There is a biblical history behind the event of Passover.

For four hundred years the Hebrews, the chosen people of God, had been in Egypt under the Pharaoh. The earlier period of their self-inflicted exile was very constructive for their growth in population and physical and material wealth. The Hebrews flourished in a foreign land, but they always retained their identity as a monotheistic ethnic group with their own unique worshipping and living customs; and their hosts were happy and comfortable with their new neighbors, who had been brought there from Canaan during a great famine and drought period long ago by one of their prime ministers who happened to be the first Hebrew to enter Egypt as a slave first and later to become their prime minister by God’s providential care. After a few centuries these new immigrants became the most prospering communities around Egypt, because they were very industrious and hardworking. Gradually, the Egyptians began to dislike these growing communities of Hebrews; they thought that their wealth and riches would finally end up in the possession of their guests. They, with their Pharaoh, began to oppress the Hebrews in many ways. They were brutally treated at work places. They were sent to forced labor and inhumane conditions. Animals began to be treated better than the Hebrews. Their children were tormented. The miseries of their slavery were unfathomable. To reduce their manpower and to impede their growth as a distinct and prospering ethnic group, the Pharaoh even ordered to kill the male babies of Hebrew women; and the order was executed and the Hebrew communities were buried in unending tears and fear.

But there was one baby that miraculously escaped this terror due to the kindness of a princess from the palace of the Pharaoh; the baby’s name was Moses. It was him that God later chose for the deliverance His chosen people out of the land of Egypt. Many years later, it took ten plagues by the hand of God to liberate the Israelites. The last one was the death of all the first-born in Egypt; an angel of death would go to all the Egyptian homes and kill the firs-born. Moses, who had escaped to the Sinai for fear of his own life, was chosen by God to be a prophet and priest to lead his people out of Egypt. Through the instrumentality of Moses, God had inflicted nine plagues one after another to change the mind of the Pharaoh so that he could let the Israelites leave the country. The pharaoh changed his mind repeatedly, and so the ultimate weapon directed by God against the Pharaoh and Egypt was the death of all the Egyptian first-born. God instructed Moses to prepare His chosen people for two emergencies, first to avert the angel of death getting into the Hebrew homes, and then to get ready for their exodus next day morning.

In order to save all the Israeli first-born from death and to get ready for the exodus out of Egypt God demanded Moses that every household should observe a Pesach. The children of Israel should sacrifice a blameless lamb. And the blood of the lamb should be sprinkled on the door posts of every Hebrew house, so that the angel of death may pass over to the Egyptian house to do his job. Thus the blood of the blameless lamb would redeem them from the imminent death. They should cook the lamb and eat a meal with five items which would signify their different sufferings in Egypt. Since there was no time to prepare the regular leavened bread, the bread that was to be used in this meal must be unleavened. Every Israeli household obeyed Moses, and sprinkled the blood of the blameless lamb on the door posts of their houses, and observed their meal in Egypt as Moses had commanded. The angel of death passed over their houses and the death of their first-born was averted. The first-born of the Egyptians were all killed by the angel of death in the same night. Next day morning the children of Israel set out for Canaan, when the entire Egyptian population was grieving over the death of their first-born. The slaughter of the lamb and the ritual consumption of that lamb in a ceremonial meal are together called the Passover event or Pesach, ort Pascha.

In this event the sacrifice of the lamb is the most crucial. It is the blood of the lamb that redeems the believer from death. In fact the liberation of the Israelites was not just a physical liberation. It was an exodus from the land of idolatry, where the Pharaoh himself was considered a god, and even an eternal being, which was the reason why the Egyptians constructed those huge pyramids to immortalize their monarchs through the sweat and blood and the slave labor of the Hebrews. The children of God had lost their freedom to worship the one and only God, Yahweh. In this sense the deliverance of the children of Israel from Egypt meant both physical and spiritual emancipation. Even the very crossing over the Red Sea to the Sinai Peninsula was tumultuous, because it took an unnatural event of splitting the sea and unrolling a dry land on the sea bed right in front of their eyes through the wondrous instrumentality of Moses and of crossing the bottom terrain of the sea to the desert. They were yet very fearful; for the Egyptian army was catching up with them. But once they all stepped in the desert land of Sinai, the entire Egyptian army that had entered the dry sea bed following the Israelites was swallowed up by the roaring waves of Red Sea that had been restored to their natural position!

This is the true prefiguration of our true Pascha! The very event that took place about 1500 years before Christ in Egypt is a prototype of the slaughter of the Lamb of God.

Sin has its inevitable consequence. St Paul calls it ‘death’. For the sin of the Egyptians every first-born in Egypt had to die according to God’s plan. However God decided that a lamb could die in the place of every Hebrew family that needed to avert death. The blood of the lamb could avoid death. God wanted the blood of the lamb to be sprinkled over the door posts, which indicated the household being in observance of God’s command and the angel of death could not inflict the punishment of death on that family.

REPENT YE, HOLY CHURCH, FROM TOP TO BOTTOM,
AND CONVERT BEFORE YOU CELEBRATE THE HOLY PASCHA

This period experiences a great turmoil, which has never been in recent times. The earth is roaring with anger. Our climate has not been normal for past the past few years; our weather has been so erratic. Many areas on the earth are being ravaged by heavy floods; for example Australia, where there was no misery resulting from floods, has been suffering from deluge; Pakistan and parts of South America suffered from massive losses due to heavy flooding.

The past decade saw massive earthquakes all over the world. Although earthquakes are not uncommon in history, they are occurring frequently and with much higher destructive power, not just killing a few hundreds, but thousands. When the epicenter is in the ocean, the earthquakes create unfathomable power and consequently roll the waters of the sea to make it a devouring lion and totally decimating entire population in surrounding lands. We saw one such wrath of the earth in 2004 that took the lives of more than 200,000 people in Indonesia and in the lands surrounded by the Indian Ocean. Again, we are struck with another such catastrophe in the western Pacific, creating unimaginable destruction and misery in Japan.

Well, the seismologist has his geological explanation for all these calamities. Historians may have a lot to lecture on them with a historical point of view. Philosophers will definitely rationalize on them. Yes, nations may gather together to find solutions for the problems resulting from these calamities. Scientists may also try to develop systems of advance warning for better preparation to deal with such future situations. But none of them will be able to alleviate the pain experienced by the survivors of these catastrophes. In fact the professionals mentioned above can never be able to solve the enigmatic problem engulfing our generation.

Readers, this enigma is understood only through FAITH! Faith can answer the problems, it can heal the wounds, it can comfort the grieving survivors and it can also suggest solutions. Suffering is inevitable in human life; but if we have the right faith it can make it lighter for the sufferer.

In the Semitic Church (both Orthodox Syrians and Nestorian Assyrians), there is a brief fasting period called the “Nineveh Fast”, or the “Three Day Fast”; which is observed in a very austere manner and falls as a prelude to the Great Lent, eighteen days before the Great Fast starts, which lasts for forty days followed by another ten more days of stricter fasting period in honor of the passion of the Lord, which ends on the day of Pascha (Resurrection). Actually the purpose of the Nineveh Fast is to prepare the faithful for the observance of the Great Lent.

We read in the bible that the Nineveites listened to the preaching of Jonah and went into deep practices of austerity. They wore sack cloths, showered ashes on their bodies, provided no food for their babies and animals. Nineveh was in sin; and God was about to destroy that region like he had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. However, God wanted to give them a chance of coming back to Him through repentance. Jonah was asked to preach repentance; but he ran away from the command of God, because he thought that the people of Nineveh were an unrepentant generation, and that they would kill him. But God did not want to destroy a nation. So He decided to punish the running away Jonah, who had taken a ship to escape from the scene. A whale swallowed him and he stayed in the belly of the whale for three days, and it finally threw him up on the shore near Nineveh. Jonah realized the consequence of his disobedience. He started his preaching so vehemently, and asked the sinners of Nineveh to observe the strictest form of penance and repentance. It is with this great biblical episode that the Semitic Church is preparing her children for the Great Lent.

Our present generation has gone beyond the magnitude of sinfulness that devoured the inhabitants of Nineveh. The world has become dangerously hedonistic and has no regard for the law of nature or the precepts of God. We are not just talking about the sin of the unchristian world; we are also talking about the sin of the Church, which was given the discernment of clearly understanding the commandments of God and the laws of nature, which are reflective of God’s ultimate purpose in His created sphere. In fact, the Church and the world around her are equally sinful now. The world around the Church does not know what God really wants of it. But the Church knows what God expects of her; hence her sins are more terrible challenging God in every area of human life.

As Christians we should know what sin is and what its consequences are, more than the heathen world. Tragically, our problem is that we are already blinded by the scars of constant sinning; we do not understand the depth of the wound it inflicts on God’s loving heart, we do not understand severe consequences of our sin. The Church is called to be the light and salt of the world. A sinful Church cannot add flavor to the world surrounding her, a constantly sinning Church cannot be a flaming torch within the world darkened by the intensity of sin. The current problem of the Church is that it DOES NOT KNOW what constitutes a sin. There is no sense of sinfulness anymore.

Our basic Orthodox Catechism tells us that there are three enemies always ferociously working against the Church and the Christians, which are the World, the Flesh and the Devil.

There are a few postulates he takes as self-evident.

1. God is metaphysically the most Supreme Being, above whom none exists. This Supreme Being is the ultimate in existence, and It cannot come down to the level of any created beings as God.

2. Mankind is in a fallen state, and needs redemption. Man cannot perform the act of redemption, because he is incapable of repairing himself as a result of the fall, whereby he is short of divine grace that sanctifies him.

3. God as God cannot perform this act, because He is existentially and essentially incapable of paying off the unimaginable debt human sin incurred and the immeasurable damage human sin inflicted on the Divinity, because God as God cannot go through the most humiliating act (kenosis) required for redemption. Redemption comes from the Latin word, redemere, meaning, to buy again after paying a huge price, which a human being cannot afford to make by any means.

4. It was essential that humanity was to be brought back to the grace of God, because God created man to be with Him eternally. So every human being should have the opportunity to be reconciled with Him. However, the possibility was negligible because God and man belonged to two different existential levels, where metaphysical impossibilities were impenetrable barriers.
Hence the redemption of humanity was a metaphysical impossibility.

The fathers of the Holy Church are of the opinion that the Persons of the Holy Trinity conducted in eternity its Holy Synod to deliberate on the lot of man. The Holy Persons agonized over the eternity of man. They even wondered if it was necessary to grant man the unique privilege of possessing Their image or similitude, which endowed man with a free will and rationality similar to those of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. It was his rationality and free will that took him to this kind of incorrigible jeopardy. It is said that there were several proposals, such as: to annihilate the human race altogether and create another rational race, or to reduce man to the irrational levels of apes or mere animals or to lift him up through some inconceivable methods. Finally, the Holy Trinity came to the conclusion that man needs to be lifted up. However they were confronted with many obstacles in that process.

What Adam in his first sin had done was an ungrateful aggression against his Master, his own creator. Using his free will man decided to rebel against a loving God, who created him and sustained him. God’s greatest act of love was His creation of humanity in His own image. To be the ICON of God is not a mirror image or reflection, which has no life in it. The Greek word, ICON which is translated from Hebrew does not mean that. It means more than that. An icon of God is actually the same being at a lesser degree and intensity with real life, life of God. A mirror reflection has no life at all. A man is not such an image, but an ICON possessing the same faculties at a much lesser intensity than what the Sovereign God possessed, the faculties of reason and free will, which are the sources of divine creation in the first place. It is this creative force that God infused into human creation; among all creations man is the only creator somewhat comparable to the creative nature of God, although not an ultimate Creator, but a relative creator. He made man very much similar to Him in many ways, although not to the extent of an offspring that is identical to its parent. Is there any LOVE similar to the love explicit in the act of the first human creation? The first sin was a breach of this primordial existential affinity, a wreck of filial love creating a divide and disconnect between God and His rational creation. This is an explicit attack on the very essence of Divinity, the punishment of which is death, to quote the idea of St. Paul. Hence man has to die for this aggression against God.

The fathers of the Church teach that the creation of man was initiated with the suggestion of the Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. When all creations were completed, God saw that everything HE created was good. But none of them could recognize its Creator. None of them was intelligent to ask the question, “Who made us?” It was at that point that God the Father consulted God the Son about another creation possessing almost the same faculties of the Godhead, with the powers of intellect and will; and the fathers of the Church propose that the second Person of the Holy Trinity suggested the idea of the unique creation of man. Yes, God the Father was impressed with the idea and responded to the Son (according to St. John Chrysostom): “Let Us make man in Our image”, and the Son concurred. This may look like a mythological account by some fathers. However, we have to demythologize and squeeze the truth out of it.

When the first man fell out of God’s grace, the fathers teach, another Holy Synod of the Trinity was conducted to deal with Their failure in creating such a stupid rational being who had the audacity to rebel against Him. The very idea of human creation was from the Son, and therefore it was also His task to come up with a solution to deal with this existential dilemma. It was a tremendous responsibility. It involved a great sacrifice, because only sacrifice could please the Godhead, to wipe out the wickedness towards a Creator, and nothing except a total sacrifice was acceptable to God. A total sacrifice literally meant the destruction or annihilation of mankind, but this would wipe out the entire mankind from the face of the earth. Even if a total destruction of mankind could be avoided, man’s sacrifice could not produce any thing good, particularly the required sanctifying grace, as he was incapable of producing any good, or of pleasing God in the absence of natural grace in which he was created; he fell away from it, he is in condemnation. In fact he cannot generate anything good for his own benefit or on behalf of him. Hence, man becoming a sacrifice was ruled out as a solution.

The destruction of man would in fact defeat the very purpose of his creation as a unique being, creation of the rational man. Although the entire creation magnifies the majesty and sovereignty of God, only angels who are celestials and men who are terrestrials, could offer RATIONAL WORSHIP to God, and the other creations do not rationally comprehend that they do magnify God. Hence the destruction of mankind was not a tenable alternative at all.

“Then how do We solve this enigmatic problem?” The Holy Trinity thought about it over and over. There was only one solution to avoid the annihilation of mankind altogether: God to become a sacrifice on behalf of man. Again there were many insurmountable problems attached to that process. God Himself cannot become a sacrifice; a sacrifice definitely involves suffering and death. God cannot suffer, nor can He die as He is an Eternal Supreme Being. So the discussion boiled down to one solution: An eternal sacrifice is needed to satisfy the Godhead to solve the most heinous crime against God. In conducting that sacrifice, whatever is impossible for man God will perform, and whatever is metaphysically impossible for God as an infinite Being man should perform. Again there remains another problem: if this sacrifice is not performed by ONE person in the place of the entire mankind, it would not bring in the results expected. If God does His part individually without being substantially united with man and if man does his part being separated from the substance (knumo/ hypostasis) of God , his deed cannot produce any good.

The Synod came up with a final solution. One person, who is both completely God and completely man, hypostatically united as ONE, can do the job. Who among the three persons of the Trinity will do this? As the Person Who proposed the creation of man, finally the responsibility fell on the shoulders of the Son, urged by the Holy Spirit. The Son willfully, without any coercion, offered Himself to God the Father to descend upon the earth and take the true form of man and go through unimaginable sufferings and even most crucial and despicable form death on the cross as an eternal sacrifice for the sin of man , and satisfy God’s justice, and reconcile him with God the Father. The Holy Spirit took an incredible supernatural task of impregnating a virgin womb on earth for the descent of the Son.

Now we go to the question Anselm asked, “Cur Deus Homo (Why God became man)?” The answer is explained above. This writer stated a Western question and its Eastern answer. For the West and the East the question and answer still remain a mystery. A mystery simply means that certain truth is incomprehensible. Yes, the incarnation is a mystery. No one internalizes it without faith. That is why Anselm said faith precedes reason, and he emphatically declared “Credo ut intelligam” (I believe so that I may understand).

Yes, Orthodox Christians, if you try to rationally understand first and then try to believe in the incarnation, it becomes no more a mystery and there is a chance that you will never understand and never believe. And redemption will never be realized in you.

Come with the mind of a child before the mysteries of God and you will eventually understand them.

As we celebrate this great mystery with all the external pomp and glamour, never forget to ask ourselves the reason behind all our celebrations. Jesus the incarnate God is underlying reason.

May the Incarnate Word of God be spiritually born in your hearts and bring salvation for your souls. May the Prince of Peace reign in your hearts and bring you peace and prosperity through out the New Year 2011!

May all our readers have a very Merry Christmas and a Bright New Year!

CHRIST IS BORN; GLORIFY HIM!!!

Our diocesan bishops are professed monks. As monks they should not have any earnings or possessions. Strictly speaking, they cannot own anything except their habit and other items for day-to-day use. The Church they serve should take care of their needs, such as residence, food, cloths, transportation, and domestic and office help. Does the Church take care of them adequately? Some bishops in the past had complained that they had been nearly at the point of starvation. If we cannot adequately support a bishop, I urge the Church not to consecrate a bishop, unless he is willing to go to the mission field where he may have only the basics.

Canonically speaking, The Syrian Church does not have a stipulation of maintaining a monastic episcopate like the Byzantine Orthodox Church that has a canonical requirement that only a monk could be made a bishop. In the Oriental Orthodox Churches, to the best of our knowledge there was no canonical and conciliar injunction against a married person becoming a bishop in any of the first three ecumenical councils. Most of our holy fathers during the early centuries of Christianity were married bishops with children, and some of their children also eventually became bishops. However, at least since the eighth century monastics began to monopolize the episcopate due to various reasons, most of which are irrelevant now. The only overriding justification for a monastic episcopate is just convention.

We would love to see our bishops living in strict obedience to their monastic vows, and we venerate their sanctity as monks. This writer was secretary to Metropolitan Mar Thoma Dionysius of Niranam for four years. There is a dictum in English: “Familiarity breeds contempt”. After living with this great hierarch of blessed memory, this writer became convinced that familiarity does not breed contempt; on the other hand, if the person under consideration possesses radiant virtues, it breeds not only appreciation, but also veneration. This great hierarch did not possess practically anything. When we went to perform sacramental rites, it was a custom among our people to give a gift (kaimuth) to him. During those days the amounts were not large; but he never saved a penny in any banks from these gifts (kaimuth). He never had a bank account of his own, except when he had to have such an account in connection with his position as the Manager of Mount Tabor Educational Institutions. Whatever he received as gifts were distributed among the poor without even counting what he had received or what he was about to donate. How many prelates are there like him in the Church now!

There are a lot of rumors spreading in our Orthodox Churches that our bishops are unreasonably attached to money and that their bank deposits are fatter than what the bank even can hold. To the best of our knowledge there are only very few bishops who could be considered ascetically poor. Bishops are supposed to observe poverty as one of their vows and as a virtue. Some of them have accounts with the worth of hundreds of thousands and even millions. Many of these bishops were humble ideal priests when they were elected to the episcopate. But after receiving their episcopal cassocks, they felt more regal and began to think of possessing more material wealth.

We believe the Holy Synods and other supervisory bodies have to think about protecting the integrity and character of our traditional episcopate. We suggest the following:

The Diocese or the Church has to meet all the expenses of a bishop and his staff and maintain his residence unsparingly, but with the simplicity required for monks.

The Church should provide adequate transportation for the bishop and his staff. No car should be registered in the name of a particular bishop. All vehicles are to be bought and registered in the name of the Church.

Every bishop should be provided with discretionary funds with limits of spending. On unusual occasions, the bishop may take from this fund to provide for his personal charities.

The Church should meet all the incidental expenses of the bishop with accountability. This does not mean that he should get permission from the Diocesan Council or Assembly to spend the money he needs for various purposes. He should be treated like the head of a household with respect and dignity. But as a father in the family, he is responsible to the entire Church. The Church should know the amount that is expended.

All substantial charities should be administered through the office of the bishop as a disbursement item covered by the Diocesan budget.

All receipts (for example, gifts received as donations, gifts, stipends, allowances, etc.) taken by the bishop should go to the treasury of the Church or Diocese.

If anyone requires a bishop to perform his sacraments, the Diocese should charge him for the transportation of the bishop and his staff, and an additional tax to help the poor of the Church (education, marriage, house construction for the homeless, etc.).
All the monies donated to the bishop as gift (kaimuth) should be turned over to the Diocese/ Church. However, he may earmark what he received as gift (kaimuth) for his favorite charities or other benevolent purposes.

No monies generated by the ministerial service of a bishop should be deposited in the personal account of the bishop, but may be deposited in his name as the head of a Diocese.

There may be more suggestions. The purpose is to establish a strict monastic discipline within the episcopate. This writer visited the Coptic Church of Egypt a few years ago, and personally observed how their bishops lived. Almost all bishops live in monastic environments. They are well taken care of by their communities. All their receipts are turned over to the monastery or institution they are part of. For example, this writer stayed with Bishop Picenti for about two weeks. He lives in a large monastery (St. BarSoum), which is like an Industrial Estate. He has a bank account in his name, but not in his personal name; the account is in the name of Bishop Picenti of Helwan (Helwan is the name of his diocese). This man does not even see the balances of that account. The account is operated by his diocesan officers (including priests and nuns). The community takes care of him. He never worries about any of his needs. This is the life an ideal monk-bishop.

Can our episcopate imitate this kind of reform to establish a simple monastic life without attachment to money and material possessions? If our bishops cannot live as monks, we do not need the monastic episcopate. Let us start thinking about consecrating virtuous and holy married priests to the order of bishops in our Church, and it is not a violation of the Word of God.

For almost a year the activities at the Indian office had been reduced due to the excessive financial burden that it was demanding in the context of consistently receding income. Therefore, powerful speeches and pregnant articles with theological insights were missing for the extensive readership of Indian Orthodox Herald.

The monthly subscription for Indian Orthodox Herald will be $2.00 for a month and $6.00 for three months. In the next three months time, the Malayalam Edition from 2005 onwards will be available in the web-archives.

Indian Orthodox Herald is trying to maintain its decorum by presenting itself in a vivid manner and strongly holding on to the diversity of dignified media. It is not a ‘notice board’ that lets paste the news and photos on a free site. Malayalam web development itself costed about Rs. 3.5 lacs. IOH is not using any Unicode letters for Malayalam. Moreover, the Malayalam edition is available on Mobile phone as well.

BMM creations have more than five full time Editors and many reporters at various states and nations. An own server is used to bring news to the whole world, as and when they break.

Incoming news have to be edited and typed, they need to be translated and typed for English edition, and the whole thing needs to be then coordinated. One would also need to contact people at various countries for accurate news scoops. There beyond come the office expenses. Esteemed readers may kindly be aware of these background activities to know the reality and constrain that IOH is facing at present.

Urbane Projects used to fund for IOH even into the recent past. However, the recession has squeezed and pushed Urbane Projects back from doing that. It is in this very context that the subscription is being introduced. Indian Orthodox Herald sincerely requests all its esteemed readers to understand and continue your benevolent attitude.

It is possible to register the names and pay the subscription online. Click here to register and pay for the subscription. Help Support Indian Orthodox Herald.

IOH is the only news paper of its kind publishing from the United States of America that brings news at once in English and in Malayalam. There is also a weekend Malayalam Edition, where one can read articles of credence and speeches from reputed orators on important occasions and events related to the Malankara Orthodox Church. Metropolitan Dr. Geevarghese Mar Julios is the Patron of the Indian Orthodox Herald.

IOH is approaching the first, second and third generation faithful in the diaspora with this fundraiser to carry on the good works it is doing in the web from 2002 onwards. Unfortunately we had to layoff four of our Indian office personals due to financial constrains. Unless we make the Indian office run in full swing, we are handicapped in bringing news, speeches and photographs firsthand. In the event of a continued financial constrain we will be forced to make Malayalam edition available only under paid subscription from 1st July 2010.

You can press the following buttons after entering the number of donations you wish to contribute at the designated place. We consider your goodwill as encouragement to our efforts and sincerely appreciate your benevolence in advance. This drive will remain online for the month of June.

2CheckOut.com Inc. (Ohio, USA) is an authorized retailer for goods and services provided by BMM Creations Inc..

Donate $5

2CheckOut.com Inc. (Ohio, USA) is an authorized retailer for goods and services provided by BMM Creations Inc..

Donate $10

2CheckOut.com Inc. (Ohio, USA) is an authorized retailer for goods and services provided by BMM Creations Inc..

Donate $25 or up

thanks
IOH Team

Donation Received

May 31, 2010 : $0.00
June 01, 2010 :$0.00
June 02, 2010 :$0.00
June 03, 2010 :$0.00
June 04, 2010 :$0.00
June 05, 2010 :$0.00
June 06, 2010 :$0.00
June 07, 2010 :$0.00
June 08, 2010 :$0.00
June 09, 2010 :$0.00
June 10, 2010 :$0.00
June 11, 2010 :$0.00
June 12, 2010 :$0.00
June 13, 2010 :$0.00
June 14, 2010 :$0.00
June 15, 2010 :$0.00
June 16, 2010 :$0.00
June 17, 2010 :$0.00
June 18, 2010 :$0.00
June 19, 2010 :$0.00
June 20, 2010 :$0.00
June 21, 2010 :$0.00
June 22, 2010 :$0.00
June 23, 2010 :$0.00
June 24, 2010 :$0.00
June 25, 2010 :$0.00
June 26, 2010 :$0.00
June 27, 2010 :$0.00
June 28, 2010 :$0.00
June 29, 2010 :$0.00
June 30, 2010 :$0.00

One can access the Web Malayalam Edition by clicking on the red navigation bar ‘Malayalam’ on extreme top right portion of English Edition of Indian Orthodox Herald. Thereafter one can navigate oneself by clicking on various nav-bars in Malayalam itself. Bonnie Mathew is the web developer.

“To updating Church-news to the world wide Malankara Orthodox presence, Indian Orthodox Herald is doing an exemplary job. There-beyond Indian Orthodox Herald puts up important suggestions with a specific aim to highlight the growth of Malankara Church. This is what I appreciate and therefore, I wish all success to the new Web Malayalam Edition also”, said the Sabha Secretary Dr. George Joseph.

Indian Orthodox Herald began its online edition in English in February 2002. It was in 2005 March that the pdf Malayalam online edition started honoring the frequent and wide spread requests of Indian Orthodox Herald readers. This was frequented as one issue on every alternate day. In order to collect news and to prepare the news paper on pdf format, an office of Indian Orthodox Herald was also opened at Thazhakkara, Mavelikkara under the Resident Editorship of Mr. George Thazakkara.

2007 onwards various online media handling Church news have set in and Orthodox Herald Malayalam edition as pdf was therefore limited as weekly. However, demand for an online Church-news edition in Malayalam with daily updates with a scope beyond the weekly pdf news paper became real strong and this new Web Malayalam Edition is thought to fill that gap up, which readers have appropriately identified. The pdf Malayalam weekly format will continue without interruptions with a revised emphasis on articles and speeches that highlight the faith, theology, history, liturgy and tradition etc. of the Malankara Church.

GO TO THE NEW MALAYALAM EDITION

It was for the first time in the history of Malankara Church that some agency conducted an Exit Poll towards the Episcopal Election to predict possible results. IOH had bravely ventured the Exit Poll 2010 to scientifically predict the seven winners. IOH had also taken important and serious measures to filter away all kinds of manipulations into the Exit Poll 2010 to the maximum possible extend as well.

Readers might have noticed that some of the candidates had their names in bold letters throughout the Exit poll 2010 and some names in normal letters. Those names that have appeared in bold letters indicated that these names have figured in those votes that have been cast for seven candidates together. Those that were not bold indicated that people voted for those candidates singularly.

It was not possible for a person to vote more than once from one IP Address. Happened that a person tried to vote a second time, the Exit Poll 2010 said to him/her that he/she had already voiced his/her opinion. This has contributed to the veracity of the Exit Poll 2010 tremendously.

962 people participated in the Exit Poll 2010 from all over the world, namely, from the Americas, from Arabian Gulf, from all over India, Oceania and so on. This indicates that the results have come from the true cross section of the Malankara Orthodox Church members from all over the globe. IOH sincerely thanks to all herewith, who have voiced their judgments.

Most important fact is that the results of Exit Poll 2010 reflected exactly in the Episcopal election results as well, except one or two candidates changing their positions in standings of majority. Fr. Dr. George Pulikkottil stood ahead of all candidates right from the beginning and he had the maximum votes with 65%, when the Exit Poll 2010 ended. Fr. V.M. James was predicted as the seventh candidate to qualify and exactly it happened too.

Finally one more observation. One candidate’s name was proposed to the Malankara Church Managing Committee by the Screening Committee after a lot of deliberations. Reason for these extra deliberations was that this candidate did not find favor in the eyes of the Principal, Orthodox Theological Seminary and so did it happen with the Chairman of the Screening committee too. Believable sources have confirmed this to the IOH.

The candidate, whom the Principal of Orthodox Theological Seminary in his confidential report deemed as ‘not fit to become a bishop’ has reaped the maximum number of votes in the Exit Poll 2010 as well as in the Episcopal Election at the Malankara Association 2010.

We need to see this result with caution though. At times God speaks through the leaders. At times, when the leadership reflects decay and needs correction, God speaks through the people. That is why genuine leaders have always respected the saying, ‘vox populi vox dei, namely voice of the people is the voice of God’! Results of Episcopal Election 2010 simply suggest that the Malankara Church Leadership needs somehow to rediscover the meaning of this old Latin saying.

Exit poll outcome

Things changed in the Church after Constantine the Great declared freedom for the Church in the beginning of the fourth century. The feast of Saturnalia, a licentious celebration of the winter solstice dedicated to Saturn, was Christianized by the Church of Rome to attract the Roman pagans to Christianity. Saturnalia had many features: As the nights became longer and darker with the arrival of winter the display of light everywhere became an important observance of the feast. With winter comes the cessation of life, particularly the vegetation; and in order to give hope of life to a frozen world of winter the display of evergreen plants and green wreaths in general was also another feature. Such practices easily found their ways into the Christianized feast, now called the feast of the Nativity of Christ (Christmas is an Anglo-Saxon rendering of the same feast), with the emphasis that Christ, who was the ultimate light and the light of light, became the new focus of the celebration; and the Roman Christianized pagans began to celebrate the birth of Christ, the light of light in conjunction with the Saturnalia celebrations.

From Rome, which was the center of the civilized world then, the celebration moved to the East, where it was not welcomed as it had been intended by the Romans. Although the Eastern Christians did not oppose the idea of a feast of the nativity of Christ, they did not embrace the date it was observed in Rome, for the simple reason that Saturnalia had no meaning for them. They accepted the feast and placed it immediately attached to Theophany. Hence, the feast of nativity of Christ was celebrated on January 7 every year, some even celebrated it with Theophany. It was at this time all Orthodox Christians and other eastern Christians celebrated the feast of Nativity. In recent times, we see that the Orthodox minorities in western countries have moved their observance of the feast of nativity of Christ along with their western brethren on December 25. However, we see that the majority of eastern Christians still follow January 6 or 7 as their Christmas day, for example, the Russians, Ukrainians and other eastern European Orthodox Christians, Armenians, Copts and Ethiopians. Please note that those Christians, who celebrate the nativity of Christ on December 25, also celebrate the annunciation to Mary on March 25 (exactly nine months prior to the birth of Christ).

Based on historical and circumstantial evidences the majority of scholars agree that Christ was not born in the winter; Christ’s birth took place some time in the autumn or spring according to them.

Then why don’t we change the date? We do not know the exact date. The most important idea is the observance of the truth of the nativity of Christ, for which a date does not matter much. Some

During our conversation the Archbishop asked me where I was studying.

“At Loyola, a Catholic University”, I replied.

“No, don’t say that; we are the Catholic Church; that’s why they are qualifying themselves as ‘Roman Catholics’. . . . We are the Catholic Church”, Archbishop John said.

In almost all Roman Catholic official documents, such as dogmatic pronouncements and encyclicals, prior to Vatican II, the Roman Church itself regularly used “Roman Catholic” (Ecclesia Romana Catholica) to signify its name. It was after Vatican II, due to the insistence of the Uniates, the Roman Church began to use “Roman Catholic” to denote its Latin rite wing. Thus the uniates began to emphasize that they are not ‘Roman’, but Greek, or Syrian, in order to win acceptance among the Orthodox that they are THE local Church, not Roman. But in international media and religious circles the Latins and Uniates are generally called Roman Catholics, because they are all under Rome, and they profess the Roman faith.

Unfortunately, the Malankarese Church shows a very unhealthy allergy when it comes to the point of accepting that they are “Catholics”. The Byzantine Orthodox Churches, when they were being established in America as ethnic orthodox churches, called themselves the “Greek Orthodox Catholic, or Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic, or Antiochian Orthodox Catholic Church or Archdiocese”. It is a shame that the Malankarese Orthodox do not identify themselves as “Catholic” when they also profess, “We believe in the One, Holy, CATHOLIC, and Apostolic Church”. In the Service Book of the Holy Qurbana (1970) translated and published by Metropolitan Mathews Mar Athanasios, later Catholicos, the creed is translated with the word “Orthodox” in parenthesis after the word “Catholic”! I wonder if the framers of the Niceo-Constantinopolitan Symbol, were so ignorant that they missed “Orthodox” after “Catholic”! It is high time for us to teach our generation what the terms “Orthodox and Catholic” mean.

With this prefatory note let me get to the historical and theological significance of these terms.

In the beginning of the fourth century, the church was divided on theological pronouncements made by a priest-monk called Arius. Arius began to teach that the second person of the Holy Trinity, Jesus, was not consubstantial with the Father. He insisted that Jesus was begotten by the Father, but was not co-eternal with the Father. In other words, Jesus’ Godhead was inferior to the Father, and His Godhead was not complete as the Father. To make it simpler, Jesus was not completely God, but a creation of God (Mar Thoma Dionysius, Aarhus Statement 1964). It was to resolve this major heresy that the Council of Nicea (325) was convened by Emperor Constantine, and it was finally settled.

The Council empathically concluded that the second person of the Trinity, Jesus, was consubstantial with the Father in essence and existence, and every divine attributes; whatever attributes the Father possesses in His Godhead, the Son possesses equally, no less, no more, except the Fatherhood. The majority of Christianity accepted this symbol of  faith.

During this period the Eastern part of the Church called themselves “Orthodox” to distinguish themselves from the minority that followed the Arian teachings. The word “Orthodox” does not mean “true or genuine faith” as many have understood. “Orthos” in Greek means ‘true or genuine’ but “doxa” in Greek does not mean faith, it means ‘praise or glory’ or worship. According to the Creed accepted at Nicea, the adoration or praise given to the Godhead is never true or genuine if it is not also directed to the second person of the Holy Trinity as true God. The Father and Son (and the Holy Spirit) are different persons in the Trinity, but are one and the same God. It is this Triune God the people of God, redeemed by the second person of the Trinity, adore in the Church on earth, in the Eucharist and in their regular worship. If the Son was not worshipped equal to the Father, such a worship was not true or genuine. In order to emphasize that they were the true worshippers, the majority that followed Nicea called themselves “Orthodox” (worshippers of the Triune God with three distinct persons but in ONE substance of the Godhead).

In the western part of the Church, which was the Church under Rome, the term “Catholic” became more popular during this period. Of course they did not undermine the significance of the word, “Orthodox”. “Catholic” was a term more commonly used by the western and eastern fathers even before Nicea and it meant “universal applicability”. It was accepted at Nicea as one of the notes, or distin-guishing marks, of the Church, to signify that the Church was for all the creations of the universe. During this period, the western Church was comparatively smaller than the Eastern church; Christianity had not reached beyond the Alps (except Spain). Italy was the only predominantly Christian region in Europe (Greece belonged to the Eastern Church). Actually it was the churches of the East which were under several patriarchates that rendered meaning to the word “Catholic”, because of the vastness of the eastern churches within the Eastern portion of the Church. Therefore, the West accepted the term “Catholic” in order to emphasize the fact that they were part of the universal faith of the larger Church that worshipped the true Godhead of Jesus. So, the words, “Catholic” and “Orthodox” meant the same as far the faith and practice of the post-Arian period was concerned, although etymologically both terms had different significances. Parenthetically, the East also used the word “Catholic” commonly before and after Nicea to signify the true genuine Church, because one of the purposes of the Church was the universalization of Christ’s Gospel.

The Roman Church began to identify itself as “Catholic” with the emphasis that it was the Church “universally” accepted as a global denomination of Christendom, or that it was the Church that reached all corners of the universe and that it was everywhere in the world. The Roman Catholic Church also taught that it was the meaning of the word “Catholic”, mentioned as one of the notes of the Church in the Nicene Creed. The codifiers of the Creed did not dream that meaning at all. In fact, the word “Catholic” simply signifies that the Church is meant for all peoples of the earth, regardless of color, or ethnicity. The Roman Catholic Church became a global Church only after Spanish and Portuguese colonization in Asian and South American countries during the colonial period. It was the Spanish and Portuguese colonial missionaries who took the Roman faith to these countries, including our own State of Keralam.

During the Constantinian period, the Western Church did not have a practice of using the phrase “Roman Catholic” in order to designate its church, because catholicity was never the note of one particular local church, although each church was and is part of the global universal/ catholic church; and in that sense every church is catholic. However, this trend changed in the West after the Great Schism between Rome and Byzantium (10th century). Rome began to assert that it was the true claimant and heir of catholicity, and that Rome was the seat and center of the true Church, and that the Church of Rome was the true successor of the Church established by Christ on the foundation of the apostles, particularly of Peter. Thereafter, the West began to use “Roman”, in order to claim that the note of catholicity was its sole possession, which the East never accepted. The West also continued to teach that no other Church but Rome was Catholic and that if a Church was not in communion with the Roman Pope it was not Catholic. The East always believed that it was Catholic despite Rome’s claim. Actually the East taught that Rome had separated itself from the true Catholic Church, and does not, in strict sense, possess the notes of Christ’s Church!