Talk:Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120418051227/http://www.cheriapally.com:80/ to http://www.cheriapally.com
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110116071902/http://www.chandanappallyvaliapally.org:80/English/Index.html to http://www.chandanappallyvaliapally.org/English/Index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:58, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

So far the content of this article has been developed extensively without the use of referencing. This is in violation of Wikipedia's requirements for appropriate citation to ensure neutrality. If this article is written from a personal perspective then it may be challenged. There is an essential requirement for scholarly citation in order to ensure adequate coverage of the requirements of an encyclopaedia. Content must be verifiable, certainly within an article concerning religious beliefs--therein lies a duty of factual rigour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinyapple (talk • contribs) 00:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The Christology of the Church

I see the Christology followed by this church is Miaphysite/Monophysite. Oriental Orthodox is a communion of some churches which follows this Christology.thanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 00:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear Wiki Admin and Editors, a discussion is happening in Oriental Orthodoxy talk page. Also a talk is happening at Oriental Orthodox sidebar talk. lease refer there first for understanding the context - --171.48.29.171 (talk) 00:46, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Kokkarani, lets continue discussing in Oriental Orthodoxy talk page, bcoz this is a common topic for all Oriental Orthodox (OO) churches ---171.48.29.171 (talk) 00:48, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

This discussion is for this article thanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk)

Sidebar order?

Ok, now there seems to be a dispute between User:Kokkarani and an anonymous user about the order of sidebars on this article. All I can say about that is... Really? That's a worthy topic of debate? The order of sidebars? I was the one who first added the Oriental Orthodox sidebar to this article, so obviously I want it to remain here (and it is directly relevant, this being the article on one of the six main OO Churches), but let me also say that the order of sidebars is a trivial thing and we shouldn't be arguing about it. If Kokkarani feels that the Indian Christianity and St. Thomas Christians sidebars should go first, I have no problem with that. Ohff (talk) 05:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Let's also use this space to discuss any other related disputes between the same users. Kokkarani would like the infobox to list the Church as Miaphysite and anon would like it to be listed as Oriental Orthodox? No problem. We can list it as both. Is there anything else under dispute? Ohff (talk) 05:33, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate it. I have no objection in listing the Oriental Orthodox side bars in this article. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 12:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Ohff, I know that you are the one placed Oriental Orthodox side bar in this article and it was a good thing. I was searching for a mechanism to link all the Oriental Orthodox (OO) Churches. User:Kokkarani does not like the side bar because of the reasons mentioned in template's talk page, hence he wanted to move that further down. When you added this OO side bar on 5th May (pls check this [[1]]) there was no "Nasrani people(St. Thomas Christians)" side bar. User Kokkarani added this side bar to the article to push down the OO side bar to a place where readers will not easily notice. Anyway even I do not want to discuss too much on this topic. If we are not keeping the OO side bar at the top it should be the 2nd just below the Indian Christianity side bar, definitely not at the bottom. And on the issues with listing the church in Infox box has been resolved by adding classification & theology separately. Hope Kokkarani will not come back with some silly arguments. - --171.48.21.9 (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I am glad I could help, by placing the sidebar here! I know User:Kokkarani does not like it, but hopefully, after the dispute is resolved and the sidebar has been edited a bit, he will like it too. Like you said, the most important thing to me is that we have some way to link all the OO Church articles together. I am willing to compromise with User:Kokkarani so that he will also come to appreciate the importance of having a mechanism that links all the OO articles together and may even help us to do that in the future. It's more important to have a sidebar that everyone likes, than to have a sidebar that is organized in a precisely accurate way. So even though I disagree with User:Kokkarani, I want to change the sidebar so that he will like it. Ohff (talk) 00:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Also there is a wrong argument/movement going on in Wikipedia about Oriental Orthodoxy. Oriental Orthodoxy is a synonym for Oriental Orthodox which is a synonym for Miaphysite/Monophysite churches. How ever some people knowingly/unknowingly tries to define Oriental Orthodoxy is a communion of 6 Oriental orthodox churches..What a pity!!!!

Please refer this :

orthodoxwiki.org/Oriental_Orthodox

to see whether Oriental Orthodox is a communion or churches that follows Miaphysite christology. ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 00:05, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

We don't need to agree on what Oriental Orthodoxy is or isn't. We just need to agree on how to cover it on wikipedia in articles and sidebars. That's the important thing to keep in mind. Ohff (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

On another note, I just wanted to mention that I have a lot of upcoming real life commitments, so I really don't have the time to be involved in any disputes on this page. As long as the OO sidebar remains here (in third place, that's fine), I am not going to participate in any other dispute that may arise. I'm sorry. I have to focus on other things. I will only continue to work towards finding a solution to the dispute on the sidebar talk page. Ohff (talk) 01:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Thats fine Ohff. I do not think you will reach anywhere if you start taking Kokkarani's inputs even for the sidebar matter. You wont be able to convince him as he already knows the facts. Till now he couldn't produce any valid references for his arguments. Anyway I wont be troubling you. I have reported to one of the Admins. Also let me see taking help of subject matter expert Admins on this topic. ---171.48.21.9 (talk) 01:26, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I think adminstrators should intervene and solve the matter.ThanksMandrake_the_Magician (talk) 02:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

suggestion for lede

I expect an article like this to be somewhat detailed and even complicated. And hard to follow. For me, a layman, it would be useful to have a sentence in the lede explaining that the MOSC is "not to be confused with" the Malankara Jacobite Syrian Church "with which it is (not) in communion for (historical, theological, personal) reasons". --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 13:32, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what you source is, but Malankara Orthodox Church is in communion with the Jacobite Syrian Church. Both follow Oriental Orthodox theology. The dispute between them is purely administrational, starting in 1911 when the Patriarch of Antioch (primate of Syriac Orthodox Church) asked the Malankara Metropolitan (primate of Malankara Orthodox Church) to submit a Testament of Submission and the latter refused to do so. The administrational divide has continued to this day (except for the roughly 12 years of peace starting in 1958 during which time the Jacobite faction was a part of the Malankara Church), and this split remains purely administrational. Members of both Churches take part in Divine Liturgy of the other without any issues. --Swordofcherubim (talk) 05:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Given that information, shouldn't the Jacobite church at least be mentioned in the body of the article somewhere? It's only found in a footnote way at the bottom; makes the article seem at least a bit POV/biased. natemup (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

The description in Malayalam lists the Church as a terrorist organisation. Keralavasi (talk) 07:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Jacobite Syrian Christian Church which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:46, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cheriapally.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120123121510/http://www.arthatcathedral.com/ to http://arthatcathedral.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:48, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal of Malankara Church and Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church

Malankara Church needs a lot of work, and its subject seems to duplicate this one. Miniapolis 19:50, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

• Support merger. All Malankara-related articles need a lot of work, in a chronic condition, due partly to chronic sock-puppetry. Elizium23 (talk) 20:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose: Malankara Church article is supposed to be a global article encompassing early history of that church and common ground for an important number of "Malankara" churches which are all under the umbrella of the "Malankara" tradition but with their unique entities. The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church is just one part of this global Malankara Church with its own separate jurisdiction in later years. But it is just a part of the whole. Other Malankara churches include Jacobite Syrian Christian Church, Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church etc. These are also part of the historical "Malankara Church" umbrella. If Malankara Church article needs clean-up, do it as such on its own merits. There is no reason to add Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church except as a small section leading to the independent Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church article. A hatnote could be added at the top of the Malankara Church page if you will leading to all these different Malankara Churches including Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. This suggestion of yours is very similar for example for somebody suggesting merger of Latin Church (a part) to the Catholic Church article (the whole). But if we had done that, how about other Catholic Church churches like the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, like the Armenian Catholic Church etc etc. Malankara Church is (with cleaning) an all-encompassing article. Keep it that way. If you are concerned with duplications, then clean up Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church and develop it separately, if it needs development, but without merging the two. werldwayd (talk) 12:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I've been working on Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (which is a mess), and when I came across Malankara Church—which is even worse at the moment—I could detect no difference between the two; there's a fair amount of my-church-is-the-best POV-pushing and a lack of distinction between present and past, which doesn't help. I'll do what I can (without merging, unless there's consensus), but I'm just a copyeditor; this article was tagged for improvement, including a copyedit. All the best, Miniapolis 13:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I oppose the merging

Malankara Church page includes informations of all the churches which are in malankara tradition. The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church is the official Malankara Church . And all other churches ( marthoma ,jacobite syrian,syro malankara-rite Catholic church,syro malabar-catholics) split from the official body of the Malankara church ie the MOSC. Malankara Church page is for the all churches in malankara. MOSC page is for the offical Malankara Church. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.97.117.237 (talk) 09:42, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

English as an Indian language

The final sentence of the section "[h]ierarchy, distribution and doctrine" goes as follows (for the purposes of honesty, I decapitalized "[l]anguages" and piped the "Konkani" link, sorry to brag):

Like the Syriac Orthodox Church, it primarily uses the liturgy of Saint James in Malayalam, Konkani, Kannada, Hindi, English and other Indian languages.

Could anyone please tell me if it's all right to call English an Indian language in this context? While the page languages of India does have English listed, I wanted to be absolutely sure about this. (Edit: Fixed quote template, sorry about that. Also sorry for the long, awkwardly placed parenthetical before the colon in the first sentence of this section.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2020

Kindly change founded in 1912 to AD 52 and Founder Dionysius VI to Apostle Thomas Zmalluzboyz (talk) 17:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Saint Yeldho Mor Baselios.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Chengannur 2.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Orgin

1912, its not 52AD Jithin8129 (talk) 15:41, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church originated during the first-century (52AD) missions of Thomas the Apostle. The year 1912 is the establishment of the catholicate in the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church which was founded by St Thomas in AD 52. For example Ethiopian Orthodox Church is orginated in the 1st century and but patriarchate of ethiopia was established only in 1970s which doesn't mean ethiopian church is established in 1970. Similarly Syro Malabar Catholic Church become major archiepiscopal in 1980s but It is formed in 1663 when they left the Malankara Church. Also all Marthoma Church(1889) and Syro Malankara rite Catholic Church (1930) and Jacobite Syrian Christian Church (2002) also split from the the official Malankara Church ie the present day Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.230.28.22 (talk) 10:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Haaahaa foolish Jithin8129 (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Will you also say that universe had split out from the MOSC?? Br Ibrahim john (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Members

Only 4lakhs as per 2011 census, not 2.5 million Jithin8129 (talk) 15:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

????? Jithin8129 (talk) 16:51, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

??? Came onnn Jithin8129 (talk) 18:43, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The data that says about 2.5 million is the Church's self proclaimed statistics. It seems to include overlapping numbers from other denominations too.

Br Ibrahim john (talk) 17:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

More unsourced crap removed

If you're going to keep changing histories back-and-forth then you need to cite reliable secondary sources and I don't mean church websites. Elizium23 (talk) 11:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Establishment of Catholicate

Establishment of Catholicate is considered to be in 1912. How did AD 52 got such a claim??? Br Ibrahim john (talk) 14:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Demographics

The number of members of MOSC is grossly inflated. There are no more than 1.3 million MOSC believers. The 2.5 million listed is very misleading as it also takes into account the number of Jacobites. Nonetheless, an inconsistency still prevails as there are more Jacobites than Orthodox believers. This is evidenced by every single disputed church having a majority of Jacobite faithful. These faithful are kicked out for some 8 or 9 Orthodox believers. Please correct the number of believers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.185.202.11 (talk) 08:21, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

There is 1600 parish churches in Malankara . In that only 400 church there is presence of jacobite faction (majority/minority). Remaining 1200 churches have 100% Malankara Orthodox belivers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.230.28.22 (talk) 10:16, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes based on my research Mosc has got more than 10 lakh on the state and 3 lakh residing outside the state. There are more 30000 in USA, 5000 in Canada, 5000 in Australia 1300 in Newzealand. Uk 957 houses (3500 approx members), 200 reg families each in Malaysia and Singapore (2000 in total). Andaman and nicobar ( 800 families) 3200 in total.Bombay diocese the parish directory app recorded 35000 hits with 70 church. Bangalore is 4000 families diocese ( 16000 strength). Brahmavar 2800 families(10000 members) Calcutta, Ahmedbad, delhi remain unknown because more than about 1,00, 000 Mosc christians living in gulf countries in 18 large parishs( excl saudi arabia) makes things difficult. * The above data does not include Students or people who went for work abroad. Coming back to kerala you can see some stronghold position of Mosc they are in kelakom( kannur region), Mennangadi( wayanad region), thamarassery, kozhikode town ( kozhikode region), karimba mannarcad, attapady( palakkad), chungathara nilambur( malappuram), Kunnamkulam, wadakkenchery ( thrissur). Pampakuda, Airapuram(kunnakurudy cathedral), ramamangalam, peruva, piravom, pothanicad, chathamattom, kunnackal etc. Kochi( spreaded). Kottayam, pampady, puthupally, kanam, mundakayam, kanjirapally,changanassery, adoor, thiruvalla, mavelikkara, chengannur, kayamkulam, thiruvalla, kottarakara, punalur, ranni, pathanamthitta. Availabe household statistics Chengannur- 8851 families(Approx 40000 members) Nilakkal- 2953 families Largest diocese ( niranam & Thumpamon) Mavelikara unknown Adoor kadampanad unknown Kollam 63 parishes Kottarakara punalur Kottayam 76 parishes kottayam central 7 Kandanad diocese 35000 as per website onakoor sehiyon 400 families ramamangalam church 275 families mannookunnu cathedral more than 500 families pampakuda valyapally ( unknown). For angamaly kunnakurudy cathedral is the largest one with (more than 800 families & more than 4000 members) pothanicadu region 695 families. Valyanchirangara region 85 families Kodanadu perumbavoor region 120 families. Total 20000 members in Angamaly diocese. Kochi diocese also got more than 33000 members. Idukki diocese kungripetty cathedral 500 members. Nettithozhu and thekkady are also large parishes (more than 2000 families in total). Kunnamkulam diocese more than 7000 famlies 30000 members. 10000 members in thrissur diocese.Malabar 86 parishs 40000 members sulthan bathery unknown 48 parishs. ( please edit me if anyone knows further data) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.114.92.187 (talk) 14:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

WP:OR we can't accept this for the article. Elizium23 (talk) 18:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

"Orthodox Syrian Church" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Orthodox Syrian Church. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 27#Orthodox Syrian Church until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Partisan bickering is unwelcome

@Zoticus777: partisan bickering is unwelcome in this topic area. I will not hesitate to bring a WP:SPI against disruptive accounts. Especially ones that come on brand new and begin making sweeping changes and accuse others of vandalism and partisanship and being insulted. Elizium23 (talk) 04:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Partisan bickering are the unsourced edits of User:Ibrahim John, to humiliate a church. Removing such new unwarranted edits are what Wiki seniors editors are supposed to do or atleast such edits should be discussed here. Zoticus777 (talk) 05:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I am inches away from SPI'ing Ibrahim John as well, so you should both consider yourselves on thin ice. Elizium23 (talk) 05:06, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I have removed his edits and have given lengthy reasons. Open to any discussions here. Zoticus777 (talk) 05:12, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Zoticus777:, The origin from the traditionally believed evangelisation activity of St. Thomas is equally argued by every St. Thomas Christian denomination.

Moreover, the arrival of St. Thomas in India is not a well established fact. Many important historians of Kerala have publically denied the historicity of the tradition and the others are silent on the topic.

We can say that a Church existed before the Synod of Diamper but we cannot say that it is the present MOSC. MOSC is a West Syriac Rite Church, but the pre-Diamper Synod Church was following East Syriac Rite. I don't mean the dialect but the liturgy. MOSC is an Oriental orthodox Church but the pre-Diamper Church was 'Nestorian', affiliated to the Church of the East.

It is known to all that the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church had been functioning under the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch atleast since 1665, after the historic Coonan cross Oath. The Malankara Church considered itself to be a division of the above mentioned Church and honours the Patriarch of Antioch as the supreme leader of the Church as it is expressed in the 1934 constitution of the Church. The liturgy of the Church mentions the title of the Patriarch before mentioning the autocephalous Catholicos.

The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church became an Autocephalous Church, i.e, an independent autonomous Church only after the Catholicate establishment of 1912, though such a move is not accepted by the Syriac Orthodox Church. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

For the consensus sake, let us also change the founder of Syro Malabar Church to either Portuguese Missionaries or Alexio de Menesis. Zoticus777 (talk) 18:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Zoticus777:, Alexio de Menesis never held any administrative position in the Syro Malabar Church. The only action he could do was the the Synod of Diamper of 1599. But neither the Syro Malabar Church nor any of the Malankara Church derivatives currently recognise the canonical nature of the Synod. The last Syriac Metropolitan of the pre-Diamper Synod Church was Mar Abraham of Angamaly, a Catholic confirmed by the Pope. His predecessor, Mar Joseph Sulaqa is the brother of the Catholic Patriarch of Babylon, Mar Yohannan Sulaqa. The administration after the Synod was undertaken by Bishop Francis Roz, who was the first Bishop of the whole of St. Thomas' Christians after the Synod of Diamper.

Moreover during that period both the Puthenkoor and Pazhayakoor were still one Church. The division occurred much later, after the Coonan Cross Oath of 1653. Parallel hierarchy, a direct implication of schism only began in the years following 1665. You should also take into account that it was Archbishop Stephen Britto who consecrated Marthoma I as the Archdeacon. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Vattasheril Mor Dionsiyus was the democratically elected Malankara Metropolitan of united church. He and the managing committee of the church maintained the verdict of the previous Royal Court judgement. The Supreme court of India does not recognize two separate churches but two factions. The offical party continued to maintain the status quo as per the Royal court judgement. Zoticus777 (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Consensus? What consensus? And please, all of you, please make an effort to indent (:::) and thread your comments properly. They are very difficult to read and follow in the first place. Elizium23 (talk) 02:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Vattasseril Mar Dionysius is the founder of the MOSC. He was initially consecrated by Ignatius Abded Aloho II, Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch. Later he established a Church by name Orthodox Syrian by interchanging the existing name. He was excommunicated by the Patriarch of Antioch. All his predecessors were Archbishops of the Malankara Archdiocese of the Syriac Orthodox Church.

Court judgements decides the legal status, not history. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 02:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Vattasheril Mor Dionsiyus was the democratically elected leader of the united Malankara Church. In the Malankara Church, decision making authority lies with the Managing Committee, not with a Bishop. During his term Patriarch Abdul Aloho, demanded the church hand over temporal authority to Patriarch which was against the previous Royal court verdict. The demand of the Patriarch was resisted by the managing committee of the united church. Those who supported the action of the Patriarch became 'bava kakshi' (Patriarch Faction) and the ones who resisted the action of the Patriarch became 'methran kakshi' or the party of the Malankara Metropolitan.

Even the words still used by the courts and both the groups is 'kakshi' or 'faction'. The source you have provided do not explicitly state Mor Dionsiyus is the founder of any Church. Zoticus777 (talk) 03:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Vattasseril Mar Dionysius wasn't the first democratically elected leader. Just like his predecessors, he was consecrated by the Patriarch of Antioch.. Since the Mullunthuruthy Synod, the Patriarch of Antioch was held as the head of the Malankara Syriac Orthodox Church. By the acts of the Synod, the Malankara Syriac Orthodox Church was made an Archdiocese answerable to the Patriarch of Antioch. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 03:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

None of the sources you cited here explicitly states Mar Dionsiyus forming a new Church.

www.syriacchristianity.info is a website maintained by SOC with their version of history which is far from neutral.

Original minutes of the Mulanthuruthy Synod is long lost and both churches do have the orginal minutes under their custody. MOSC version on the Synod of Mulanthuruthy, is different from the source you have provided. Since the originals are lost the authenticity of any articles about the synod is in question.

From Marthoma 1 to Marthoma 12, (1653 - 1856) none of the leaders of the Malankara Church was consecrated by the Jacobite Patriarch. None of these leaders were selected or elected with the consent or knowledge of the Patriarch. The exception being, Marthoma 1 whose consecration was regularised by Abdul Jaleel of SoC at the request of the Malankara Church. It was due to the activities of the reformed party ( present Marthoma Church) that the Jacobite Patriarch could intervene in the affairs of the Malankara Church and exploit the situation to their advantage. Mathews Mar Athanasius, leader of the reformed party was the first Indian to be consecrated by a Jacobite Patriarch ( 1850s).

Royal Court verdict, explicitly found the Jacobite Patriarch having no temporal authority over the Malankara Church. This verdict was understood and followed in all its essence by the Malankara Church.

To override the Royal Court Verdict, Patriarch Abded Aloho insisted all churches in Malankara give registered deeds in writing granting him temporal authority. This demand was resisted and rejected by the managing committee of the Malankara Church, causing a split.

The one united church split into two 'factions' and the courts in India see the fued as an Internal factional fued.

For the courts it is not a secular legal issue, the courts are passing verdict based on the canons of the church and after studying the history of the Malankara Church. Read the 1995 Supreme Court verdict and the first part numbering numerous pages is the history of the Malankara Church.

Zoticus777 (talk) 16:30, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The original minutes may or may not be present, but there are numerous secondary resources which relate to the Synod. From Marthoma I to Baselios Augen I, almost all Malankara Metropolitans were consecrated either directly or indirectly by the Syriac Orthodox Church. Even the 1934 constitution doesn't have an original. Secular historians of Kerala have attested the fact the Synod of Mullunthuruthy subjugated the Puthenkoor faction under the SOC Patriarchate of Antioch. I have cited secular sources too. If you are so convinced about the merit of Court judgements, then just accept it as such: the court has as also decreed that the Synod of Diamper was an action of loyalty towards the See of Antioch and it was aimed to safeguard the dominance of the SOC Patriarch. This clearly shows that the Court hasn't studied the history well. Again I say, court judgements are not binding on history. Courts can decide on law and its implementation, and can produce verdicts over disputes. However that doesn't change the history. Everybody knows why all the Church property was allotted entirely to the MOSC. It's because, during a brief period of reunification between 1950s and 1970s, the SOC had accepted the 1934 constitution enacted by the MOSC, for the sake of unity. But now since the excommunication of Baselios Augen I, the SOC has ceased to access the 1934 constitution, which was originally enacted unilaterally by the MOSC. The MOSC took advantage of this and they amended the constitution multiple times inorder to substantiate their claims.Br Ibrahim john (talk) 01:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

References

Adding Dubious References in Infobox

Br Ibrahim john Please add References based on the WP:REF.J.Stalin S ^Talk 14:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Jstalins Your edits seem to be vandalism.These references have been copied from Wikepedia itself. You can check related article True Orthodox Metropolis of Germany and Europe#History. The reference from Hindu newspaper does show content. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 16:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The references added by User: Br Ibrahim John, explicitly do not back his edits. Bishop Gurgan an ethnic Syrian, was never a member of the Malankara Orthodox Church, he belonged to the Syriac Orthodox Church. Gurgan, approached two senior bishops of MOSC and was thereby consecrated as Bishop, without the knowledge of the Catholicos and Synod of MoSC. Synod had to later agree to the consecration done by the Senior Bishops, however decided not to maintain any communication with the new Bishop and his community. Gurgan and his community seperated from SoC and MoSC has no ethnic Syrian members. Zoticus777 (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The membership of diaspora and ethnic bias does not matter. The Church was taken into Synodal Communion. The bishops were consecrated by the bishops of the MOSC and was regularised by the MOSC Synod. Later MOSC excommunicated the Church. This is clearly a separation. There is an article in Wikepedia about the same. If you have a problem just go in and check. You cannot create inconsistencies in Wikepedia. One history in an article and a completely different one in another cannot be tolerated. This content was already in the article before I have started editing this article. I have seen many sock-puppets trying to delete this but I have restored it all the while. And I will continue to do so. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 01:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john Please add sources that states separation clearly. This True Orthodox Metropolis of Germany and Europe#History article was tagged with multiple issues and do not copy paste without understanding WP:OR. J.Stalin S ^Talk 05:33, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Jstalins Even this article has been tagged with multiple issues Br Ibrahim john (talk) 05:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john Please understand what the tags are for. Please use the Teahouse if you are new to editing on Wikipedia.J.Stalin S ^Talk 05:45, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

You cannot delete the sourced contents in the way you like it to be seen. Hiding facts does not make truth untrue. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 05:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

There is no source which validates the German church coming into communion with MoSC. The ethnic syrian Bishop sought assistance and he was assisted. Even if both the Churches were in Communion and later stopped being in communion, it is not 'separation'.Marthoma Church is in communion with Anglican Church, and if they decide to end the communion, it does not mean one church separates from another. None of the sources you provide validates your edits. The syrian Bishop and his syrian followers seperated from the Syriac Orthodox Church, and they were assisted by two bishops from MOSC without the consent of MOSC synod.

The other wikipedia page is certainly not fact checked and most edits come from unregistered users.

Zoticus777 (talk) 06:39, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

References

Inflating the number of members.

The actual membership of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church is just nearly 500,000. As per Census records, 0.49 million in the native state of Kerala The worldwide numbers logically does not exceed 0.5 million. The sum total of membership of all Malankara Church denominations does not cross even 2 million. Even though things are like this, the article claims that the MOSC has 2.5 million members. This is absurd and funny. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 13:26, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Johnchacks, the citations that are linked as sources for the membership claim of 2.5 million in MOSC are just overviews and news reports. None of them contain statistical data or researched content. I would have certainly agreed with you if you had provided statistical records gor your claim. But you did not. these are not statistical records but mere news reports or overviews without researched information and thus can only be seen as reports of inflated claims. On the other hand the sources that I have put for Syro-Malabar Church membership is well documented statistical record. As far as I know, the MOSC does not have non-Keralites as its members. On the other hand, the Syro Malabar Church has mission dioceses and non-Keralite members. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 19:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john I checked the source you kept in the article Syro-Malabar Church, its original source is "Annuario_Pontificio" - that is nothing but annual directory of Catholic Church, not an independent/secular source. The survey was not done by Govt or any other independent agencies. The numbers listed in that article/table does not carry any special value in a general forum. That is equivalent to the numbers put it in other churches websites!! I know how many non-Keralites are there in Syro-Malabar dioceses outside Kerala :) In fact many Syro-Malabar members are part of Latin dioceses outside Kerala. Even bishops, priests and nuns originally from Syro-Malabar families in Kerala are part of Latin dioceses outside Kerala (example: Franco Mulakkal). But in case of MOSC, at least there is a dioceses "Brahmawar dioceses" where majority of the members are Konkani. If you consider the Keralites staying outside the state, that is same with other churches too. We can not have special considerations for one/some churches. Its called double standard. Either we need to accept the numbers published in these references or need to go with Kerala govt's 2011 census. Thats all - John C. (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

JohnchacksDon't be so idiotic. How can a National government take the survey of a world wide organization like the Catholic Church??? The sources that your are coming up with does not contain any statistical data. It does not even contain any research analysis. The sources that I have provided are external, that is, not from Syro Malabar Church. Annuario Ponificio is not a Syro Malabar source. Now about your ignorance. Bishop Franco Mullackal is not a Syro Malabar. He is a Latin Church bishop. I am not saying about people like Father Shlomo or bishops like Alexios Eusebios of MOSC who were living as immigrants abroad and in states of India. I am talking about those non-Keralites, who became members of Syro Malabar Church due to religious convertion. Hope it's clear atleast now. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 03:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Johnchacks, if you have statistical record of any kind supporting your claim that the MOSC has atleast nearly 2.5 million members, that claim can be present. But the argument of 2.5 million in this article is clearly dumb as it does not cite any sources which are statistical. Atleast bring up your MOSC church records. And do not play the victim card always when you face questions. When you don't have accurate references do not try to compare and over-simplify without common sense. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 03:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john, I didnt say its a Syro Malabar source. Its from "Annuario Pontificio". Its not an independent source. The data given there is statistics given by archdioceses and dioceses. You read what I said, Franco Mulakkal is a Latin bishop, but he is from a Syro-Malabar family in Thrissur. Why I took this example is to say there are Bishops, priests and nuns from Syro-Malabar families are moved to Latin diocese outside Kerala. Okay, if you talk about "non-Keralites, who became members of Syro Malabar Church due to religious conversion" - Do you have any statistics on that?. -John C. (talk) 04:10, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Johnchacks, Why are you dragging Franco Mullackal into this thread?? Is it because he has been alleged of rape??? Is this what you mean about discussions!! Then see Alexios Eusebios , Father Shlomo etc. I have already told you that I am speaking about non-Keralite members. So do not act as a fool.
Statistics are provided from Annuario Ponificio. Annuario Ponificio may be or may not be independent but anyway it is not under Syro Malabar Church. In the same standard, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/member-churches/malankara-orthodox-syrian-church is also not an independent source. None of the sources for the highly (may be five times or more) inflated membership of the MOSC are statistical records or researched content. Therefore come up with atleast your Church record in support of this inflation. If your Church does not have any statistics for your inflation of membership, then just piss off. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 04:17, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Br Ibrahim john I can not talk you the way you talk to other users in a derogatory manner. If any independent source is there that is acceptable. Others are claims from the church - it is immaterial that is from "Syro-Malabar" or "Holy See of Catholic Church". - John C. (talk) 04:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Johnchacks, Don't act dumb. Annuario Pontificio is neither a Syro Malabar Church source nor is under the direction of the Church. The source explicitly contain statistical records and is a reliable source. If you have any statistical records that in any way support your massively inflated claim of 2.5 million members in the MOSC, then add it and legitimise your claim. Br Ibrahim john (talk) 04:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

References