An Open Letter to the Synod members of the Syro-Malabar Church
Sub: Thirty-three questions to the 33rd Synod of the Syro-Malabar Church .
Respected Major Archbishop, Archbishops, and bishops,
As the Syro-Malabar prelates from across the globe gather for its 33rd Synod, I would like to pose 33 questions for introspection by the discerning minds of the participants.
1. Is it not a fact that the online Synod decision of August 2021, fixing a deadline for implementing 50:50 Mass, led to an ‘upheaval’ in the Church turning prelates against prelates, priests against priests, and lay people against lay people? Didn’t it create bad blood among the Church members in Ernakulam-Angamaly Archdiocese and all the 35 dioceses?
2. Isn’t the claim that uniformity has been achieved in celebrating the liturgy in 34 of the 35 dioceses a lie?
3. Is it not a fact that there are parishes in various dioceses, other than in Ernakulam-Angamaly Archdiocese, where people-facing Mass is offered? (Recently, I attended Holy Mass in a remote Syro-Malabar parish in a diocese in North India where people-facing Mass was offered with great devotion. In another parish, in another diocese in North India, the Mass started with ‘In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ which differs from the practice in several parishes. Even the Creed of the Apostles is recited differently in different dioceses.) If so, is not your claim of uniformity nothing but a big lie?
4. There are umpteen other differences in many parishes and dioceses nailing the lie of your claim on uniformity. If so, is not your assertion that Ernakulam-Angamaly Archdiocese is the only violator of 50:50 Mass a lie?
5. Isn’t your claim that the decision on 50:50 Mass was unanimously taken in the Synod yet another utter lie? Is it not a fact that there were a few dissenting notes in the beginning itself and the number of dissenters has increased over time?
6. Did the Synod approve the Taksa by voting as prescribed in Section 657/1 of the Canon Law?
7. Do you deny the accusation that changes (whatever they may be) have been incorporated in the Liturgical Text, during a Synod meeting, after the Pope approved it? Did the final liturgical text, before it was sent to the Pope, pass through the hands of the Central Liturgical Committee?
8. If changes have been incorporated in the Taksa, without the knowledge of the Pope after his approval, how is it valid until and unless it is again sent to the Pope for his approval?
9. If rubrics can be incorporated in the Taksa by the Synod without the approval of the Pope, why not the ‘rubric of people-facing’ be incorporated in it by the Synod as an exemption for certain dioceses as was being followed for decades? Why is the Synod adamant about a particular rubric while blink at other rubrics? Why do you invoke the name of the Pope for implementing a rubric that the Synod incorporated in the Taksa without his approval?
10. Aren’t there factual errors in the Pope’s letter on the liturgy issue?
11. Is it not a fact that those errors got into his letter because he was misinformed about the issue? For example, the Pope’s letter speaks about discussions and deliberations on the uniform mode of Mass in every Synod meeting in the last two decades or more. Did discussions on the issue take place in every Synod in the past? If such discussions took place in the Synod, why don’t they get reflected in the Synodal News?
12. If the Syro-Malabar Church claims its ancestry to St. Thomas, what makes it hold on to the tail of the Chaldean Church that came to Kerala in the fourth or fifth century, and not to the original Church as existed in the first century?
13. Is it not a fact that some of the Chaldean Churches follow people-facing Mass?
14. Is there any other Rite in the Catholic world which follows 50:50 Mass? If not, what is the basis of this ‘unique’ and ‘compromised’ model of Mass?
15. The ‘people-facing Holy Mass’ came into existence in more than 99 per cent of the Catholic world after the culmination of the Second Vatican Council. Had those Churches, including the Latin Church, fixed an ‘enforceable date’ for the implementation of people-facing Mass?
16. If ‘people-facing Holy Mass’ came into existence across the world without fixing any date for its implementation, what forced the Syro-Malabar Synod to fix a timetable for implementing the 50:50 Mass?
17. Is it not ridiculous to fix a ‘date of expiry’ for the validity/licitness of Holy Mass and go on extending the ‘expiry date’ as per the whims and fancies of the Synod? Is Eucharistic celebration a commodity whose validity date is decided by Synod?
18. Is it not a fact that the July 3, 2021 letter of the Pope was portrayed as an order, papal bull or decree from him by some of the Synod members to mislead the priests and the laity?
19. Is it not a fact that the Pope’s appeal was in the form of a “Letter to the bishops, priests, religious and the laity?”
20. If it is a papal bull or decree, as claimed by some of the Synod members, why did he use words like ‘I appeal’ and ‘I urge’ in it? Hence, is it not clear that it was only an appeal by the Pope to the prelates, priests, religious, and laity on the need for a uniform mode of liturgy?
21. If the letter was not addressed to the Synod, what prompted the bishops to take up the issue to fix a date for the implementation of the 50:50 Mass?
22. Considering the above chronology of events, is it not logical and reasonable to presume that there was more to the decision than meets the eye?
23. The Pope used the word ‘unity’ thrice while the word ‘uniformity’ was used only twice in his letter. Doesn’t it mean that he keeps the Christian value of ‘unity’ close to his heart more than the adjective ‘uniformity’?
24. Is it not a fact that the Nuncio, in one of his addresses to the bishops, made it clear that the 50:50 Mass should be implemented without affecting the unity in the Church? Doesn’t his exhortation mean that the 50:50 Mass should not be imposed at the cost of unity?
25. Doesn’t it mean that the Synod decision went against the spirit of the Pope’s exhortation?
26. Aren’t the bishops going overboard in using the name of the Pope repeatedly regarding the liturgy issue while showing disregard to his other exhortations like washing the feet of women and prisoners during Maundy Thursday, limiting the length of Sunday homily to 8 minutes, need to take action against those indulging in corruption in the Church, focus on improving harmony among different religious and other communities, etc.
27. If the people-facing Holy Mass is celebrated in over 300 parishes in the Archdiocese, what is the logic of banning the same in the Basilica while permitting other sacraments there?
28. Won’t the affidavits of the Major Archbishop and Bishop Bosco Puthur on the liturgy issue submitted to a court harm the Church in the long run as courts could usurp the areas of worship and decide on such issues in the future? (It is pertinent to point out that the Supreme Court itself had raised doubts about the power of the judiciary to intervene and adjudicate the questions of religion, faith, and beliefs.)
29. The Major Archbishop has set up a tribunal to take up the cases against priests accused of disobedience and delict in the Archdiocese. Have any of the Major Archbishops of the Syro Malabar Church in the recent past set up such tribunals when Church leaders were accused of serious crimes like sexual abuse, corruption, financial irregularity, etc?
30. Is it not an irony that while Jesus was surrounded by his unarmed disciples and ordinary mortals when He moved around, His supposed successors are surrounded by Kerala Police personnel both when they move around or stay put in their ‘houses’?
31. Are you aware of the following quote from the Pope: “Dialogue is born from an attitude of respect for the other person, from a conviction that the other person has something good to say….. In order to dialogue, it is necessary to open the doors of the house, and offer human warmth.”
32. Aren’t the decisions taken by the Syro-Malabar Synod, the Bishop of the Archdiocese, and its Curia in contrast to the concept of ‘Synodality’ persistently propagated by the Pope?
33. In the end, is the decision taken by the Synod on the mode of celebrating Holy Mass a gain or loss for the Church in spiritual terms or in nourishing the spirituality of its members?
As the Synod members embark on a retreat invoking the blessings of the Father, the Son (whom some of you have removed from the Creed of the Apostles and the main Altar in many parishes), and the Holy Spirit for the success of their meeting, may the answers to the above questions lead you to see light at the end of the tunnel.
Yours sincerely,
Marydasan John
Former Senior Assistant Editor,
The Hindu, Delhi. Jn
January 06, 2025.