Talk:Syrian Catholics of Malabar

Questioning the validity of the title of this article

Paḻayakūṟ (Old Party/Old Alliance)division of St.Thomas Christians of Kerala never referred by the name "Malankara Church". These references can seen only in writing of few Paḻayakūṟ authors , but not in formal usage- --John C. (talk) 05:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Johnchacks, I prefer the discussion at Talk:Malankara Church#Moving the article to continue. But for others who may follow this, I am quoting some verses from the Angamāly Padiyōla which is obviously a Pazhayakoor document.

• The document signed by all the people of the Church of Malankara (beginning with Angamāly) who were assembled in the Great Church of Angamāly, on the first of February in the year of our Lord, 1787....
• The honoured Kariātil Malpan was consecrated as Metropolitan of the Diocese of Malankara...
• We, the representatives of eighty-four churches in the diocese of Malankara...

Malankara Church is the name of Saint Thomas Christians as a whole. Not just the West Syriac Community, otherwise called Puthenkoor.Br Ibrahim john (talk) 06:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john, After the split, pazhayakoor faction never officially referred them as "Malankara Church" like Puthenkoor faction, also Pazhayakoor faction never had a primate or bishop officially addressed as "Bishop of Malankara". You are bringing some vague remarks from here and there. You should prove unified pazhayakoor faction (Syro-Malabar and Chaleden Syrian Church) officially referred as "Malankara Church" . I am fine to continue the discussion at the section Talk:Malankara Church#Moving the article - --John C. (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Yours is a funny argument. The Angamāly Padiyōla is a reliable and official church record of the Pazhayakūr signed by all the representatives of its churches. The Varthamanappusthakam is the first travelogue written in an Indian language and its author is none another than Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar, the then head of the Pazhayakūr and the administrator of the Archdiocese of Cranganore. Both evidently mentions Malankara Church. What I have quoted above is from the Angamāly Padiyōla and it is sourced.Br Ibrahim john (talk) 11:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john, People who know basics of Kerala Christianity laugh at this title!! All your arguments revolves around one or two remarks in Angamaly Padiyola and in Varthamanappusthakam (a travelogue). Who presided the function at Angamaly ? Its Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar. Who is the author of Varthamanappusthakam? Its again Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar. Yes, Thoma Kathanar was the administrator of the Archdiocese of Cranganore, but he was not even a bishop in Pazhayakoor community. Now let us check what is "Angamaly Padiyola" - It is a set of decisions taken at a meeting at Angamaly. In fact this meeting was a revolt against the church ecclesiastical authorities of that time. How can you bring the remarks in a rebel meeting as supporting evidences for your claims? Do you have any strong evidences to prove the Pazhayakoor fraction referred as "Malankara Church"? ---John C. (talk) 02:29, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

These are just your interpretations and these are undoubtedly wrong. Being a bishop or not is not a matter here. Paremmakkal Thoma Kathanar was the ecclesiastical head of the Pazhayakūr Malankara Church. And the Angamāly Padiyōla is not a fabricated document. It is a historic declaration signed by all parishes of the church. Every historical document, let it be the Padiyola or any other, clearly calls the Pazhayakūr Catholic faction as Malankara Church. There are numerous other sources too. The circulars of Louis Pazheparambil, Augustine Kandathil.. all speak of the Malankara Church. I don't know what you found laughable in all these. I think your arguments are childish. Malankara Church is not a monopoly of any particular faction. Just because you have heard its usage only in the Puthenkoor faction, doesn't mean it wasn't used by anyone else. Hope that's clear. And finally I will have to remind you. You seem to have a tendency to deny all sources which go against your arguments. But that's not going to work here in the way you expect it to work. Angamaly Padiyola and Varthamanappusthakam are reliable documents just like any Puthenkoor document.Br Ibrahim john (talk) 02:52, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

There is an obvious mistake in first bullet point in your above quoted sentences (in purple color font). There is a deviation from the actual reference text. Check with the reference text by Thomas Whitehouse. There its not written as "Church of Malankara" as you quoted, it is actually "Church people of Malankara". That means here 'Malankara' is used to refer a region (Today's Kerala region). And on the 2nd and 3rd bullet points, the mention is about "Diocese of Malankara". This again affirms that the Pazhayakoor division name is not "Malankara Church", 'Malankara' is used to refer an administrational region (diocese) within a Church (Catholic Church). Also you could not bring up any valid official circular or document which refers Pazhayakoor as "Malankara Church". (Please note, clear references are required, not some vague remarks.) So due to lack of available evidences renaming the article title.--John C. (talk) 01:54, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

References