P.T. Kuriakose

Recent unfortunate happenings in the Syro–Malabar Church, especially those related to the Synod’s decisions about the Holy Mass and the unruly violence and the use of viperous language by some sections of the laity, are sure to make the faithful wonder where the Syro- Malabar Church is going. Unfortunately, the issues today have been blown up to become more than the posturing of the priest during the Holy Mass but instead have become a conflict between the Synod’s authority on the one hand and obedience by priests and laity on the other. These were avoidable controversies, had there been greater exercise of prudence and patience on the part of all involved and a better appreciation of the implications of Vatican II for the Syro- Malabar Church.
Among the several historic gifts of Vatican II, there are two which are pertinent to the present situation of the Syro- Malabar Church. These are (a) the description of the Church as PEOPLE OF GOD and (b) the concept of PARTICIPATORY CHURCH. These two gifts are the most arterial sources for determining what should be the primary mission of the universal Church and of the Syro-Malabar Church in Kerala.
Declaring that the Church is the People of God is, in effect, is saying that the Church is not only the Pope, bishops and priests but the entire membership of the Church. Of course, it is absolutely clear that the Church is not a liberal democracy and there are certain matters which are entirely within the purview of the Magisterium. The question can then be asked how far the Syro -Malabar Church has tried to conform to the Vatican II teaching about People of God and a participatory Church while taking important decisions on non doctrinal matters.
Now, let me begin with the issue of the Holy Mass and how it fits into Vatican II teachings. As far as I can decipher, the Holy Mass can be said to have two parts. The first one is what I term as the Doctrinal part which includes the main Eucharistic prayers during the Mass and secondly the rest of the Mass. We all know that the Mass is a COLLECTIVE offering by the priest and the faithful but with special responsibilities for the priest in such areas as Eucharistic prayers which form part of the Eucharistic prayers in the Mass. That is a prerogative bestowed upon priests by virtue of their ordination as priests. As for the rest of the Mass, the people, as joint celebrants, have a duty and responsibility to be fully involved or at least be consulted, especially since the people are also co-celebrants in the Mass.
I do not know whether the Synod did undertake any such genuine consultation. The fact that there were widespread disagreement with the Synod’s decision seems to suggest a slightly different scenario. If, and I repeat if, the consultation did not take place in the proper manner, then, with all my due respect to the Synod, I will have to say that there are certain infirmities in the Synod’s decision about the way the Holy Mass is to be offered which may need a revisit to the issue by the Synod without the loss of credibility to anyone. A revisit does not imply a questioning of the final authority of the Synod which should be accepted by all.
From what I have stated above, it will be clear that the concept of a participatory Church also seems to have been given a go bye by the Synod while taking decisions about the manner in which the Holy Mass is to be celebrated. In other words, the faithful are being deprived of a chance to fulfil their responsibility to be joint celebrants of the Mass.
The Synod can take proper decisions if only it has before it all the needed information. The availability of complete authentic and dependable studies about the mission of the Church in Kerala would have been helpful to finding suitable solutions to these vexatious issues. Seeking correct information is NOT for questioning the authority of bishops but for ensuring objectivity of the information on the basis of which the bishops take their decisions. All the information gathering and presentation have to be done keeping in view the teachings of the Popes and of Vatican II. The mission itself is a universal one, namely EVANGELISATION of the world, a mission shared by the Syro-Malabar Church as well.

“They all are eminent persons but regrettably many are unwilling or unable to appreciate the huge transformation that is taking place in the Church universal and in the Syo-Malabar Church in particular.”

Jesus himself underscored the centrality of evangelisation as the mission of the Church. That is why when he sent out his disciples to spread his good news, he asked them to tell the people that to be authentic followers of Christ, they had to become true witnesses, as individuals, groups or institutions, to the love, mercy, humility and readiness to make sacrifices for the safety and wellbeing of others. It is for the Syro Malabar Church to determine whether its present activities are in conformity with its witnessing responsibility.
I am convinced that a more pertinent issue is indeed the vision of the Syro-Malabar Church about its own future tasks in Kerala. In my view, over the past few years the Syro–Malabar Church has developed a partly blurred vision of its mission and its responsibility to the people of Kerala and the rest of India. I place this responsibility for this deviation on the entire Syro-Malabar community of faithful, especially its leadership, for it is the leadership which has to lead the Church to the attainment of the mission of the church as mandated by its Founder. Regrettably many of its leaders are focussed on institution building which they consider as the fulfilment of their role as evangelisers forgetting the concept of People of God.
Fulfilment of that mission to evangelise requires the full participation of the People God. Unfortunately, this has not happened, even during the post Vatican II Kerala Church as much as needed. Large sections of the laity, especially the educated laity, seem to be indifferent to the calls for laity participation. Recent happenings have only strengthened this growing alienation. If this be the case, how can the Syro-Malabar Church become fully effective as an instrument of evangelisation? Substantial sections of the laity seem to believe that the Church is more interested in building institutions rather than evangelisation. Therefore, the moot question is why this growing alienation is taking place. I do not think that the Syro-Malabar Church has seriously looked for or found an answer.
If the Church in Kerala is to engage in an introspection about what it is doing today, the first thing to do is to take a closer look at itself. In today’s context it will involve examining its ability to put into effect, the teaching of Jesus and as elaborated by Vatican II. Maybe it is time for the Church to evaluate its present rules and practices in order to reassure itself of the correctness or otherwise of what it is doing in Kerala and outside in the context of its basic mission of authentic evangelisation. The tricky question now is whether the Church in Kerala has moved away, knowingly or unknowingly, from its fundamental aspirations in its search for greater acceptance, wider presence in the country and abroad, greater role in the Holy See, access to wealth and power and far too wide an interpretation of its original mission to evangelise our country.
I am not suggesting, even remotely, that our bishops do not try to keep abreast of new ideas and events… They all are eminent persons but regrettably many are unwilling or unable to appreciate the huge transformation that is taking place in the Church universal and in the Syo-Malabar Church in particular.
It is these considerations that have prompted me to suggest that the leadership of the entire Church, including bishops, priests, the Religious, the laity and experts undertake an in-depth review of (a) its own understanding of its mission in Kerala in the context of present day realities, particularly in the Catholic community itself and (b) its legislative, administrative and pastoral structures, procedures and actual practices.
Today the issue is not only about the authority of the Synod but is also about the objectivity of the information on the basis of which the Synod has to take its decisions… The issues have become quite complex but still can be sorted out if all concerned sit together and escape from their self-imposed postures and work out a solution that will bring back peace in the Syro-Malabar Church.