tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post5750691499061206471..comments2023-12-13T11:47:29.235+05:30Comments on MALANKARA NAZRANIES – A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE: PALAMATTOM OR PAKALOMATTOM ?JEEVAN PHILIPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14984875719152707144noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-15868267655925676222020-08-19T20:49:18.107+05:302020-08-19T20:49:18.107+05:30Yes ,there are certain lists produced by authors b...Yes ,there are certain lists produced by authors but none of then ever provided the original documentation with respect to the Synod. One need to do an authentic study to find out the veracity of these claims . Some authors have questioned the very place called Udayamperoor ever had been a place for the said Synod. Of course ,there require authentic studies based on primary sources. Vatican never published these documents yet(as far as I know) JEEVAN PHILIPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14984875719152707144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-23530154099736058472020-06-26T17:22:34.184+05:302020-06-26T17:22:34.184+05:30Do we have the name of Churches from which delegat...Do we have the name of Churches from which delegation was send to for Synod of Diamper .peter ivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00927936578239183506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-29597441038551800652019-08-23T00:02:13.045+05:302019-08-23T00:02:13.045+05:30Marthoma 1 or Parambil Thoma was reigning from Ang...Marthoma 1 or Parambil Thoma was reigning from Angamaly and buried there. You may get some ideas from there especially the fame of Angamy church Kaniamparambil.ThanksChronicles of Malankarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01268315320288245344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-38226553430493863562015-10-09T23:18:58.322+05:302015-10-09T23:18:58.322+05:30Johny Kuriakose,
History should be written base...Johny Kuriakose, <br /><br />History should be written based on evidences note ones church allegiances. Plz read the article and ref.books and links. <br /><br />Kathanar Jacob was an assistant to Shemayon the Asserian layman who acted as a Bishop for money .He Was a Vicar General of this Shemayon. Malankara Moopan position is not a Vicar General position. Plz understand the history and heritage behind this position. Malankara Moopan must be elected by Malankara nazranies.He require “Paliam” from the ruling king not from any Naaduvazhies friendship.. These are prime requirements. <br /><br />As I stated many Roman prelates created duplicates to Arkadiyokon to subjugate Malankara nazranies. So these duplicates are not Malankara Moopans or have any right to his chair. Read the story of Kunnel Mathai-link is given in the article. <br /><br />The statement like “Under Mar Abraham and Joseph” probably a wrong word because Malankara nazranies were visited by many prelates from different churches with diametrically opposite philosophy and teachings. This is because Malankara Nazranies respected every one without their theological outlook. This has been wrongly noted as ‘Under” or “Subjugation” etc. Later in history you may see it sliding towards subjugation due to the colonial environment. It is quite interesting to notice that Malankara nazranies has different practices other than these churches and Malankara Moopan was the sole custodian of this heritage. Later in colonial world people developed stories to brand Malankara nazranies with respective churches .There is no truth in it.<br /><br /><br />Plz do not call Malankara Nazrani Moopans such words like sleeva,cross which shows the subservient mentality of a third world citizens . We have great Judeo-Aramaic- Indian names and be proud of it.<br /><br />Geevarghese Moopan ruled 1593-1604 and Ittikuriathu moopan ruled 1604-1640.Your assumption with respect to Gheevarghese Moopan and Ittikuriathu Moopan are one is absurd because it just goes against the naming of persons. And it cannot be true because Niranam Grandhavari specifically identify these two Moopans separately. It is Katholik historians manipulation to give credibility to their wretched origin. <br />Malankara church was one body before and after 1653. That is the splinter group which separated is not Malankara Church rather a new church created by Latin money and Portuguese power on the foundation of lesser breeds. Foundation of Katholic church was started much before. Malankara Nazranies were against any kind of Portuguese hegemony in church matters. But many church historians wrongly identify the situation existed during 1599-1653 as Roman face of Malankara Church. It was some kind of forced subjugation under Portuguese rule. This can not be termed as Roman church or Malankara nazranies accepted Roman Pope’s hegemony . It was such a political situation Malankara nazranies were brought to by colonial forces . Many dialogues , representations or letters can be termed as diplomatic way of dealing the situation. These things happen in any civilized society, which can not be interpreted to give credibility to a church that was created by money and colonial forces. The very fabric of Katholic church in India especially SMC looks absurd in front of historical truth.<br /><br />Thanks.<br />JEEVAN PHILIPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14984875719152707144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-22141022002677497462015-10-07T18:38:11.079+05:302015-10-07T18:38:11.079+05:30//But Katholic sources created another Archdeacon ...//But Katholic sources created another Archdeacon Jacob in between without any records.// It is not a creation. We have records of it. Kathanar Jacob was appointed as Archdeacon by Nestorian Bishop Mar Simon (he was in Malankara from 1576 to about 1580), who was a rival Bishop of Mar Abraham, and the Churches of Vadakkancoor obeyed him. So there were two Archdeacons ruling during the period (dates not known exactly) from 1584 to 1593. They are Jacob and Yohannan. Yohannan was Archdeacon from 1570 to 1593, under Mar Joseph and Mar Abraham. George of the Cross (Geevarghese Sleeva) was Archdeacon from 1593 to 1640, under Mar Abraham and Bishop Francis Roz. May be he was also called as Ittikuriathu. From AD 1640 also, there was only one Archdeacon appointed by Bishop Britto. The Malankara Church was of one body and soul until 1653. If there was a rival Archdeacon, from 1640, then we should have had some record of it. So what we can conclude is that the word 'Palamattom' used in some places in the Niranam Granthavari actually stands for "Pakalomattom" only. What we can conclude is that Pakalomattom is pronounced in a loosid way as Palamattom by some authors. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11800408490480413969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-4337384466310089282013-08-18T10:31:27.392+05:302013-08-18T10:31:27.392+05:30Dear Koshy kunju,
What are the credentials in sup...Dear Koshy kunju,<br /><br />What are the credentials in support of Pakalomattom other than usual stories? Can you Plz post here? When you say this is incorrect then you have the moral responsibility to explain it.<br /> <br />Thanks <br />JEEVAN PHILIPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14984875719152707144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4894860475317312100.post-3552765183368906722013-08-17T21:09:57.838+05:302013-08-17T21:09:57.838+05:30This is incorrect.... having no credentials .... b...This is incorrect.... having no credentials .... better not to publish such hooked up stories....<br />N T Koshy Kunjuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06708023096562072026noreply@blogger.com