Knanaya Catholics and Endogamy

[yawsep1569]

Fijiq48, it does seem that there was some agitation among non-Knanaya about being placed under Mar Makil. I am sorry this occurred and believe that this was absolutely wrong. For me as a non-Knanaya Syro-malabar, the Knanaya are comparable to a large family with their own special customs and traditions (especially when considering endogamy). I fully support the preservation of ancient God-honoring traditions and practices. Nothing wrong with that. I just do not support creating a separate ecclesiastical identity that is based on membership to a certain family (one that you cannot even be adopted into), especially since there is no liturgical difference. It is slightly outrageous to me that there can be two adjacent church buildings with the exact same liturgy being conducted with the only difference being the family the priest was born into. Since non-Knanaya can already attend services at a "Knanaya church", why should membership in the parish depend upon which family one belongs to? The Knanaya identity is not an ecclesiastical one (at least I do not think it should be). Knanaya family members should be free to celebrate their own customs but one should not merge that into the church. I hope the time will come when non-Knanaya can be served by a Knanaya priest and bishop, and vice versa.

It does seem to me that many Catholics are too willing to sacrifice unity (in terms of ecclesiastical identity) in order to placate those who agitate for a distinction to be made (ecclesiastically) out an inflated sense of the importance of their uniqueness (as cherished as it should be). I pray for the day when Knanaya and non-Knanaya can see each others as brothers who are united in Christ and can attend Qurbana in the same church as equal members. If the traditions are true, then certainly I am grateful for the Knanaya coming to Kerala and greatly strengthening our church (is that not proof that they never desired a separate church?). Mar Thoma is the father in faith to both Knanaya and non-Knanaya, so let us live in peace and harmony as his children Nasranis!

[fijiq48]

You are right yawsep the Knanaya identity is not an ecclesiastical one, we celebrate the same quarbana as our Syro Malabar brothers and most Kna's including my self have no problem in remaining as the Arch Diocese of Kottayam but we must also remember that certain eastern catholic churches celebrate the exact same mass but are separated through tradition and or geography for example, The Byzantine Rite has 14 separate churches within it. The reason our customs are merged into the church is because our biggest difference between other churches is our wedding customs and matrimony is a big part of Christian life and church.

In agreement to what you said, the biggest problem we see between each church im talking about all Eastern Catholics here, is wanting to preserve customs and traditions of each church or else we could all like Christ wanted, be united under one church. But being humans we have too much pride for our individual church and want to maintain the methods,customs,and traditions of our individual churches. Like Rome said during the creation of the Eastern Catholic Churches, "United but divided"

[Vico]

Since the purpose of a sui iuris Church is to preserve the rite (for the benefit of the faithful and all Catholic churches) with their own laws, it makes sense to have on for the Knanaya. That means those ascribed to that Church sui iuris will then have the right to celebrate in their traditional way. There is likely more than only the marriage laws that is unique. The Apostolic See would have to determine the legitimacy of the marriage traditions of the Knanaya, so there is where the greatest difficult lies, I think.

[fijiq48]

To Vico,

Yes, i do hope one day we achieve our goal of a Sui Juris. And yes marriage will be the biggest problem. Also missionary work, The Knanaya Diocese at the time does do missionary work but all converts are sent directly to Syro Malabar Diocese. If a Knanaya Sui Juris is erected how can they do missionary work with all endogamous diocese? My guess is that some sort of deal will be made where all converts are placed under the latin church.

To Yawsep,

For some reason whenever Knanayas and Syro Malabar are forced to share parishes or diocese problems occur. Like I've stated there was the issue with Mar Makil but then in the 1980's when our people first started moving to the U.S there was no separate diocese, churches, or priests for us here.

Then the Knanayas requested that our Metran at the time Mar Kunnacherry send over a Knanaya priest to hold masses in the U.S , and so Mar Kunnacherry did. Soon after the priest was sent, a Knanaya Mission was created. This mission was shared by both The Knanayas and the Syro Malabar though it was officially a Knanaya Mission. This only lasted for a short time because once the Knanaya Mission was set up the Syros requested that a mission for them be set up as well and so it was and it soon become the St.Thomas Diocese.

Another problem was recorded in the 1600's. When the Portuguese landed in Kerala the Latin Church took control of all St.Thomas Christians, until of course the Koonan Kurishu Sathyam took place and the Mar Thoma Christians were split into either Syro Malabar Catholics or Jacobite Orthodox. During the years of Latin rule over the Syro Malabar Catholics it was recorded that when Bishop Menezes (Latin Bishop of Kerala in 1600) tried to force Knanayas and Syro Malabars to share churches, blood shed occurred. Hopefully in the near future Knanayas and Syro Malabars will have an even better relationship then that of what we have today.

[antunesaa]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

Well, that's not an unrealistic observation ...

The problem is according to the report of the OP, one cannot join the parish/diocese if one is not connected through blood. They have their own bishops and priests. If so it is an exclusive club supported by the church.

Naturally, I would be delighted to learn that this is not true.

Now people can discriminate like that if they want to, without having a special church structure devoted only to them. If they want to be unwelcoming to newcomers, that is their business as individuals, and only God judges so I will let it go at that.

The church though, should not have an official policy in support of this attitude. Every parish and mission should be open and welcoming to any and all inquirers, regardless of social station, education level or ethnic origin.

I know we as individuals fail at this all too often, and it troubles and shames me, it is like soiling the seamless garment of Christ.

I don't understand your point. You don't seem to be interested in joining that community. They probably do not want you to join their community. I don't know how they can evangelize, but I trust the Church to make that judgement. The fact that these people apparently are entitled to be in the community only through family links is irrelevant for the argument: there are plenty of alternatives. I don't see any reason why people should worry about this small group operating under the authority of the Church other than a misplaced, politically correct view that all people should be welcomed everywhere. If you go to a Carthusian convent, for example, you won't be able to just step in and enjoy. Unless you're in need of help, they'll kindly tell you to go somewhere else; and even if you ardently want to join in, it's possible that they won't accept you.

As long as these people are not heretics (and this precludes that they generally indulge in evil practices), they should be allowed to live according to their ancient customs.

[antunesaa]

Originally Posted by fijiq48

To Vico,

Yes, i do hope one day we achieve our goal of a Sui Juris. And yes marriage will be the biggest problem. Also missionary work, The Knanaya Diocese at the time does do missionary work but all converts are sent directly to Syro Malabar Diocese. If a Knanaya Sui Juris is erected how can they do missionary work with all endogamous diocese? My guess is that some sort of deal will be made where all converts are placed under the latin church.

To Yawsep,

For some reason whenever Knanayas and Syro Malabar are forced to share parishes or diocese problems occur. Like I've stated there was the issue with Mar Makil but then in the 1980's when our people first started moving to the U.S there was no separate diocese, churches, or priests for us here.

Then the Knanayas requested that our Metran at the time Mar Kunnacherry send over a Knanaya priest to hold masses in the U.S , and so Mar Kunnacherry did. Soon after the priest was sent, a Knanaya Mission was created. This mission was shared by both The Knanayas and the Syro Malabar though it was officially a Knanaya Mission. This only lasted for a short time because once the Knanaya Mission was set up the Syros requested that a mission for them be set up as well and so it was and it soon become the St.Thomas Diocese.

Another problem was recorded in the 1600's. When the Portuguese landed in Kerala the Latin Church took control of all St.Thomas Christians, until of course the Koonan Kurishu Sathyam took place and the Mar Thoma Christians were split into either Syro Malabar Catholics or Jacobite Orthodox. During the years of Latin rule over the Syro Malabar Catholics it was recorded that when Bishop Menezes (Latin Bishop of Kerala in 1600) tried to force Knanayas and Syro Malabars to share churches, blood shed occurred. Hopefully in the near future Knanayas and Syro Malabars will have an even better relationship then that of what we have today.

Very interesting post. It seems that my compatriot Menezes didn't have enough diplomatic skills. A curiosity: my paternal grand-father was the only living relative of St. João de Brito when this great saint was canonized, back I guess in the 1940s. St. João de Brito was martyred in India in 1693.

[antunesaa]

Originally Posted by JharekCarnelian

I find it it disturbing that any section of the Church should insist on rules whereby other Catholics cannot marry members of that section. I have heard of this issue before in relationship to this group and endogamy strikes me as strictly at odds with the Catholic faith. We are all one in Christ ultimately as Catholics. Valuing traditions is one thing endogamy is another thing altogether.

These people can always leave their particular section and join another one, under full compliance with canon law. What's the problem then?

[DhuAlQarnayn]

Originally Posted by antunesaa

These people can always leave their particular section and join another one, under full compliance with canon law. What's the problem then?

Because the church does not practice racial or ethnic discrimination -- in any of its branches -- so it is impermissible to have Catholic churches where the priest will refuse to witness a marriage simply because one of the parties is not of the "correct" tribe. This is by far the biggest sticking point with the Knanaya. In comparable situations in the recent past -- rural white congregations in the American south that refused to worship with blacks or allow a black priest to enter the church -- the Vatican has actually used interdicts to place the entire parish under a temporary state of excommunication, so this is clearly something that the Vatican is not prepared to countenance.

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by antunesaa

I don't understand your point. ...

Phyletism.

[Pitcharan]

Originally Posted by yawsep1569

I have many Knanaya friends and love them as members of our church. I do not even have too much of a problem with their endogamy since many groups support it to some degrees. However, I do not see on what basis they can be recognized as being ecclesiastically distinct from other Syro-malabar christians. Even granting that they really are a separate genetic group (which I sincerely doubt), how can the Church discriminate a group that is purely motivated on genetic/ancestral grounds? Is not the Church open to all converts? But the Knanaya (Kottayam eparchy) is completely closed to any converts. If there is something I am missing, please let me know. Otherwise, I see their ecclesiastical existence as a blemish upon the Syro-malabar church

Are the 'Syro-malabar', 'Syro-malankara' or for that matter the Armenians any different?

[Pitcharan]

Originally Posted by yawsep1569

.... I hope the time will come when non-Knanaya can be served by a Knanaya priest and bishop, and vice versa.

.... Mar Thoma is the father in faith to both Knanaya and non-Knanaya, so let us live in peace and harmony as his children Nasranis!

I hope the time will come when all prefixes like 'Latin', 'Syrian' and 'Knanaya' will vanish and there will be just ONE HOLY CATHOLIC & APOSTOLIC CHURCH

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by Pitcharan

Are the 'Syro-malabar', 'Syro-malankara' or for that matter the Armenians any different?

They would not be any different if they deliberately excluded other peoples from membership based upon racial or ethnic or cultural considerations.

As far as I know they do not. They must be open to others, and they still have a responsibility to spread the faith.

This is not to say that some layperson-members will not be bigoted/prejudiced or even hateful enough to discourage visitors and newcomers. Sometimes this happens because they don't want their daughters meeting these 'strange' persons, they want the parish to be an ethnic club. That is always wrong.

However, as wrong as it is, one does not usually see the attitudes reinforced by the clergy and hierarchy in churches like you mentioned, even if they privately still share some of these same attitudes they realize it is an unchristian position to take.

In fact, in some places the clergy are the first to realize that such attitudes, if left unchecked, could mean the parish will eventually collapse.

This may not be so in the core area, the traditional homeland of the people, but in areas of dispersal the general trend is for the ethnic minority to assimilate, and the parish will die.

Even the Knanaya will see this process as they migrate and settle around the world. Every generation will see some children marry outside. It can only mean heartache and disappointment if they are not welcoming to these mixed ethnic families. A parish of 200 families eventually has just 60 families, then 40, then 12 ...

Any parish and any church that does not take upon itself the Great Commission while it is strong and has the means to do so deserves it's fate.

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by Pitcharan

I hope the time will come when all prefixes like 'Latin', 'Syrian' and 'Knanaya' will vanish and there will be just ONE HOLY CATHOLIC & APOSTOLIC CHURCH

I find this interesting as a comment.

It is not wrong actually, but these prefixes denote the liturgical tradition.

One does not have to be a Syrian in order to worship in the liturgical tradition which developed among the Syrians, any more than one has to be a Latin (or Roman) to worship in the Latin tradition.

I usually worship in the Russian tradition, but in fact I am not a Russian at all. I am very happy with it and comfortable. There are many others like me.

Of course, there was a time when diversity was not as appreciated as today. Many people thought that uniformity in religious practice was important. An outward sign of an ineward unity. For this reason the Byzantine and Roman liturgical and spiritual traditions were imposed on others, and they spread widely. But this was never really necessary.

Today, we are (in general) much more tolerant of local variations in liturgy and the many diverse spiritual traditions. I think this is good. It is unity in faith which we desire more than anything else, unity of faith is also the most difficult to maintain and requires more energy and vigilance.

[Vico]

Originally Posted by fijiq48

To Vico,

Yes, i do hope one day we achieve our goal of a Sui Juris. And yes marriage will be the biggest problem. Also missionary work, The Knanaya Diocese at the time does do missionary work but all converts are sent directly to Syro Malabar Diocese. If a Knanaya Sui Juris is erected how can they do missionary work with all endogamous diocese? My guess is that some sort of deal will be made where all converts are placed under the latin church.

To Yawsep,

For some reason whenever Knanayas and Syro Malabar are forced to share parishes or diocese problems occur. Like I've stated there was the issue with Mar Makil but then in the 1980's when our people first started moving to the U.S there was no separate diocese, churches, or priests for us here.

Then the Knanayas requested that our Metran at the time Mar Kunnacherry send over a Knanaya priest to hold masses in the U.S , and so Mar Kunnacherry did. Soon after the priest was sent, a Knanaya Mission was created. This mission was shared by both The Knanayas and the Syro Malabar though it was officially a Knanaya Mission. This only lasted for a short time because once the Knanaya Mission was set up the Syros requested that a mission for them be set up as well and so it was and it soon become the St.Thomas Diocese.

Another problem was recorded in the 1600's. When the Portuguese landed in Kerala the Latin Church took control of all St.Thomas Christians, until of course the Koonan Kurishu Sathyam took place and the Mar Thoma Christians were split into either Syro Malabar Catholics or Jacobite Orthodox. During the years of Latin rule over the Syro Malabar Catholics it was recorded that when Bishop Menezes (Latin Bishop of Kerala in 1600) tried to force Knanayas and Syro Malabars to share churches, blood shed occurred. Hopefully in the near future Knanayas and Syro Malabars will have an even better relationship then that of what we have today.

I believe that the concept that has been used is that when Knanaya members marry non Knanaya members, their jurisdictions do not change.

Now this is really not in accord with the default eastern canon law (CCEO) so would require indult or to be included in the particular law of the Church sui iuris. CCEO gives the ways to become enrolled in a Church sui iuris:

1) via infant baptism with a Catholic father, (or single mother, or both Catholics when in agreement),
2) via matrimony, by declaration anytime desired, and
3) of children under 14 when the parent(s) change, but this is not requried, and
4) adult baptism,
5) by approval of the Apostolic See.

So it may be possible to have particular canons, if the Holy See approves of it, to exclude enrollment in cases 1 (by agreement case), 2, 3, and 4. That would keep the Knanaya parent and their children in the hypothetical Knanaya sui iuris and the rest in another.










So to maintain

[fijiq48]

To Vico-

What happens when a Knanaya marries a non Knanaya, is that the Archbishop of Kottayam gives that said Knanaya, permission to leave Kottayam Archdiocese and join the diocese of the non Knanaya spouse. Even if a Knanaya marries lets say a Marthoma, they must leave Kottayam Archdiocese and either join another Syro Malabar diocese or The Marthoma Church.

Knanayas can intermarry among all there people which means, a Knanaya Catholic can marry a Knanaya Jacobite with no problem.