Priests, laypeople from Kerala’s Syro-Malabar Church oppose uniform mode of celebrating MassIndian Church’s bitter liturgical dispute brings street protest – UCA News
A priest of India’s Eastern-rite Syro-Malabar Church addresses a gathering in front of the church’s headquarters in Kochi on Nov. 12 protesting a synod decision to have a uniform liturgical celebration. (Photo supplied)
The decades-long liturgical dispute in India’s Eastern-rite Syro-Malabar Church took a dramatic turn with priests and laypeople taking to the streets to protest the decision by the bishops’ synod to have uniformity in celebrating Mass.
Catholic priests and lay groups began gathering separately on Nov. 12 in front of St. Thomas Mount, the church’s headquarters in Ernakulam district of Kerala state, seeking a review of the synod’s decision.
The synod in August had agreed to implement a 1999 decision for uniformity in Mass celebration in all its dioceses as part of an effort to bring in more unity among its members, especially in liturgy.Donate to UCA News with a small contribution of your choice
The 1999 decision had agreed to the priests facing the congregation during Mass until the Eucharistic prayer, and then again from communion to the end of the Mass. During the Eucharistic prayer, they were required to face the altar against the congregation.
As the Nov. 28 deadline for implementing the decision in all 35 dioceses inched closer, groups of priests and laypeople demanded that the entire Mass be celebrated with the celebrant facing the people, as they have been doing for at least four decades.
Some people see the 1999 decision as a “compromise formula” to satisfy two factions of the church, divided over the liturgical renewal efforts that began after the Second Vatican Council.
The synod’s decision without consulting anyone — the priests and the laity — is not acceptable to us
One group wanted renewal on modern lines requiring the priests to face people during the Mass, while the other wanted the traditional way where the priest faces the altar.
Some dioceses already follow the 1999 decision but it was put on hold in some dioceses due to opposition from a section of priests and laity. To bring unity, the synod set a deadline of Nov. 28 to implement the unified form of Mass in all dioceses.
The synod also gave dioceses until April 17, 2022, to implement the decision.
The main opposition to the compromise formula has come from the Archdiocese of Ernakulam-Angamaly and Trissur besides Irijnalakuda Diocese.Related News-India’s Eastern Church moves for uniform liturgy ignoring oppositionCrisis deepens in India’s Eastern Church over liturgy‘Uniformity is not Catholic, it is not Christian’Vatican asks Indian bishops to curb priests violating canon law
Police blocked protesters at the gates when they tried to present a memorandum to the church’s major archbishop, Cardinal George Alencherry, who heads the Syro-Malabar Church.
Riju Kanjookarn told UCA News on Nov. 14 that they have been following the Mass with the celebrant facing the congregation for more than five decades.
“The synod’s decision without consulting anyone — the priests and the laity — is not acceptable to us,” he said.
Some laypeople supported the synod and insisted on complying with its decision within the set deadline.
The bishops had not forced any decision on anyone as being made out but had acted in good faith for unity and uniformity among our people and for our better future as one people of God
“It is painful to see our priests and laity staging protests in front of the church’s headquarters,” said Father Alex Onampally, media commission secretary of the Syro-Malabar synod.
“The bishops had not forced any decision on anyone as being made out but had acted in good faith for unity and uniformity among our people and for our better future as one people of God,” he told UCA News on Nov. 15.
The synod had followed all the provisions of canon law and there is no chance of any change in its decision, church officials said.
The protesters, however, vowed to continue their protest if the synod refused to revoke its decision.