Archbishops Cyril Vasil has given an interview in Slovak on his appointment as the Papal Delegate on Unified Holy Qurbana in the Ernakulam-Angamaly Archeparchy. It is apparently an exposition of his post as Papal Delegate. He says that his role as Papal Delegate gives “me moral authority and does not authorize me to perform administrative acts within the Syro-Malabar Church.” He further says: “These remain the competence of local Church officials: the Apostolic Administrator, the Major Archbishop, and finally the Synod of Bishops of the Syro-Malabar Church.” Thereby he gives the hint that the authority of all his administrative dealings rests not on himself but on somebody else.
He explains: “My role, however, was to clearly present within the forum of this Archdiocese that the ongoing crisis is not merely a trivial liturgical dispute at the level of one diocese, but a matter concerning the entire Church, as liturgical unity expresses the internal unity of individual sui iuris Churches, and vice versa – the unity of a sui iuris Church is expressed through liturgical unity.” This statement clearly tells something very serious. Not “merely a trivial liturgical dispute at the level of one diocese” – whose interpretation is this? How come all of a sudden it becomes a question of schism. Has the synod interpreted it this way? Everywhere in the Syro-Malabar Church there is only one Eucharistic text which the Synod has passed and the Pope has approved. All are following this text only. In a recent interview with Vatican News, the present Major Archbishop says, “There is a [liturgical] controversy, but that controversy, according to me, is a little bit exaggerated by the media, especially social media. The liturgy is celebrated from the same text. [There has been] absolutely no change in the text. …This is a temporary controversy which can be settled by amicable discussions and friendly approaches and things like that.” The difference was simply about a ritual of facing the people or facing the altar. Was this a matter of schism? Who is the author of such an interpretation?

“I wish to help you, not supersede you, because the nature of your Church sui iuris empowers you not only to examine carefully the situations and challenges that you face, but also to take appropriate steps to address them, with responsibility and evangelical courage, remaining faithful to the guidance of the Major Archbishop and the Synod” says Pope Francis

What is the legality of the Mass Facing the People on all days other than Sundays and days of obligation? The Papal Delegate says, “This does not legitimise other celebrations on other days.” Who has the right to legitimise it? The Permanent Synod has deputed an archbishop and other people of the curia of the Major Archbishop to discuss the issue and find a solution to the deadlock initiated by two Catholic advocates. There was a document signed by both the parties where it was agreed that the Mass on weekdays “can be continued.” It is an expression that legitimised the Mass. How come the Papal Delegate did not know of it? He never mentions the message of Pope Francis on May 13 to the Syro-Malabar Church on the issue at stake. In this message Pope Francis clearly said: “I wish to help you, not supersede you, because the nature of your Church sui iuris empowers you not only to examine carefully the situations and challenges that you face, but also to take appropriate steps to address them, with responsibility and evangelical courage, remaining faithful to the guidance of the Major Archbishop and the Synod.” The Pope says that he does not want to supersede the sui iuris Church; does he say someone else can? Doesn’t the Major Archbishop have the authority to make a decision on the issue in consultation with the Synod? Why were they asked to excommunicate the priests who did not comply? The circular was published even before the synod was convened. The synod has the full right to decide on the liturgy.