What is the liturgy?
The term "liturgy"
1. Etymology and evolution of the meaning of "Liturgy"
The word "Liturgy" from the Greek leitourgía, letourgía, litourgía, now used almost exclusively to describe the Christian worship, is not born in a religious nor in world of AT. It rises instead in ancient Greece, as a word from the classical Greek language. It has its own story originally linked to its etymology.
"Liturgy" is a word made up of two root: leit (laós = people), which means "the public", "belonging to the people", and: érgon (ergázomai = act, act) that is, "action", "work" .
------------------
The word "Liturgy, from antiquity to the present, has suffered a significant evolution of meaning, that deserves our interest.
A) In classical Greece, namely, around the sixth century before Christ, the word "Liturgy" or a designated work done for the people, a public. Therefore, the verb leitourgía was used at that time with a sense of "public support tasks" in the Greek city.
Trattatasi therefore public services made by certain wealthy people who felt obliged to this from their social and economic position. We distinguish two types of "Liturgy" those "cyclical", composed almost always from games and parties, and those "extraordinary", which made it necessary in cases of public emergency: to provide a defensive military department or the a crew of the ship.
Aristotle (Policy 5.8) notes that "liturgies cyclical", while showing the power of the donor, were the cause of unnecessary loss of wealth for many families.
B) In Hellenistic III centuries BC, the term passes to indicate a mandatory work created by a community or certain categories of people, both as a penalty or any disobedience against the authority of the state, both as workers in exchange for special rights or honors received by the state.
In this era, in addition to this effect, the term "liturgy" also receives a large extent service generally, meaning a mandatory or a servant to his master, or for a friend. Thus the term "liturgy" loses its value "public", ie, service created for the community, which in its etymology.
In the same period the Hellenistic period begins to appear more and more sense religioso-cultuale, as a service to the gods, made by people that intended. That use is noticed especially in so-called "mysteries" of religions. And, with the loss of all references to the "public", this new sense of "liturgy" grow to the point that, after or switched to indicate only "a service provided to worship gods. Exactly in this technical sense find the word "Liturgy" is nell'AT (Greek translation of LXX) or, in some degree, in the nascent Christianity.
C) In Sacred Scripture, in the Greek translation of LXX (translation performed approximately 250-150 before Christ), the term "liturgy" appears in its various forms written about 170 times. And each time it appears, it means always worship supplied Jahve by priests and Levites in the Temple (tabernacle). Even when the lyrics refer to the cult supplied Jahve by the people, the word used is never leitourgía, but only: doulía, latría (= worship, honor). This clearly says that the translators of LXX have made a conscious choice, giving the word "Liturgy" technically precise sense of worship Journal intended to Jahve and realized by a particular category of persons appointed to this: the priests and Levites.
D) In the New Testament, the word "Liturgy" only appears 15 times in various ways: 1) as a term borrowed from the common language: Rom 13.6; 15.27; Phil 2,25.30; 2 Cor 9.12; Hb1, 7.14; 2) in the rituale-sacerdotale of AT: Luke 1.23; Hb 8,2.6; 9.21; 10.11; 3) in the sense of spiritual worship: Rm 15.16; Phil 2.17; 4 ), and only once in the sense of ritual worship of Christians: At 13.2: "While they were celebrating the cult of the Lord (liturgy) and fasting, the Holy Spirit said," a reservation for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to The reason abandonment of the term in NT seems due to the fact that "liturgy" recalls in a clear and direct the sacrifices made in the temple, which were harshly criticized by the prophets of Israel, not to be true expression of love and gratitude to God by the people for the benefits received. In these sacrifices, in general, did not appear hearts, and this hypocritical worship God not ever accept (cf. Ps 39.7-9; 49,14.23; 50.18-19, 68.31-32; 140.2 ; Is 1,10-20; Jr. 7,3-11; Os 6.6; 8,11-13; Am 5,21-25).
E) In the primitive Christianity word "Liturgy" is slow to appear. The early Christians, using the "cultural spiritualism", ie, the kind of worship in spirit and in truth, no longer tied to the priesthood or temple, the temple in Jerusalem, is to Garizim (cf. Jo 4,19-26), do not feel the need to use the word "liturgy." This, indeed, was served to identify explicitly nell'AT a cult official made the second rules, rich in appearance, but empty of spirit. Therefore, as we mentioned, was sentenced by the prophets. But, in the Apostolic Church, "Liturgy" is beginning to lose its negative aspect and distinguishes the rite of Christian worship, as is observed in some documents: Didache 15.1 and 1 ° Clemente Romano Letter to the Corinthians ...
F) Nell'Oriente Greek, the word "Liturgy" has always been used to describe the Christian religion in general. It shows, first of all, the Eucharist according to a particular rite. Es. "Liturgy of the 12 Apostles," "St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil", "San Marco", "St. James' etc..
G) Nell'Occidente Latin, that is, among us, the word "Liturgy" will be ignored for many centuries. In its place are used other terms, such as: Officia divine sancta, celebratio, ministeria sacred sacred ritus, ritus ecclesiastical agenda divine agenda opus, etc. sacramentum. Only in the sixteenth century, thanks to the Renaissance contacts with the ancient Greek sources, the West appears the word "Liturgy" in the sense of rituals and forms of worship Mass. But ecclesiastical official language in the Latin term appears only in the first half of the nineteenth century with Gregory XVI (1842) and Pius IX (1864), becoming usual starting from Pius X (Among the concerns, 1903), until the Second Vatican Council.
2. Current Concepts of liturgy
At the Liturgical Movement of the first part of the twentieth century, the word "Liturgy" was frequently used to describe the celebration of Christian worship. Indeed, the movement is called "liturgical", in reference to concern that central determine its development: the promotion of liturgical life in the Church. And the Second Vatican Council, as a legitimate child and directed, started by Liturgical Movement, consecrate the word "Liturgy" in its various documents, especially in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium.
SC defines "liturgy" as:
1) "banner (Standard, teaches or symbol) raised in the face of nations, under which the children of God can gather, as long as there is one flock and one shepherd" (SC 2);
2) "exercise of the priestly function of Jesus Christ. Sanctification is signified by means of sensitive and implemented in a way that each of them; full public worship is performed by the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, namely the head and its members "(SC 7);
3) "the summit toward which the action of the Church and at the same time the source from which all her energy" (SC 10).
But, in a simple, direct and current can say that "Liturgy" is "the celebration, using symbols and rituals of the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ."
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Ahathulla Bava
Ahathulla Bava is one of the Patriarch belonging to Mother Church (Antioch).
But nowadays the Roman Catholic historians ('His Storians') proved that His Grace was from Antioch, but he was a Roman Catholic bishop.
This argument is published only by some writers. [India constitution gives to the freedom of writing. So anyone can write their own opinion.]
Some Modern Roman Catholic writers’ argument is Ahathulla is a Catholic Bishop. They said that
'' Ahathulla , belonging to the Antioch, was born in Aleppo in Syria around 1590. He became a monk of the Order of St. Antony and later was appointed as the archbishop of Damascus. Due to the work of the Latin missionaries in Aleppo, Ahathulla became a Catholic. Finally he reached Cairo in Egypt. Then he reached India (Cfr. Pallath, Paul THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN INDIA, Marthoma Yogam Publications, Rome, 2003, pp-94, Cfr.Fr.Bernad Thoma, Mathoma Christians, Vol.2, pp71-72)
Fr. Bernad Thoma says with Roman Document. Page 68 ...But this document is unbelievable, because It’s later made by Roman Catholic Historians.
Some Protestant and Nestorian Writers’ View is that Ahathulla is a Nestorian Bishop.
Nowadays Indian Orthodox Church 'His Storians' argument is Ahathulla was a Bishop of Syrian Orthodox Church, But the Patriarch excommunicated from the Church. Then he went to Alexandria Patriarch. Alexandrian Papa sent him to India. ( Cfr. Fr.Dr.Joseph Cheeran,K.V.Mamman,Advocate PC Mathew, Indian Orthodox Sabha Charithravum Samskaravum Kottakka Publications, Manganam ,2002 pp270-275)
It is an unbelievable argument.
Because according to some ancient catholic and protestant writers,
1) James Hough says in History of Christianity in India from the Commencement of the Christian Era,London,1839. Page299. Ahathalla is a Syrian Bishop from Antioch. But he lived in Cairo. And the Cairo was under the jurisdiction of Coptic Patriarch.
2) Raulin J.F. says in Historia Ecclesiae Malabaricae cum Diamperitana Synodo, Roma,1745, Ahathalla is Jacobite Bishop.
3) Assemani J.S., Bibliothecae Apostolice Vaticanae Codicum Manuscriptorum catalogus, pars1, tom.2.Romae 1758; Ahathalla is either Jacobite or Nestoian.
Our Church Historians argues that Ahathalla was a Patriarch of Antioch.
1) E. M Philip, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, Kottayam,pp133-135.
2) Pukadiyil Ittoop Writer, Malayalathulla Suriyani Christianikalude Sabha Charithram, Kottyam, pp 136
3) Kaniyamparambil Corepiscopa, The Syrian Orthodox Church in India and its Apostolic Faith.(English) pp 80-83
4) Paulose Aprem Ramban, Malankara Sabha Bharichittulla Seemakaraya Pithakkanmar,pp XI
But in Rome (Vatican Library states a strong evidence about Ahathalla. It was written by Alexander VII Papa (Cum Nobis) that Ahathalla was a non catholic Patriarch.
I found that document in Vatican Library but it was written in Latin Language. I am sorry ,I cant read latin.
One of My friend (He is a Catholic Priest, he asked me not to publish his name) said to me that there is a document in Lisbon(Capital of Portuguese) that clearly giving evidence about Ahathulla Bava. I wrote a letter to the archive authority with a recommendation letter from one of my University professor for verifying the fact. But there is no response from them. (3 years before one Indian Orthodox Priest went to Lisbon for collecting some documents ,but the authorities did not allowed him to check the details)
Above mentioned Friend said to me that Ahathulla is Patriarch Mor Ignatius Hadayat Allah (1597-1639). In 1639. He went to Cairo to meet Syrian Christians in Alexandria. That time the Malankara church was in a need of a bishop and they wrote letter to Antioch for getting one from Jacobite Patriarchate. But the letter reached in Alexandrian Patriarchate. During a visit to the Syrian Christians in Alexandria, Patriarch Mor Ignatius Hadayat Allah (Ahathulla) met with Alexandrian Patriarchate and he came to knew about the matter of the letter. Mor Ignatius Hadayat Allah (Ahathalla Bava) decided to go to Malankara. HE started his journey from Cairo.But he reached in the hands of Portuguese authorities in India(1642). We have no idea about the place where he was caught.(Near Karachi..?).The Holy Antiochian synod came into a wrong conclusion about this missing and thought Bava was died. At last Ignatius Simon (1640-1659) became the Patriarch of Antioch. Later Portuguese authorities brought to Mylapore (in 1652.) Ahathalla was a former Maphriyono of the East (1597-) as Mor Pathros V Ahadyatallah. And later he became the patriarch of Antioch.
This is not a wonderful story. Above mentioned friend showed me some Arabic documents. I tried to get a copy of that ancient hand written Arabic book. BUT NO CHANCE.
Above mentioned things are quiet convincing…But there are some doubts......
1) All the historians said Ahathalla reached in Mylapore...Why He reached in Mylapore .?
Geographically from Cairo to India, first Sea port is Karachi, Surath, Goa etc. He would have been reached one of these places. Then Portuguese authorities captured HIM.
2) Ahathalla was the former Maphriaya of the East. After his arrival (around 30 years ) Maphriyana Baselious Yeldho also reached in India.
Let me conclude
A lot of documents about our church are lost or hidden in different parts of the world. For example Life History of Yeldho Mor Baselius , we cannot prove them fully. But a strong document (about Yeldho Bava) in Berlin Library . It was said by Itteera Malpan from Kothamangalam to the Kottayam Magistrate during the time of Church case.
But nowadays the Roman Catholic historians ('His Storians') proved that His Grace was from Antioch, but he was a Roman Catholic bishop.
This argument is published only by some writers. [India constitution gives to the freedom of writing. So anyone can write their own opinion.]
Some Modern Roman Catholic writers’ argument is Ahathulla is a Catholic Bishop. They said that
'' Ahathulla , belonging to the Antioch, was born in Aleppo in Syria around 1590. He became a monk of the Order of St. Antony and later was appointed as the archbishop of Damascus. Due to the work of the Latin missionaries in Aleppo, Ahathulla became a Catholic. Finally he reached Cairo in Egypt. Then he reached India (Cfr. Pallath, Paul THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN INDIA, Marthoma Yogam Publications, Rome, 2003, pp-94, Cfr.Fr.Bernad Thoma, Mathoma Christians, Vol.2, pp71-72)
Fr. Bernad Thoma says with Roman Document. Page 68 ...But this document is unbelievable, because It’s later made by Roman Catholic Historians.
Some Protestant and Nestorian Writers’ View is that Ahathulla is a Nestorian Bishop.
Nowadays Indian Orthodox Church 'His Storians' argument is Ahathulla was a Bishop of Syrian Orthodox Church, But the Patriarch excommunicated from the Church. Then he went to Alexandria Patriarch. Alexandrian Papa sent him to India. ( Cfr. Fr.Dr.Joseph Cheeran,K.V.Mamman,Advocate PC Mathew, Indian Orthodox Sabha Charithravum Samskaravum Kottakka Publications, Manganam ,2002 pp270-275)
It is an unbelievable argument.
Because according to some ancient catholic and protestant writers,
1) James Hough says in History of Christianity in India from the Commencement of the Christian Era,London,1839. Page299. Ahathalla is a Syrian Bishop from Antioch. But he lived in Cairo. And the Cairo was under the jurisdiction of Coptic Patriarch.
2) Raulin J.F. says in Historia Ecclesiae Malabaricae cum Diamperitana Synodo, Roma,1745, Ahathalla is Jacobite Bishop.
3) Assemani J.S., Bibliothecae Apostolice Vaticanae Codicum Manuscriptorum catalogus, pars1, tom.2.Romae 1758; Ahathalla is either Jacobite or Nestoian.
Our Church Historians argues that Ahathalla was a Patriarch of Antioch.
1) E. M Philip, The Indian Church of St.Thomas, Kottayam,pp133-135.
2) Pukadiyil Ittoop Writer, Malayalathulla Suriyani Christianikalude Sabha Charithram, Kottyam, pp 136
3) Kaniyamparambil Corepiscopa, The Syrian Orthodox Church in India and its Apostolic Faith.(English) pp 80-83
4) Paulose Aprem Ramban, Malankara Sabha Bharichittulla Seemakaraya Pithakkanmar,pp XI
But in Rome (Vatican Library states a strong evidence about Ahathalla. It was written by Alexander VII Papa (Cum Nobis) that Ahathalla was a non catholic Patriarch.
I found that document in Vatican Library but it was written in Latin Language. I am sorry ,I cant read latin.
One of My friend (He is a Catholic Priest, he asked me not to publish his name) said to me that there is a document in Lisbon(Capital of Portuguese) that clearly giving evidence about Ahathulla Bava. I wrote a letter to the archive authority with a recommendation letter from one of my University professor for verifying the fact. But there is no response from them. (3 years before one Indian Orthodox Priest went to Lisbon for collecting some documents ,but the authorities did not allowed him to check the details)
Above mentioned Friend said to me that Ahathulla is Patriarch Mor Ignatius Hadayat Allah (1597-1639). In 1639. He went to Cairo to meet Syrian Christians in Alexandria. That time the Malankara church was in a need of a bishop and they wrote letter to Antioch for getting one from Jacobite Patriarchate. But the letter reached in Alexandrian Patriarchate. During a visit to the Syrian Christians in Alexandria, Patriarch Mor Ignatius Hadayat Allah (Ahathulla) met with Alexandrian Patriarchate and he came to knew about the matter of the letter. Mor Ignatius Hadayat Allah (Ahathalla Bava) decided to go to Malankara. HE started his journey from Cairo.But he reached in the hands of Portuguese authorities in India(1642). We have no idea about the place where he was caught.(Near Karachi..?).The Holy Antiochian synod came into a wrong conclusion about this missing and thought Bava was died. At last Ignatius Simon (1640-1659) became the Patriarch of Antioch. Later Portuguese authorities brought to Mylapore (in 1652.) Ahathalla was a former Maphriyono of the East (1597-) as Mor Pathros V Ahadyatallah. And later he became the patriarch of Antioch.
This is not a wonderful story. Above mentioned friend showed me some Arabic documents. I tried to get a copy of that ancient hand written Arabic book. BUT NO CHANCE.
Above mentioned things are quiet convincing…But there are some doubts......
1) All the historians said Ahathalla reached in Mylapore...Why He reached in Mylapore .?
Geographically from Cairo to India, first Sea port is Karachi, Surath, Goa etc. He would have been reached one of these places. Then Portuguese authorities captured HIM.
2) Ahathalla was the former Maphriaya of the East. After his arrival (around 30 years ) Maphriyana Baselious Yeldho also reached in India.
Let me conclude
A lot of documents about our church are lost or hidden in different parts of the world. For example Life History of Yeldho Mor Baselius , we cannot prove them fully. But a strong document (about Yeldho Bava) in Berlin Library . It was said by Itteera Malpan from Kothamangalam to the Kottayam Magistrate during the time of Church case.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
The Historical Mission of Pantenus in South India
The Historical Mission of Pantenus in South India.
IntroductionThe origin of Christianity in Malankara is closely connected with the evangelization of India by St.Thomas. According to the Apostle Thomas landed on the Malabar Coast in A.D. 52, preached the Holy Gospel and he established Christian communities in India. Before the end of the second century, these Christians came into closer contacts with Alexandria1. The main after effects of this contact, the Alexandrian Church sent a missionary to India for Pastoral care and spiritual guidance. That missionary, Pantenus came to India and he gave the spiritual knowledge to the Malankara people. We have only a few historical documents to get information about the works of Pantenus.
1. Life historyPantenus was the master of a school in Alexandria. His parents belong to Sicily. He was born at Alexandria; in which he had his education, being seasoned in his younger years with all learned and philosophical studies; that being the place where there were all arts and sciences, and School of thoughts.
1.1.Head of Alexandrian SchoolHis philosophy was Stoicism and his literary interests were classical; considering the exegetical writings of his successors, this would account not only for their strong emphasis upon a divine literature, but also for their allegorical methodology in interpreting the same. He became head of the school in Alexandria around A.D.180.2 The foundation of the School of Alexandria is often traced back to St. Mark the Evangelist-though historical data is not about certification, but the school would become the first key development was in the time of Pantenus.
His learning and excellent manner of teaching raised the school’s reputation above all schools of the philosophers, whom he strove to win to Christianity.
1.2.He was a Bishop?
Pantenus was the head of Alexandrian School. Some scholars say that, he was an ordained person (Bishop).3 Most of the world church historians currently discussing this topic. The main possibility is, his successor, Clement was an ordained person in that time. When we consider this thing, we can say may be he was a bishop. What ever it may be, he must have been a magnetic personality and teacher, as testified by Clement of Alexandria, the student who succeeded him as head of the school.
3.Supplication of Malankara Christians to Alexandria
The Indian Church requested the Patriarchate of Alexandria in order to send a person, who is well-versed in church doctrines, for spiritual and pastoral guidance. That time St. Demetrius was the Patriarch of Alexandria.4 He was the 12th Patriarch of Alexandria. Most of the ancient historians opinion is Pantenus came to India for the request of Malankara Christians5.
It is a probable question: Why the Malankara Church approaches Alexandrian Patriarchate? There was a close relationship between India and Alexandria6. And these facilitate to approach the Indian Christians to the Alexandrian Patriarchate. It is believed that St.Thomas came from Alexandria to Malankara. There were many Indians at Alexandria in the first century A.D. Dion Chysostom writes (c.100 A.D.): “Ethiopians, Arabians, Bactrians, Sythians, Persians and Indians, were flocking to Alexandria7”.
All these things reflect the integral relationship between Alexandria and Malankara. We can understand clearly that it was at Patriarchate of the Alexandria where Malankara Church approached for at first time for its spiritual needs. It happened that some Indian ambassadors entreated Demetrius, then bishop of Alexandria, to send some worthy and excellent person along with them to preach the faith in India. 8
4. Arrival of Pantenus in Malankara.Pantenus’s journey to India must be reckoned as an established historical event.9 Being arrived in India, he set himself to plant the Christian faith in those parts, especially conversing with the native philosophers, whose principles and way of life seemed more immediately to dispose them for the entertainment of Christianity Eusebius writes: “About that time, Pantenus, a man highly distinguished for his learning, had charge of the school of the faithful in Alexandria. A school of sacred learning, which continues to our day, was established there in ancient times, and as we have been informed, was managed by men of great ability and zeal for divine things. Among these it is reported that Pantenus was at that time especially conspicuous, as he had been educated in the philosophical system of those called Stoics. They say that he displayed such zeal for the divine Word that he was appointed as a herald of the Gospel of Christ to the nations in the East, and was sent as far as India. For indeed there were still many evangelists of the Word who sought earnestly to use their inspired zeal, after the examples of the apostles, for the increase and building up of the Divine Word. Pantenus was one of these, and is said to have gone to India. It is reported that among persons there who knew of Christ, he found the Gospel according to Mathew, which had anticipated his own arrival.”10 It is true that the account of Pantenus going to India was a tradition. According to historians Pantenus visited in Malankara.
4.1.Contradictions about the arrival of Pantenus
Most of the historians agreed Pantenus visited Malabar in last of 2nd Century. But some historians opposed arrival of Pantenus in Malabar.11 There opinion is Pantenus visited not present India. See how E.M. Philip rejects the opinions: “In the first place, we have to see if the above description of the country and people visited by the Alexandrian missionary applies to Malabar. If it does, there is no room to doubt the Syrian tradition of the apostolic origin of the Malankara Church. Had Clement and Jerome failed to refer to the Brahmin population of the country, our learned critic would have carried Pantenus to Abyssinia or Arabia Felix, defining India in its widest sense. The narrative, as recorded by the famous writers of Alexandria, leaves no room to suspect the genuineness of Pantenus visit to India proper”. 12
Another historian A. Mingana,13also same opinion of Rae. He rejects the Indian mission of Pantenus. His opinion is Pantenus never visited India. See how Stuart rejects the opinion of Mingana. “Notwithstanding the deservedly high reputation of Dr. Mingana and his well known erudition, one ventures to differ from him in the conclusion to which he has come. The statement by Clement, derived presumably from Pantenus, that the Brahmins were those who obey the commandments of Buddha whom they honour as a god is quite conclusive. Where else than in India proper could a traveler from the West have got information that would cause him to join Brahmins and Buddhists together in this way?... At the date when Pantenus is said to have visited India. Brahmins and Sramans, as the Buddhist ascetics were called, were working together in closest harmony… The fact that Pantenus associates Brahmins with Buddhists so correctly describes the condition of things then existing that it stamps his account as that of an eye witness”. 14 It is clearly evident that the Alexandrian-Malankara relationship was very strong during second and third centuries.
Conclusion
Pantenus always retained the title of The Stoic Philosopher. He returned to Alexandria, went on with his office (The office of the Catechetical School of Alexandria) till his death, which happened in the year of A.D.211.15 His memory is preserved in the Roman calendar. Roman Catholic Church is classified by the number of saints, and the festival celebrates its July 7, and the Coptic Church June 22. Pantenus might be identified as the second missionary evangelist to India. The mission of Pantenus represents a part of Christian missionary history of Malankara. The very possibility that Pantenus once set foot on land in India is sufficient for grounding a later Jacobite identity in Malankara Church. The main advantage of his visit is, the improvement of Christian faith in Malankara as well as the Church of Malankara started a new ecclesiastical relationship with an ancient Apostolic See.
1. J.N. FARQUAHAR, “The Apostle Thomas in North India”, in J.Vellian, ed., The Apostle Thomas in India according to the Acts of Thomas ,Kottayam, 1972, p.13
2. OSBORN ERIC FRANCIS, Coptic Encyclopaedia, Vol.6, New York,1991. p.1881
3. JOSEPH THOMAS, Universal Pronouncing Dictionary of Biography and Mythology,London, 1901. p.664.
4. JOHN MANSON NEALE, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, Patriarchate of Alexandria, Vol.1. London, 1847. p.16; ABU SALIH THE ARMENIAN, The Churches and Monasteries of Egypt and Some Neighbouring Countries , 2001. New Jersey. p.84.
5. WILLAM CAVE D.D., Lives of the Most Eminent Fathers of the Church..,Oxford,London, 1840. p. 291
6. M.RAE, The Syrian Church in India, Edinburg-London,1892,56.
7. J.GWYNN. “Panaenus”, W. Smith and H. Wace, ed., Dictionary Christian Biography. Vol. IV, New York, 1974. p.181.
8. WILLAM CAVE D.D., p. 291.
9. H.HOSTEN, “ Bartholomeo and Pantenus”, Works of Hosten, complete collection in the Library of Vidyajyoti, Vol. 17, fol.206., Delhi.
10. EUSEBIUS, Historia Ecclesistica V,10, Patrologia Grecca XX, col. 453-456; The translation from the Nicean and Post- Nicean Fathers, Second Series, vol.1, 224-225.
11. MILNE RAE, The Syrian Church in India, London, 1892.
12. E.M. PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, Cheeramchira, 2002. p.53.
13. A. MINGANA, Early Spread of Christianity in India, BJRL,10,1926. p.449
14. J. STUWART, Nestorian Missionary Enterprise, Story of a Church on Fire, Edinburg, 1928. p.106-107 ; T. JAMES KURIKILAMKATT JOSEPH, The Apostle Thomas at Taxila... Pontificia Università Greogoriana, Facoltà di Storia Ecclesiastica,Rome, 2002.
15.William Smith, The History of the live, Arts and Martyrdoms of those Blessed Christians, Manchester,1785.p.141
IntroductionThe origin of Christianity in Malankara is closely connected with the evangelization of India by St.Thomas. According to the Apostle Thomas landed on the Malabar Coast in A.D. 52, preached the Holy Gospel and he established Christian communities in India. Before the end of the second century, these Christians came into closer contacts with Alexandria1. The main after effects of this contact, the Alexandrian Church sent a missionary to India for Pastoral care and spiritual guidance. That missionary, Pantenus came to India and he gave the spiritual knowledge to the Malankara people. We have only a few historical documents to get information about the works of Pantenus.
1. Life historyPantenus was the master of a school in Alexandria. His parents belong to Sicily. He was born at Alexandria; in which he had his education, being seasoned in his younger years with all learned and philosophical studies; that being the place where there were all arts and sciences, and School of thoughts.
1.1.Head of Alexandrian SchoolHis philosophy was Stoicism and his literary interests were classical; considering the exegetical writings of his successors, this would account not only for their strong emphasis upon a divine literature, but also for their allegorical methodology in interpreting the same. He became head of the school in Alexandria around A.D.180.2 The foundation of the School of Alexandria is often traced back to St. Mark the Evangelist-though historical data is not about certification, but the school would become the first key development was in the time of Pantenus.
His learning and excellent manner of teaching raised the school’s reputation above all schools of the philosophers, whom he strove to win to Christianity.
1.2.He was a Bishop?
Pantenus was the head of Alexandrian School. Some scholars say that, he was an ordained person (Bishop).3 Most of the world church historians currently discussing this topic. The main possibility is, his successor, Clement was an ordained person in that time. When we consider this thing, we can say may be he was a bishop. What ever it may be, he must have been a magnetic personality and teacher, as testified by Clement of Alexandria, the student who succeeded him as head of the school.
3.Supplication of Malankara Christians to Alexandria
The Indian Church requested the Patriarchate of Alexandria in order to send a person, who is well-versed in church doctrines, for spiritual and pastoral guidance. That time St. Demetrius was the Patriarch of Alexandria.4 He was the 12th Patriarch of Alexandria. Most of the ancient historians opinion is Pantenus came to India for the request of Malankara Christians5.
It is a probable question: Why the Malankara Church approaches Alexandrian Patriarchate? There was a close relationship between India and Alexandria6. And these facilitate to approach the Indian Christians to the Alexandrian Patriarchate. It is believed that St.Thomas came from Alexandria to Malankara. There were many Indians at Alexandria in the first century A.D. Dion Chysostom writes (c.100 A.D.): “Ethiopians, Arabians, Bactrians, Sythians, Persians and Indians, were flocking to Alexandria7”.
All these things reflect the integral relationship between Alexandria and Malankara. We can understand clearly that it was at Patriarchate of the Alexandria where Malankara Church approached for at first time for its spiritual needs. It happened that some Indian ambassadors entreated Demetrius, then bishop of Alexandria, to send some worthy and excellent person along with them to preach the faith in India. 8
4. Arrival of Pantenus in Malankara.Pantenus’s journey to India must be reckoned as an established historical event.9 Being arrived in India, he set himself to plant the Christian faith in those parts, especially conversing with the native philosophers, whose principles and way of life seemed more immediately to dispose them for the entertainment of Christianity Eusebius writes: “About that time, Pantenus, a man highly distinguished for his learning, had charge of the school of the faithful in Alexandria. A school of sacred learning, which continues to our day, was established there in ancient times, and as we have been informed, was managed by men of great ability and zeal for divine things. Among these it is reported that Pantenus was at that time especially conspicuous, as he had been educated in the philosophical system of those called Stoics. They say that he displayed such zeal for the divine Word that he was appointed as a herald of the Gospel of Christ to the nations in the East, and was sent as far as India. For indeed there were still many evangelists of the Word who sought earnestly to use their inspired zeal, after the examples of the apostles, for the increase and building up of the Divine Word. Pantenus was one of these, and is said to have gone to India. It is reported that among persons there who knew of Christ, he found the Gospel according to Mathew, which had anticipated his own arrival.”10 It is true that the account of Pantenus going to India was a tradition. According to historians Pantenus visited in Malankara.
4.1.Contradictions about the arrival of Pantenus
Most of the historians agreed Pantenus visited Malabar in last of 2nd Century. But some historians opposed arrival of Pantenus in Malabar.11 There opinion is Pantenus visited not present India. See how E.M. Philip rejects the opinions: “In the first place, we have to see if the above description of the country and people visited by the Alexandrian missionary applies to Malabar. If it does, there is no room to doubt the Syrian tradition of the apostolic origin of the Malankara Church. Had Clement and Jerome failed to refer to the Brahmin population of the country, our learned critic would have carried Pantenus to Abyssinia or Arabia Felix, defining India in its widest sense. The narrative, as recorded by the famous writers of Alexandria, leaves no room to suspect the genuineness of Pantenus visit to India proper”. 12
Another historian A. Mingana,13also same opinion of Rae. He rejects the Indian mission of Pantenus. His opinion is Pantenus never visited India. See how Stuart rejects the opinion of Mingana. “Notwithstanding the deservedly high reputation of Dr. Mingana and his well known erudition, one ventures to differ from him in the conclusion to which he has come. The statement by Clement, derived presumably from Pantenus, that the Brahmins were those who obey the commandments of Buddha whom they honour as a god is quite conclusive. Where else than in India proper could a traveler from the West have got information that would cause him to join Brahmins and Buddhists together in this way?... At the date when Pantenus is said to have visited India. Brahmins and Sramans, as the Buddhist ascetics were called, were working together in closest harmony… The fact that Pantenus associates Brahmins with Buddhists so correctly describes the condition of things then existing that it stamps his account as that of an eye witness”. 14 It is clearly evident that the Alexandrian-Malankara relationship was very strong during second and third centuries.
Conclusion
Pantenus always retained the title of The Stoic Philosopher. He returned to Alexandria, went on with his office (The office of the Catechetical School of Alexandria) till his death, which happened in the year of A.D.211.15 His memory is preserved in the Roman calendar. Roman Catholic Church is classified by the number of saints, and the festival celebrates its July 7, and the Coptic Church June 22. Pantenus might be identified as the second missionary evangelist to India. The mission of Pantenus represents a part of Christian missionary history of Malankara. The very possibility that Pantenus once set foot on land in India is sufficient for grounding a later Jacobite identity in Malankara Church. The main advantage of his visit is, the improvement of Christian faith in Malankara as well as the Church of Malankara started a new ecclesiastical relationship with an ancient Apostolic See.
1. J.N. FARQUAHAR, “The Apostle Thomas in North India”, in J.Vellian, ed., The Apostle Thomas in India according to the Acts of Thomas ,Kottayam, 1972, p.13
2. OSBORN ERIC FRANCIS, Coptic Encyclopaedia, Vol.6, New York,1991. p.1881
3. JOSEPH THOMAS, Universal Pronouncing Dictionary of Biography and Mythology,London, 1901. p.664.
4. JOHN MANSON NEALE, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, Patriarchate of Alexandria, Vol.1. London, 1847. p.16; ABU SALIH THE ARMENIAN, The Churches and Monasteries of Egypt and Some Neighbouring Countries , 2001. New Jersey. p.84.
5. WILLAM CAVE D.D., Lives of the Most Eminent Fathers of the Church..,Oxford,London, 1840. p. 291
6. M.RAE, The Syrian Church in India, Edinburg-London,1892,56.
7. J.GWYNN. “Panaenus”, W. Smith and H. Wace, ed., Dictionary Christian Biography. Vol. IV, New York, 1974. p.181.
8. WILLAM CAVE D.D., p. 291.
9. H.HOSTEN, “ Bartholomeo and Pantenus”, Works of Hosten, complete collection in the Library of Vidyajyoti, Vol. 17, fol.206., Delhi.
10. EUSEBIUS, Historia Ecclesistica V,10, Patrologia Grecca XX, col. 453-456; The translation from the Nicean and Post- Nicean Fathers, Second Series, vol.1, 224-225.
11. MILNE RAE, The Syrian Church in India, London, 1892.
12. E.M. PHILIP, The Indian Church of St. Thomas, Cheeramchira, 2002. p.53.
13. A. MINGANA, Early Spread of Christianity in India, BJRL,10,1926. p.449
14. J. STUWART, Nestorian Missionary Enterprise, Story of a Church on Fire, Edinburg, 1928. p.106-107 ; T. JAMES KURIKILAMKATT JOSEPH, The Apostle Thomas at Taxila... Pontificia Università Greogoriana, Facoltà di Storia Ecclesiastica,Rome, 2002.
15.William Smith, The History of the live, Arts and Martyrdoms of those Blessed Christians, Manchester,1785.p.141
