www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Jurisdictional Tension between Vatican and Syro-Malabar Bishops

November 20, 2008
Syro-Malabar Catholics Frustrated With Vatican Offices

NEW DELHI (ICNS): A senior bishop of the Syro-Malabar Church (SMC) says Catholics of his Oriental rite have "lost all faith and hope" of getting justice from Vatican offices.

"Our Church ... (has) patiently waited for justice from the Holy See for the last 42 years, after the Second Vatican Council," Bishop Gregory Karotemprel of Rajkot told a theological seminar in New Delhi, UCA News reported.

The Nov. 14-15 seminar titled "Ecclesial mission of Syro-Malabar Church" addressed various issues including the Church's demand for jurisdiction outside Kerala, the southern Indian state where it is based.

Bishop Karotemprel says his Church has appealed to the Vatican several times for nationwide jurisdiction, especially after it was made sui juris (self governing) 15 years ago.

"But to our great disgust and agony, not even a single line of reply, either positive or negative, was received by the Bishops' Synod," noted the 75-year-old Carmelite of Mary Immaculate prelate, who monitored pastoral care for SMC migrants until a year ago.

The synod, the Church's highest authority, has the power to create dioceses and appoint bishops, in consultation with the pope, but only in Kerala.

The Vatican's silence, Bishop Karotemprel says, creates "an abominable situation" with repercussions such as questioning the credibility of the Holy See.

He accused some Latin-rite bishops of influencing Vatican congregations and the Apostolic Nunciature in New Delhi to block the SMC's "just" right to India-wide jurisdiction.

Bishop Karotemprel says SMC Catholics can no longer tolerate Latin bishops' "ecclesiastical colonization of India" and have "lost all faith and hope" that the Vatican and the nunciature will "ever do justice to their cause." He points out Latin prelates head the important Vatican positions and their people fill other offices in the Vatican congregations.

Nonetheless, he maintains the Vatican alone can find "an equitable and just solution" to the "insoluble disputes" between India's Latin and SMC Churches.

The SMC prelate says his people also wonder whether the Vatican's "culpable silence" requires "another law to implement what is right and just."

In his analysis, "a negative written reply" from the Vatican would negate its own teachings, while a positive reply would "invite very strong opposition" from the Latin Church. Such "games" need "a final whistle," he added.

Bishop Karotemprel regrets the Vatican's new demand that two-thirds of Latin-rite bishops in India should agree to grant SMC nationwide jurisdiction. Since most Latin prelates oppose the demand, the Vatican stand amounts to "absurd" ecclesiastical jurisprudence, he explained.

The SMC prelate remarked that the Church champions truth and justice but "totally denies" those values in "its internal administration."

SMC migrants in Latin dioceses know their just and juridical rights, and "are totally fed up" with the Vatican attitude, Bishop Karotemprel stated.

However, in concluding he recalled that his 2,000-year-old Church "never got separated from the See of Peter" and pledged "filial love and obedience to our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI."

Describing the pope as the "ultimate dispenser of truth and justice in the Church," he urged SMC Catholics to remain "hopeful."

The Latin rite accounts for 128 of India's 160 dioceses. The SMC has 26 dioceses in India, including 10 outside Kerala, to which 3.5 million of India's 17 million Catholics belong. It also has one diocese for North America, based in Chicago, the United States.

Latin rite follows the Roman liturgy introduced by European missioners in the 15th century.

The SMC is the larger of the two Oriental-rite Churches in India, both of which follow Syrian Church traditions and trace their origins to Saint Thomas the Apostle. The smaller Syro-Malankara Church, also based in Kerala, has six dioceses.

Until the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), India's Oriental-rite Churches were confined to Kerala. The council set up SMC dioceses outside Kerala, but placed them in ecclesiastical provinces headed by Latin-rite archdioceses.

The Vatican made the SMC self-governing in 1992 but retained the right to decide on administrative matters for its dioceses outside Kerala.

The Mar Thoma Christians have been waiting for simple justice for a much longer period than that - rather more than 400 years. One of the worst aspects of the problem is that they have internalized the oppression - not unusual but always depressing.

Fr. Serge

Shlomo Aho Michael Thoma,

I have to agree with the Syro-Malabar Eparchs. Why should we Eastern Catholics be limited by territorial jurisdictions, but not the Latins. Further why should be have have Latin Bishops have any say where Eastern Catholic jurisdictions are established for OUR faithful.

I love being a Catholic, but this is one of the few issues that makes my blood boil. This is like the head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church being denied the title of Patriarch, because of the Vatican's desire not to offend the Eastern Orthodox Church, but has no concern about offending us.

Fush BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Scorecard?

Well, the Orientalium Ecclesiarum mandate for the creation of new Patriarchates was primarily in response to the needs of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church and the Ethiopian Catholic Church. The Roman Curia has repeatedly given the Ukrainians the Roman brush-off, and has not even been bothered to make the Ethiopians a "Major Archbishopric".

The Syro-Malabar Church was at last recognized as a Major Archbishopric, but is jurisdictionally confined to what we may call an "Indian reservation" in Kerala (pun intended).

The Syro-Malankara Church styles her "major archbishop" a Catholicos, and the relevant (or irrelevant) people in the curia scream "foul"!

We are all of us told to restore the Eastern Christian traditions. If I were to discuss how this applies even in the are of Liturgy, we would be here all night. As simple a question as that of the ordination of married Priests produces the most amazingly cynical responses - such as (in the USA, where the Latin bishops are utterly opposed to the idea) the suggestion that we should obtain the consent of the Latin bishops to have this "ban" removed (shades of the Syro-Malabar claim to jurisdiction in India).

And on, and on. But I'll be a monkey's uncle before I'll allow these nameless, faceless monsignori to drive us out of our own Church!

Fr. Serge

Father Serge:

Father bless!!

The thing that amazes me in these types of situations is that the Latin bishops thumb their noses at Rome whenever it suits their purpose(s) but pay lip service to Rome when they must for appearance sake.

OTOH, the Eastern bishops in communion with Rome go out of their way to express their loyalty even as they are treated as second-class Catholics.

The question I have, and I would imagine the younger generation has, is why don't the Eastern bishops act like their Latin counterparts? For the Ukrainians, just declare a patriarchate. For the SMCs, simply establish eparchies where there is a need to serve the flock entrusted to them, even if it means naming bishops to head them. I guess what I'm trying to say is that it might take a move that would force a canonical crisis to move this off center and make the documents of Vatican II more than ink on paper.

But, then, maybe it's a good thing I'm not in orders because I'd probably spend the bulk of my time suspended.

In Christ,

BOB

Theophan,

I suggested the same many months earlier... why wait for beaurocracies to unravel? Just do what needs to be done, I trust it'll work itself out in the end anyhow, especially when it is a righteous act like this.

For example, do we need wait for canonization before prayer for intercession from Mother Teresa? Need we have waited for beatification?? I don't think any of us are in the wrong for asking her intercession NOW, the system will catch up eventually... (Obviously this act has limits, one should never contradict DOCTRINE, but jurisdiction and discipline don't contradict the Faith...)

I think its about time the Eastern churches at affected territories take a "b**** to you" approach. Pardon the harsh choice of words, but in the case of Australia, that was how the Eastern eparchies got the greenlight or rather, the "cajones" to ordain married men in Australia itself.

Don't think that is quite the case, at least for the Melkites in Australia.

There is a serious case of failure to recognize their own self interest here . . .

I choke when I read the semi-regular op-ed pieces from Roman Catholic bishops claiming that there is no evidence that celibacy is in any way limiting vocations.

I will state unequivocally that if there was an order or society of latin rite married priests, I would have joined twenty some-odd years ago. Celibacy is the *only* reason that I never answered the call--both times I was ready another call intervened. The first time, I didn't marry; the second time, I did.

For that matter, if I had been aware of the Eastern Catholic churches, beyond the general "those kind-of orthodox with the Orthodox liturgy but they're catholic and sometimes have married priests and more colorful robes at ecclesiastical gatherings" I probably would have been one of the "back door" ordinations in the '80's.

Anyway, I can identify at least three men in my small parish, myself included, that would pack for the seminary ASAP if they could figure out the financials. My wife would fully support it in my case.

Plain and simply, the vocation rate is much higher for Eastern Catholics. The chancellor of our diocese is an EC; our pastor works 1 day for the Roman chancery and three days in one of their parishes.

If the hierarchs' recognized their own self interest, they would see legions of eastern priests to "borrow" for understaffed latin dioceses . . .

hawk

Matt, I could be mistaken but I remember reading of a joint statement issued by both Bishop Peter and Kyr Issam John on this. This was issued in 1998.

Dear Friends,

Thank you for your contributions to this fascinating thread.

Ukrainian Catholics shouldn't feel "alone" when it comes to being treated by Rome in this fashion.

What is truly damaging is the whole "in communion with" enterprise when Eastern Catholics come to realize they are as under the Rome yoke as Latin Catholics in terms of jurisdictional matters.

It makes one pause to think whether Rome's heavy-handed bureaucratic centralization with respect to EC's is designed to make EC's feel unwelcomed to the "breaking" point.

Alex

Archbishop Issam's telling of it is much gentler. The goal was that he wanted the whole of the Australian Bishops Conference to agree to it, so that later there would be no issues.

I think around two-thirds of our priests are married, all bar one with children.

Of the coming ordinations next year, that ratio still holds true.

INDIA Oriental-rite Prelate Expresses Frustration With Vatican Offices
November 19, 2008
NEW DELHI (UCAN) -- A senior bishop of the Syro-Malabar Church (SMC) says Catholics of his Oriental rite have "lost all faith and hope" of getting justice from Vatican offices.


"Our Church ... (has) patiently waited for justice from the Holy See for the last 42 years, after the Second Vatican Council," Bishop Gregory Karotemprel of Rajkot told a theological seminar in New Delhi.

The Nov. 14-15 seminar titled "Ecclesial mission of Syro-Malabar Church" addressed various issues including the Church's demand for jurisdiction outside Kerala, the southern Indian state where it is based.

Bishop Karotemprel says his Church has appealed to the Vatican several times for nationwide jurisdiction, especially after it was made sui juris (self governing) 15 years ago.

"But to our great disgust and agony, not even a single line of reply, either positive or negative, was received by the Bishops' Synod," noted the 75-year-old Carmelite of Mary Immaculate prelate, who monitored pastoral care for SMC migrants until a year ago.

The synod, the Church's highest authority, has the power to create dioceses and appoint bishops, in consultation with the pope, but only in Kerala.

The Vatican's silence, Bishop Karotemprel says, creates "an abominable situation" with repercussions such as questioning the credibility of the Holy See.

He accused some Latin-rite bishops of influencing Vatican congregations and the Apostolic Nunciature in New Delhi to block the SMC's "just" right to India-wide jurisdiction.

Bishop Karotemprel says SMC Catholics can no longer tolerate Latin bishops' "ecclesiastical colonization of India" and have "lost all faith and hope" that the Vatican and the nunciature will "ever do justice to their cause." He points out Latin prelates head the important Vatican positions and their people fill other offices in the Vatican congregations.

Nonetheless, he maintains the Vatican alone can find "an equitable and just solution" to the "insoluble disputes" between India's Latin and SMC Churches.

The SMC prelate says his people also wonder whether the Vatican's "culpable silence" requires "another law to implement what is right and just."

In his analysis, "a negative written reply" from the Vatican would negate its own teachings, while a positive reply would "invite very strong opposition" from the Latin Church. Such "games" need "a final whistle," he added.

Bishop Karotemprel regrets the Vatican's new demand that two-thirds of Latin-rite bishops in India should agree to grant SMC nationwide jurisdiction. Since most Latin prelates oppose the demand, the Vatican stand amounts to "absurd" ecclesiastical jurisprudence, he explained.

The SMC prelate remarked that the Church champions truth and justice but "totally denies" those values in "its internal administration."

SMC migrants in Latin dioceses know their just and juridical rights, and "are totally fed up" with the Vatican attitude, Bishop Karotemprel stated.

However, in concluding he recalled that his 2,000-year-old Church "never got separated from the See of Peter" and pledged "filial love and obedience to our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI."

Describing the pope as the "ultimate dispenser of truth and justice in the Church," he urged SMC Catholics to remain "hopeful."

The Latin rite accounts for 128 of India's 160 dioceses. The SMC has 26 dioceses in India, including 10 outside Kerala, to which 3.5 million of India's 17 million Catholics belong. It also has one diocese for North America, based in Chicago, the United States.

Latin rite follows the Roman liturgy introduced by European missioners in the 15th century.

The SMC is the larger of the two Oriental-rite Churches in India, both of which follow Syrian Church traditions and trace their origins to Saint Thomas the Apostle. The smaller Syro-Malankara Church, also based in Kerala, has six dioceses.

Until the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), India's Oriental-rite Churches were confined to Kerala. The council set up SMC dioceses outside Kerala, but placed them in ecclesiastical provinces headed by Latin-rite archdioceses.

The Vatican made the SMC self-governing in 1992 but retained the right to decide on administrative matters for its dioceses outside Kerala.

End Story:

My comment and Question:

How can this Church be self ruling if the Vatican decides on administrative matters outside its diocese outside of Kerala?

I don't mean to start a flame war, but It seems that Rome keeps the "Self Governing" churches on a short leash.

For several decades, the Roman Curia has been using this bizarre notion of "canonical territory" as a means of confining the Eastern Churches.

The situation in India is particularly blatant and outrageous. Beginning with the late sixteenth century, the Vatican (at first in collaboration with the Portuguese) did everything possible to drive the Thomas Christians either out of the Catholic Church or out of existence. They failed, but only because there were heroic faithful who refused to accept either "alternative", and instead internalized their own oppression. The Latins for centuries denied the Syro-Malabarese (who were, of course, the historic, indigenous Church in India) any bishop of their own - and when the Vatican under Leo XIII finally conceded bishops to the Syro-Malabarese the first bishops were themselves Latins. Only several decades later was a normal hierarchy allowed to the Syro-Malabarese, and then under tight conditions: no connection with the Chaldean Patriarchate, no married priests, etc. etc.

To add insult to injury (or vice versa) the Latin diocese all over India openly recruit "vocations" from the Syro-Malabarese, and then require these men and women to have no use whatever of the Syro-Malabarese tradition. The numbers are so great that many Latin dioceses in India would not be able to function without these deracinated clergy and religious.

So the Roman Curia pretends to be virtuous and acts as if the Syro-Malabarese should be happy with a handful of "exarchates" while keeping the majority of India (the historic territory of the Syro-Malabarese) reserved to the Latins. If it were not the simple truth it would sound like a comic satire.

Defenders of the Curia point out - correctly - that the liturgical situation of the Syro-Malabarese is an intolerable mess. So it is. And just who is responsible? Who, for centuries, taught the Syro-Malabarese that everything of the Chaldean tradition is worthless and that the more romanization, the better? I don't know what such utterance and conduct is called in the jargon of canon lawyers, but I know very well what it is called in standard English!

Meanwhile, my confidence is with the Syro-Malankarese, who have retained some concept of who they are and what they are. It is sufficient just to see a photograph of both hierarchies to notice the difference (a friend of mine in Rome tells me "Serge, you don't understand!" I certainly don't!).

The Chaldean Patriarchate is faced with all the troubles of war and persecution in Iraq and even elsewhere in the Middle East, and mass emigration, and can do little for the Syro-Malabarese.

One can but pray, and live in hope.

Fr. Serge

My my... the Curia still has a colonial attitude.