{
  "bookName": "History of Christianity in India: Source Materials",
  "authorName": "M. K. Kuriakose",
  "publisherName": "Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge",
  "publicationYear": 2011,
  "chapterNumber": 197,
  "chapterName": "1971. A Common Statement from the Orthodox Mar Thoma Conversations",
  "pageFrom": 423,
  "pageTo": 425,
  "pages": [
    {
      "pageNumber": 423,
      "ocrText": "SOURCE MATERIALS\n423\n197. A COMMON STATEMENT FROM THE ORTHODOX-\nMAR THOMA CONVERSATIONS (1971 A.D.)\nRepresentatives of the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Mar\nThoma Syrian Church held a series of unofficial conversations in\nwhich their differences as well as points of agreement were consi-\ndered. The Common Statement, reproduced here, indicates the points\nof agreement and was published in 1971. Fr. Paul Verghese and м.\nThommen, Orthodox-Mar Thoma Conversations, pp. 5-7.\nA few of us belonging to the Syrian Orthodox Church and the\nMar Thoma Syrian Church have been meeting together in the name\nof Christ, several times in the last three years. We want to place\nbefore our Christian Brethren this agreed d statement of some of the\nthings which we hold in common with each other as Christians.\n1. Common History:\nOur two Churches shared a common history till the later half of\nthe nineteenth century. This common history in one undivided\nChurch for some eighteen centuries or more still exists as a strong\nbond between our two Churches.\nThe demand for reform in the undivided Syrian Church was the\noccasion for our division. At least as early as the beginning of the\n19th century these demands were made both by Anglican missiona-\nries and by Syrian Christian leaders. There were abuses in the\nChurch; the priests were often uneducated and unable to give\nspiritual leadership. The demands for reform were often justified;\nsometimes they resulted from lack of understanding of Eastern\ntradition.\nThe demand for reform was pressed by the missionaries. In\n1836 the Mavelikara Synod unanimously rejected the demands,\nexcept for a solitary voice of protest. Many of these demands\nwere subsequently complied with in both our Churches, but alas\nonly after the separation. The liturgy is celebrated by both our\nChurches in Malayalam-one of the major demands of the reformers.\nMany of the demands of that time we both find now irrelevant.\nIn major matters of faith we find ourselves substantially in\nagreement.\n2. Common Faith:\nMuch of the faith of the Christian Church we still hold in\ncommon. The great ecumenical creed of Nicea and Constanti-\nnople still remains fundamentally the formulation of our faith.",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 424,
      "ocrText": "424\nHISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA\nOur common faith is in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,\none God; in the Father, the creator of all; in the Son of God who\nbecame incarnate, was made man and was born of the Virgin Mary,\nwho lived and taught and died on the cross on behalf of us all; who\nrose again from the dead, who sits at the right hand of the Father,\nand who will come in the fulness of his glory to judge the living and\nthe dead; in the Holy Ghost, who spoke in the Old and New\nTestaments by the prophets and apostles, who proceeds from the\nFather alone, who is worshipped and adored with the Father and\nthe Son; and in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. We\nconfess one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resur-\nrection of the dead and life eternal in the world to come. These\nfundamental realities which we hold together give us a basis for\ncommon prayer and common labours for the glory of God in the\nservice of man.\n3. The Bible :\nWe both hold the Bible in high reverence as the Spirit-inspired\nWord of God, the Apostolic testimony to our Lord and Saviour\nJesus Christ. Both Churches agree that while the Holy Scriptures\nare unique in their status and authority and that no other documents\ncan be placed on the same level in the Church, it is also accepted\nthat the Bible is not the sole authority for the whole faith and\npractice of the Church.\n4. The Church:\nWe both believe that the Church is the body of Christ, the divine\nsociety into which members are incorporated by Baptism and\nChrismation. It is the communion of Saints in which members\nunited to Christ and to each other in Christ, share in one common\nlife by the Holy Spirit.\n5. The Eucharist:\nBoth our Churches are agreed that the Eucharist is the central\nact of worship of the Church in which we share in the one eternal\nand unrepeatable sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. We have\nagreed that the Eucharist is a sacrifice, not in the sense that it\nrepeats the unique sacrifice of Calvary, but that it makes the sacrifice\nof Calvary present in our time and enables us to participate in the\nsaving power of the cross and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.\nWe are also agreed that Jesus Christ gives himself his own body\nand blood, in the Eucharist and that we partake truly of Christ's\nbody and blood. We are also agreed in rejecting the terminology\nand underlying philosophical concepts of the Western doctrines of\ntransubstantiation and Consubstantiation. We have agreed that",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 425,
      "ocrText": "SOURCE MATERIALS\n425\nin the Eucharist by the action of the Holy Spirit, the bread and wine\nafter consecration, are the body and blood of our Lord, though we\nare unable to explain the precise sense in which that is so.\n6. The Ministry:\nWe are agreed that the episcopal ministry with the presbyters\nand deacons to assist the bishops, belongs historically to the life\nof the Church. We both believe that the Holy Spirit bestows\nspecial grace and power through the sacrament of ordination.\n7. The Place of the Departed :\nWe both agree that belief in the communion of the saints belongs\nto the faith and practice of both our Churches; that all those who\nbelong to Christ are united to Christ and to each other in the Body\nof Christ; that death does not separate the believer from Christ or\nhis Body; that the living and the departed belong together to the\nsame Body of Christ though in different ways that we should\ncommemorate the faithful departed and especially those departed\nwhose lives have been an inspiration to the Church. We are all\nagreed that Christ is the sole mediator between God and Man,\nbut that asking the departed saints for their prayer on our behalf\nwould be no more a violation of the sole mediatorship of Chrsit\nthan asking our living Christian friends to pray for us. There are\nmany significant disagreements among us in this field, but on the\nthis\npoints mentioned here, we find a remarkable area of agreement.\nThe disagreement relates to the questions-firstly, whether our\ndeparted are in a state where they can pray to God or benefit from\nour prayer; secondly, whether we can communicate with them.\n8. Practice :\nThere is much else that is common between us in practice. The\nEucharistic and other liturgies we use are similar in many respects.\nWe both face east for public worship, make the sign of the cross,\nand genuflect in adoration of God. Our episcopal and clerical\nvestments are similar. We both give the kiss of peace in much the\nsame manner. We both use the mother tongue for worship. We\nhave many of the feast and fast days in fact much of the Church\ncalendar in common. We both believe in and claim apostolic\nsuccession. We both insist on celibacy of bishops and allow\nmarried people to be priests. We are both members in the World\nCouncil of Churches.",
      "status": "completed"
    }
  ]
}