these oriented conquests of Your Majesty; and that no one could, without his leave, interfere in the affairs of the Christians of the said parts; and that those who went to minister the sacraments to the Christians of Malabar without the leave of the Bishop of Goa were thieves who do not enter the sheepfold by

17 176 the gate". The same expressions were repeated time and again till the conduct of the Diamper Synod and it was this Portuguese mentality that persisted and prevailed in allsubsequent dealings with the Malabar Church. When the Chaldean Patriarch Ebedjesus was in Rome to make profession of faith, he expressly included in his declaration, as pertaining to his jurisdiction, in India under the Portuguese dominions, the Metropolitan sees of Cuscim, Canonor and Goa and the diocese of Calicut to which is subject Caronongol, which is in the possession of idolaters and pagans. Ebedjesus did not remain in the Council of Trent and the above-mentioned letter with an introductory letter from Cardinal Amuluis was presented in the Council. When it was read, the Portuguese representative rose up and protested. He repudiated the claims of the Patriarch and emphatically asserted the right of the Archbishop of Goa over the whole of India and wanted nothing prejudicial to it to be enacted in the Council. The council of Trent decided nothing about this dispute and let things drift. In 1563 Mar Joseph had been deported to Lisbon and Mar Abraham arrived in Malabar in secret, though Portuguese at different places arrested him. Mar Abraham did not attend the second provincial council of Goa in In his absence the council took decision regarding the Malabar Church. It is resolved in the Provincial Council that the Portuguese patronage be established over the church of the St. Thomas Christians in Malabar. But as per the letter of the Pope, Mar Abraham attended the Third Provincial Council of Goa. In the convocatory letter as well as in the introductory formula Mar Abraham, together with the Bishops of Cochin and Malacca, is accounted a 'con provincial the

18 'in bishop'. Further some important decisions were taicen with regard to the governing of the St. Thomas Christians and the right of the Chaldean Patriarch over the Church of Malabar be entirely done away with and the archbishop of Goa is authorized to examine the credentials of Babylonian prelates before they are admitted to Malabar. The right of the Chaldean Patriarch to nominate bishops for Malabar is admitted only in obedience and communion with the Holy See of Rome. Menezes's mentality to the Malabar church is clear from his letter to Fabio Biondi in We read, "What is more concern than anything else is that the bishop of Angamale should be a suffragan of this city, as it is close to the bishopric of Cochin, which is the nearest suffragan". From this, one would suppose that Menezes was contemplating a new move to bring the bishop to be appointed for Angamale, under his metropolitan jurisdiction, thus implicitly admitting that so far the church of Angamale had not been a suffragan^^. But succeeding events do not tally with this supposition. Before coming personally to Malabar, Menezes wanted the Archdeacon to accept him as his Metropolitan, which the Archdeacon, according to Gouvea, evaded with subterfuges'*". Even after his arrival in Malabar he was not accepted by the Archdeacon as the Metropolitan, and to keep the peace, the archbishop was obliged to sign a declaration saying that he would not exercise any jurisdiction or confer Holy Orders and would pass for a guest bishop, in exchange for a promise in the part of the archdeacon to celebrate the proposed diocesan Synod by a fixed date'". But as the time fixed was over, the archdeacon showed no signs of acceding to his intentions, Menezes considered the conditions no more binding on him, and proceeded to exercise 177

19 178 jurisdiction in Malabar. The Archdeacon protested saying that the principal thing to be discussed in the proposed Synod was whether Menezes had to be obeyed or not''^. But the archdeacon could not resist long. Finally the Synod of Diamper was conducted and Menezes figures repeatedly in the decrees with the title of 'the Metropolitan'. A few months after the Synod, Roz was nominated to the See of Angamale and now it was reduced to the status of a bishopric and made subject to the Metropolitan of Goa"*^. By another brief data August 4, 1600, the Patronage of the king of Portugal was established over it'*'*. Hence it is clear beyond any shadow of doubt that Archbishop of Goa was not the Metropolitan of Angamale at the time of Synod of Diamper. Hence the summoning of the Synod of Diamper by Menezes is illegitimate. Menezes argument for legitimizing the convocation of the Synod was that, in the absence of the Cathedral Chapter in a suffragan diocese, the whole administration of the diocese, devolved on the Metropolitan, and as such by pretending himself the Metropolitan of Angamale, he could convoke the Synod. But in the Malabar Church it was always the Archdeacon who governed the diocese during its vacancy. The Cathedral division was unknown and unheard among the St. Thomas Christians. Although the Latin influence was being increasingly felt in many spheres of canonical legislation long before the Diamper Synod, owing to the persistent Latinizing policy of the Portuguese missionaries, there was absolutely no trace of a Cathedral chapter functioning or even being planned before the Synod of Diamper. It was under Menezes's inspiration, that soon after the Synod of Diamper, such an institution was set up

20 179 in Malabar'*^. Thus when Mar Abraham died, the government of the Church duly devolved on the Archdeacon, and Menezes even if he were the Metropolitan of Angamale, had no right to interfere in the administration of the Malabar church. Hence Menezes's interference as Metropolitan should be considered illegitimate not only because Angamale was as an Oriental Church, and as such with its different traditions did not come under the provisions of the council of Trent but it would have been illegitimate even supposing that the prescription of the Council of Trent were as binding on the Church of St. Thomas Christians as a Latin Diocese''^. Regarding the two briefs of Pope, it should be noted that the first brief dated January 27, 1595 was addressed to archbishop Menezes, without anyone being named 'to the venerable brother Archbishop of Goa' and it goes on to say: 'firmly confident in the Lord of your faith, integrity and zeal for the Catholic religion'. The See of Goa had become vacant in During the vacancy, the bishop of Cochin was the administrator of the archdiocese of Goa. Menezes was nominated Archbishops of Goa only on February 13, 1595 but the brief is allegedly addressed to him on January 27, The brief delegates some faculties to the archbishop of Goa namely; to enquire in to the life and doctrine of Mar Abraham, and others suspect of heresy; a vicar apostolic is to be appointed only in case Mar Abraham, being found guilty, has to be taken to Goa for the formal process and the archbishop of Goa is further commissioned to keep out anyone else coming to govern the see of Angamale during the absence or after the death of Mar Abraham, until Rose appoints a pastor. These are the contents of the brief. When the brief reached Goa, the situation

21 180 in Malabar had changed. Mar Abraham had fallen ill and in consultation with the Jesuits, he had made a testament nominating the Archdeacon as his successor, according to the permission he had from the Patriarchs; as he wished that the fathers should get the nomination confirmed by Rome'*^. So the execution of the brief was suspended and more information was solicited from the Fathers of Vaippicotta under secrecy. But finally a judicial enquiry was conducted. Gouvea says that a process was made out and sent in Rome; although the Mar Abraham could not be brought to Goa because of the old age and infirmity and their inability to lay hands on him as he lived outside to Portuguese limits'*^. Thus, no formal action was taken against Mar Abraham till his death and no apostolic vicar was appointed. The second brief brought forward to legitimize the conduct of the Diamper Synod is that of Clement VIII, dated January 21, According to the second brief, Menezes, the archbishop of Goa is commissioned to appoint a vicar apostolic to govern the Angamale Church in case of Mar Abraham's death. The vicar apostolic, contrary to the first brief, need not be of the Latin rite. No faculty is given to the archbishop to depose the vicar apostolic once appointed. The vicar apostolic will govern this vacant church till Rome provides a Pastor. His faculties are not limited, as in the previous brief, in matters of jurisdiction. When Menezes came to know of the death of Mar Abraham on February 16, 1597'*' from a letter of the Viceroy while he was at Daman, he immediately hastened to nominate Roz as the Vicar Apostolic. But the Archdeacon, according to the traditions of the church of St. Thomas Christians and in virtue of the commission he had from the defunct Archbishop

22 181 Mar Abraham, had taken possession of the government of the Church and opposed the nomination of Roz. The Jesuits at Vaippicotta also thought it expedient to allow the Archdeacon to continue his offices. After arriving in Goa after his visit, Menezes appointed, in consultation with others, the Archdeacon himself as the administrator^". Thus when the Archbishop died, the government of the Church duly devolved on the Archdeacon, and Menezes even if he were the Metropolitan of Angamale, had no right to interfere in the ordinary administration of that diocese^'. Menezes' interference as a metropolitan should be considered illegitimate riot only because Angamale was an Oriental Church, and as such with its different traditions did not come under the provision of the Council of Trent, but it would have been illegitimate even supposing that the prescription of the Council of Trent were as binding on the Church of the St. Thomas Christians as on a Latin diocese^^. On the other hand Menezes considered he invested with the full and absolute powers of an administrator and metropolitan, and as such did not scruple to confer Holy Orders and convoke a diocesan Synod and in this matter he acted 'ultra vires'. He tried to introduce drastic changes in the Church discipline through the Synod of Diamper, which is a flagrant violation of justice. His claims over the titles to convoke the Synod are invalid. The archbishop of Goa had no metropolitan rights over the Church of Angamale. From the very beginning of the establishment of the See of Goa, the Bishop of Goa always presumed he had full jurisdiction all over India. But, the Chaldean Patriarchs, after their formal re-union with Rome in 1552, had secured papal recognition for their claims over the ancient Church of the St. Thomas Christians,

23 182 and had even obtained briefs from the Pope to the Archbishop of Goa and the bishop of Cochin asking them to respect the Patriarch's jurisdiction, and not to molest Mar Abraham, sent by the Patriarch to govern the St. Thomas Christians. Thus the Archbishop of Goa had no metropolitan rights over Angamale, and in fact, Angamale was reduced to a suffragan see subject to Goa, only after the Synod of Diamper". Further the other title that of the two briefs did not empower Menezes to convoke the Synod of Diamper, as these briefs did not say a word about the conduct of a Synod. The main authorization of the briefs gave to Menezes was to nominate a vicar apostolic for the vacant see of Angamale. The Synod of Diamper had actually nothing to do with the nomination of a vicar apostolic. Thus both titles put forward to legitimize the Synod fall and hence we agree with Thaliath and other historians to conclude that Menezes invalidly convoked the Synod of Diamper. The great majority of the priests who participated in it were those illegally ordained by Menezes himself for the sake of winning for himself a party in the Synod. Further with the support of the native kings intimidated the Christians with threats of serious punishment. The decisions in the Synod were taken arbitrarily. Ros has said absolutely that not a single one of the prepared decrees was discussed and changed^''. Moreover the decrees were read in Portuguese, which neither the laymen nor the priests understan.d. At the end they were obliged to sign a translation in Malayalam the contents of which they were given no opportunity to study. Moreover Menezes took the liberty of adding more canons 'ad libitum' after the Synod was over. It was this revised text that was sent to Rome for Papal approbation. Pope Clement VIII issued the brief 'Divinam Dei'

24 183 in 1601, showing his satisfaction at the work accomplished. But the brief did not contain any formal approbation. But John Ochanthuruth quotes a brief of Pope Clement VIII; Divinam Dei Omnipotentis Providentiam dated May 19, 1601 and claimed that this Synod of Diamper was formally approved by Rom. The extracts from the Brief follows: "To the venerable Brother, the Bishop of Angamale and to the clergy and the people of the Christians converted by St. Thomas the Apostle in the province of the Serra, Clement VIll. "The divine province of Almighty God... For it was not enough for eternal salvation that you were called by the Christian name, unless you were also Catholics united to Christ, the invisible and immortal head, and joined together under the visible head, the Roman Pontiff, His Vicar on earth... Therefore when formerly you wandered as sheep without a shepherd... you were led astray in various doctrines by the wile of Satan and by the guile of perverted men, who by an appearance of piety deceived souls and sowed broadcast amongst you manifold and most pernicious errors... But in this has marvelously shown forth the providence of God and the singular clemency towards you of Him who has led you out of that dense darkness of errors... Therefore we filled with great joy and with great gladness in the Lord when from letters written on this subject we learned that our venerable brother the Archbishop of Goa held among you a Synod which was attended your priests and by the chief men of your nation, in which Synod, by the influence of the Holy Spirit, with a great unanimity of mind the errors of the impious Nestorius were by you rejected, anathematized and condemned. But which is the utmost importance that you acknowledged and professed that the Roman Pontiff, the

25 184 common father of the faithful, is the head of the whole Church... wherefore beloved sons, we congratulate you on this so pious, so holy and salutary deliberation... Therefore, have given you a bishop"^^. To quote John Ochanthuruth: "we feel that the above cited special Brief explains everything and is more significant than a formal approbation of the Synod, especially when it was confined to a particular Church"^^. It is crystal clear that this Brief did not contain any formal approbation of the Synod as such, even in an implicit way. C. De. Clercq concluded that "the Synod of Diamper was only a simple diocesan Synod; there was therefore no need to have it approved at Rome"^^. Beltrami^^ and C. Korolevskiji also hold the same view^^. Placid, after quoting from Beltrami on the question of the non-approbation of the Synod adds, "To us it seems that Dom Menezes had no title to conduct the Diocesan Synod of Diamper"^". Similarly Cussa says, "Moreover the Synod was not confirmed by the Holy See. It was convoked and presided over by Dom Menezes, Arch bishop of Goa, of Latin rite to whom Pope element VIII had given a commission only to appoint a vicar apostolic for the vacant see of Malabar until the Holy See should provide the same church with a pastor, and to inquire into cases of (Nestorian) heretics and institute regular judicial process against them, either judicial process against them, either personally or through the vicar apostolic he would appoint"^'. Giamil also agree with others when he says, "it is worth noting here that the above said Synod was never approved by the Holy See"". we

26 185 The conformation or approbation of the Holy See was obligatory, only in the case of Provincial and Plenary councils. It was Sixtus V who made the ruling that thereafter all Provincial and Plenary councils should be examined (recognittio) by the Sacred Congregation of the Council before being definitely promulgated. The Diocesan Synods were not under this obligation. Hence it can be rightly concluded that the brief Divinam Dei did not approve the Synod of Diamper formally, even in an implicit manner". It is also to be noted that after the conclusion of the Synod, Menezes took the liberty of adding more canons 'ad libitum' inserting them into the body of the text. This revised text was sent to Rome for Papal approbation and Pope Clement VIII, without knowing the full story, issued the brief Divinam Dei in 1601, showing his satisfaction at the work accomplished and bestowing his apostolic blessings on Menezes and his endeavors, especially in the conduct of the Synod. But the brief did not contain any formal approbation of the Synod as such, even in an implicit way. The Clementine Congregation of Cardinals never actually examined the acts of the Synod to be presented to the Holy See and it was finally decided not to present it. In 1603, Menezes not fully aware of the vicissitudes of the acts of the Synod in Rome tried by himself again for papal approbation. So he wrote to Malabar and got from Roz the signatures from the document signed at Diamper. These signatures were thus affixed to the Portuguese text in many ways different from the one to which they were originally attached. But Menezes, owing to the influence of Roz, seems to have abandoned the idea of getting the acts approved by Rome and instead made arrangements to

27 186 get them published at Coimbra. They came out in 1606 together with the story of his visit^'*. Meanwhile Roz, the bishop of Angamale, convoked another Synod in 1603 in which many of the decrees of the Synod of Diamper were altered or dropped, to the general satisfaction of all. It was also presented for approbation. The Latin translation of this new Synod was sent to Rome in 1605 but was lost on the way and no second attempt for translation was made. The decrees of this Synod were not very well observed and therefore in 1606 Ros completed a Statute Book of Diocesan laws for Angamale. After sometime Gouvea's Jornada with the acts of the Diamper Synod reached Malabar and Ros seems to have gone back on his repudiation, perhaps erroneously thinking that the Synod had been approved by Rome. Thus slowly, the Diamper Synod found its place again in Malabar through Gouvea's book. The prelates who came later accepted it and enforced it by this own legislation. Thus in 1745, Raulin prepared a Latin translation of the Acts and was for the Synod.still greater popularity. From 'Jornada' and 'Synodo Diocesano' we get the impression that the Synod of Diamper was a very orderly meeting, where in spite of the language difficulty everything was discussed in common through the medium of interpreters and all the resolutions were taken in consultation with the priests and the lay representatives. According to the report of Gouvea, already before the beginning of the Synod, the decrees were read to a Committee of eight priests with Archdeacon and their views were solicited. In matters pertaining to secular customs, the lay representatives were also consulted. During the sessions there was absolute freedom for all to put forward

28 187 their views^^. And at the end, before the signing all were again entreated to propose doubts, if they had any. To enable all to follow the discussions, there were interpreters, for which function a priest, Jacob of Palluruthy, was specially commissioned and had taken an oath to do his office scrupulously^^. And finally, the decrees have been signed with the unanimous consent of all^^. But the letters written by Ros give us a very different picture about the Synod. Roz's first letter of November 20, 1603 is very clear: "not a single canon was discussed or altered". In his letter of December 27, 1603, he says that, "No consultation was made". "And the Christians heard them without understanding anything that was being said, as I can myself bear ample witness as well as the other Fathers who understood the language" (letter of Ros dated November 20, 1603); "The Christians had no idea of what was being enacted" (letter of Ros dated December 27, 1603); "And most of what was read was done in such hurry and confusion that Christians did not understand it". (Letter of John Campori dated January I, 1604)^. From these letters it is clear that Gouvea, as Menezes' historian, had deliberately misrepresented the facts. Moreover three writers Roz, Campori and Laerzio are unanimous and emphatic that additions were made before Menezes left Malabar, i.e., during his visit to the churches after the Synod. And it was this revised text that was sent to Rome for papal approbation. Pope Clement VIII issued the brief Divinam Dei in 1601, expressing satisfaction at the work accomplished and bestowing his apostolic blessing on Menezes and his endeavors, especially in the conduct of the Synod. But the brief did not contain any formal approbation of the Synod. The Clementine Congregation of Cardinals never examined the

29 188 acts of the Synod for although a Latin translation was got ready in Rome to be presented to the Holy See it was not presented. In 1603, Menezes wanted to try by himself again for approbation. So he wrote to Malabar and got from Ros the signatures from the document signed at Diamper and these signatures were thus affixed to a Portuguese text. Finally Menezes abandoned the idea of getting the acts approved by Rome, and instead, made arrangements to get them published at Coimbra. Thus Gouvea printed the acts of the Synod in Coimbra together with the 'Jornada' of the Archbishop Menezes. This book came out of the Coimbra University press in Hough in his Christianity in India, a book that is in the Trivandrum Library, reproduces the narrative of the journey of Jornada, told at length in Gouvea's Jornada. The impression that a perusal leaves on the mind is that Archbishop Menezes must have been an exceptional man, of great personal influence over those with whom he came in 71 contact. Difficulties, which would have foiled the utmost efforts of an ordinary man, seemed to disappear before him. After finishing the great task, he returned to Goa, where the death of the Viceroy had left him as the chief civil officer of Portuguese India. He had been absent from Goa only ten months, but into these ten months he had compressed work that would keep most men busy for ten years''^. Geddes, in his 'History of the Church in Malabar, London 1694', attacks Archbishop Menezes because of the Synod of Diamper and the visitation of this Church and in this he has been followed by later writers, so that it has become an accepted tradition that the Archbishop was high handed and tyrannical and this is repeated, not only by polemical writers but also by authors such

30 189 as Colonel Yule and Sir W. W. Hunter. But Mackenzie justifies Menezes' works. He argues that much of the denunciation of the Archbishop is merely an expression of the opinion that the Church of Rome has no right to interfere with other Churches, but the Portuguese being Roman Catholics held exactly the opposite opinion.on the arrival of Vasco da Gama the Thomas Christians had formally asked for the protection of the king of Portugal, that in 1569 a formal treaty was made between the Portuguese bishop of Cochin and the Raja Rama Varma bringing the Christians under the protection of the bishop. And that the last two Archbishops of the Thomas Christians, Mar Joseph and Mar Abraham, although they may have been Nestorians at heart, nevertheless were nominally Roman Catholics sent by the Pope'''. In these circumstances the Archbishop Menezes would have failed in a plain duty that lay before him, if he had not done his utmost to bring these Thomas-Christians into conformity with Rome. Some protestant writers see this side of the question: For example. Day, 'Land of the Perumals' 280, 233 and Howard, 'The Christians of St. Thomas and their liturgies, 3'. But it is said that his methods were bad, and that, not content with preaching and arguing, the Archbishop bribed and used the influence of the Rajas and threatened. Professor Lee and others make an especially bitter denunciation of Archbishop Menezes because he burned the liturgical books of the St. Thomas Christians. Another point, upon which especially Dr. J. M. Neale denounced Archbishop Menezes, is his alteration of the liturgy used by the Thomas-Christians. The liturgy that they used was the liturgy of all the Apostles, composed by St. Adaeus and St. Meris, Apostles of the Chaldeans. The Nestorians adopted this has