Scaria Kanniyakonil

THe Indissolubility of in the Syro-Malabar

1. Introduction

The Roman has historically upheld the indissolubility of mar- riage. THe (session 24, canons 5, 6, 7) decreed that a Christian marriage bond endures until the death of one or both of the spouses. THe Church’s catechesis on indissolubility usually explains the benefits as a shared responsibil- ity in conjugal love, procreation, and the education of children, emphasizing the theological context of the relationship between Christ and the Church. THe recent increase in marital breakdown presents a challenge for the traditional teaching, since it seems at first glance that some marriage bonds do not last.TH is raises the question of whether there may be some justifiable cases where separation and remarriage may be permitted. When looking at the history of Christian practice, one notices that the discipline of the Eastern Churches differs from that of the Roman Church. Orthodox Christians today admit remarriage in certain cases, grounding their practice in biblical principles. THe history of the Syro-Malabar treatment of marriage can provide important insight here.

1.1. THe Eastern Perspective on Remarriage

THe Orthodox celebration of a second or even third marriage expresses an acceptance of the reality of marital failure. THe practice is explained as the appli- cation of God’s mercy, not the recognition of divorce. THis practice is known in the Orthodox Church as an application of oikonomia. In its strict sense, the word refers to God’s plan of salvation, but in this sense, it means the ability of the church to extend mercy when the reality of a person’s life does not conform to the ideal norms. It is “a principle of mercy employed when a norm is not met”.1 THe church plays an active role in the bestowal of God’s mercy such that, in the context of marriage discipline, it can judge that a marriage is so damaged that it is beyond saving and that the only recourse is to allow a second marriage for one

1 C.F. Frost: “THe of Love: Marriage & Remarriage in the Orthodox Church”, in: Commonweal 143/4 (2016), 13-18, at 13. See also L. Örsy: “In Search of the Meaning of ­Oikonomia: Report on a Convention”, in: THeological Studies 43 (1982), 312-319, at 313.

106 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24, 106-120. doi: 10.2143/INT.24.1.3284969 © 2018 by INTAMS/Peeters. All rights reserved S. Kanniyakonil or both of the spouses.2 A similar concept in regard to moral norms is found within the Catholic moral tradition under the name of epikeia,3 but this has not been applied to a possible second marriage. THe use of oikonomia is consistent with what Vechoor characterizes as the relational emphasis in Eastern , which always sees the juridical dimension within a relational context.4 It can be said to be an approach based on love rather than on the application of moral norms. In other words, Eastern Christians would explain that they permit remarriage in certain cases out of pastoral mercy or love. While the grounds for the possibility for remarriage differ from one Eastern Christian Church to another, a second or third marriage is today always seen as a sorrowful moment, as a recognition of the power of sin. THe admission to a second marriage does not promote or favor divorce but rather is seen as “giving sinners ‘a new chance’”.5

1.2. THe Contribution of the Syro-Malabar Tradition

As the Greek Christians appeal to oikonomia, the Syro-Malabar tradition refers to m’rahmanoosa or m’rahmanutha.6 THe Syro-Malabar Church originally followed the Syrian and practice and was only Latinized through the colonizing work of the Portuguese. THus, while the church once operated with the idea of m’rahmanoosa/m’rahmanutha, it no longer does today. THe of Diamper

2 THis application of mercy has been explained on the one hand by Basilio Petrà as “a virtuous habit, that attitude of prudence and measure, which shrinks from excess, namely from the oblivion of reality and from the forgetfulness of truth, as well as tending to come close to the ideal, as far as possible within the limits of a reality, marked by sin” and on the other by Edward Farrugia as “a practico-pastoral sense of Christian balance and a model for resolving ethical issues.” See B. Petrà: “Moral in the Orthodox Tradition”, in: Ephrem’s THeological Journal 2 (1998), 12-24, at 22-23. E.G. Farrugia: “ as a Society of Mourners, Introducing Eastern THeology”, in: P. Pallath (ed.): Catholic Eastern Churches Heritage and Identity, Rome: Mar Thoma Yogam, 1994, 54-55. 3 Epikeia refers to the application of a law according to its spirit rather than to the letter. It is found in Aquinas, who considered it a virtue, following a similar treatment in Aristotle. See G. Virt: “Moral Norms and the Forgotten Virtue of Epikeia in the Pastoral Care of Divorced and Remarried”, in: Melita THeologica 63/1 (2013), 17-34 as well as K. Schlögl- Flierl: “Epikie, ein Movens für die Moraltheologie”, in: Studia Moralia 55 (2017), 65-97. 4 He argues that, for the East, ethical reflection “implies keeping the commandments of God and the precepts of the Church in a family spirit proper to the children of God, characterized by the generosity of heart/maximalism and longing for perfection of the heavenly Father.” D. Vechoor: “Catholic Moral THeology in the Light of the Communion of Vatican II: Promises and Challenges”, available online at http://dukhrana.in/catholic-moral- theology-in-the-light-of-the-communion-ecclesiology-of-vatican-ii-promises-and-challenges (accessed 07.02.2018). See also M. Vellanickal: “Biblical Foundations of Ethics of the Syriac Orient”, in: S. Kanniyakonil (ed.): Ethical Perspectives of the Eastern Churches, Changanach- ery: HRIS, 2004, 43-53, at 43; and P. Connolly: “Contrasts in the Western and Eastern Approaches to Marriage”, in: Studia Canonica 35/2 (2001), 357-402. 5 J. Meyendorff: Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective, Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2000, 58. 6 In the Syro-Malabar tradition, M’dabranutha is used for the broader sense and M’rahmanoosa or M’rahmanutha for its application by the church to cases in need of mercy.

107 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018)

(1599) brought Syro-Malabar practice, including marriage practice, into conform- ity with the Roman Church. Since the historic and Syrian roots of the church are being renewed in liturgical and theological practice, it is reasonable to ask whether the possibility of the application of m’rahmanoosa/m’rahmanutha could be rightly restored to the Syro-Malabar marriage practice. THis article demonstrates that such a practice is evident before the . It first examines various Chaldean canonical sources. It then looks at the Chaldean marriage liturgy. THe next part of the article looks at the decrees of the Synod of Diamper and its effect on marriage.TH e final part of the article looks at the renewal of the Syro- Malabar liturgy that has happened in recent years and poses the question of a possible renewal of the more ancient marital practice. THe article concludes with a reflection on how this church’s current understanding of marriage could be informed by the historical perspective and the broader tradition.

2. THe Understanding of Indissolubility in the Syro-Malabar Tradition before Diamper

THe Syro-Malabar Church traces its origin to the ministry of in the first century.W hatever the actual historical roots of the church, it derives from the Seleucia-Ctesiphone tradition in its theology as well as in its linguistic, commercial, and cultural influences, reflecting a Sumero-Dravidian affinity.7 THe arrival of Portuguese in the 16th century divided the church into different denominations and traditions, separating it intoE astern Catholic and Oriental Orthodox Churches. As a result, the liturgy, theology, and ecclesial identity of THomas Christians changed, at least in those communities in union with Rome. THis change is reflected in both the liturgy and theology of marriage.8

7 M. Geddes: History of the Church of Malabar, London: Smith and Walford, 1694, 16-45; J. Hough: THe in , 5 vol., London: Seeley and Burnside, 1839-1860; V. Aiya: THeT ravancore State Manual, vol. 2, : THeT ravancore Government Press, 1906, 103; A. Ayyer: Anthropology of Syrian Christians, Ernakulam: Cochin Govt. Press, 1926, 20; E. Tisserant: : A History of the Syro-Malabar Church from the Earliest Time to the Present Day, London: Longmans, 1957, 163; P. Podipara: THe THomas Christians, London: Darton, 1970, 101; X. Koodapuzha: , : Oriental Institute of Religious Studies in India, 1998; M. Mundadan: History of Christianity in India, vol. 1: From the Beginning up to the Middle of the Sixteenth Century, : THeological Publications of India, 1984; P. Podiapra: “Hindu in Culture, Christian in Religion, Oriental in Worship”, in: G. Menachery (ed.): THe St. THomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, vol. 2, Trichur: THomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, 1973, 107; J. Kolengaden: “Culture and Traditions of the THomas Christians”, in: G. Menachery (ed.): THe St. THomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, vol. 2, Trichur: Saint THomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, 1973, 128; J. Kollaparambil: THe Sources of the Syro-Malabar Law, ed. S. Kokkaravalayil, ­Kottayam: OIRSI, 2015, 98; J. Puliurumpil: Syro-Malabar Church Towards Patriarchate, Kottayam: OIRSI, 2017. 8 L. Edekalathur: THe THeology of Marriage in the East Syrian Tradition, Rome: Mar THoma Yogam, 1994, 70.

108 S. Kanniyakonil

2.1. East Syrian Canonical Sources

THere is substantial evidence that the THomas Christians and the Chaldean Church were in hierarchical communion from at least the seventh century.9 Chaldean in India used Chaldean canons to govern the Indian Church. THese were not applied without adaption, however. As Popidara shows, the Chal- dean canons would be utilized in Malabar “only whenever the social, political, and ecclesiastical practices were found defective.” He thus concludes that the Malabar Church should be understood to be in actuality, even though it claimed canonical identity with the Chaldean Church.10 For this reason, the early tradition of the Malabar Church gives witness to an authentic and independ- ent development of theology and practice that derives from the Chaldeans but develops in its own cultural context. THe early East Syrian understanding of marriage is certainly in continuity with the broader ; it also shows some similarity with the Jewish tradition.11 Its understanding of indissolubility, as one might expect, derives from Mt 5,32, Mt 19,6, and Eph 5. A writing from Mar Išo Bokt, who was Metro- politan of Rev-Ardasir in the 8th or 9th century, utilizes the Matthean passage, while a text from Mar Abdišo bar Brīkhā, Metropolitan of Nisibis who died in 1318, builds his argument on the Pauline passage.12 Like their eastern counterparts and unlike the tradition, they do include the Matthean exception of adul- tery as a limit to indissolubility.13 THe tradition recognized betrothal as the beginning of marriage, a true matri- monium initiatum. After betrothal, the man and women were known as husband and wife. Accordingly, sexual relations with a third party after the betrothal was considered adultery. It was, though, the bride who bore the consequences of such an action, the same punishment given to married women was applied to betrothed women.14 THe Chaldean patriarchal and canonical collections allowed for both separation and remarriage.15 THese are present together in the texts and so will be

9 J. Aerthayil: THe Spiritual Heritage of the St. THomas Christians, Bangalore: Dharmaram Publications, 1982, 21; M. Mundadan: History of Christianity in India, vol. 1, Bangalore: Church History Association of India, 2001, 98-104; A. Thazhath: Juridical Sources of the Syro-Malabar Church, Vadavathoor: OIRSI, 1987, 7, 68-72. 10 P. Podipara: “THe Hierarchy of Syro Malabar Church”, in: Collected Works of Rev Dr Placid Podipara CMI, vol. 1, Alappy: Prakasam Publications, 1974, 95. 11 J. Dauvillier/C. DeClerq: Le mariage dans le droit canonique oriental, Paris: Sirey, 1936, 48, as quoted in L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage in the East Syrian Tradition, Rome: Mar THomaY ogam, 1994, 107. For a short introduction to the Jewish celebration of marriage, see K. Hruby: “Symboles et textes de la celebration du marriage judaique”, in: G. Franedi (ed.): La celebrazione cristiana del matrimonio: Simboli e testi, Rome: San Paolo, 1986, 15-28. 12 T. Dharmo: THeT ext of the Matrimony of the East Syrian Church, THrichur: Mar Narsai Press, 1968, 3; L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 193. 13 L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 193. 14 Ibid. 193. 15 G. Badger: THe Nestorians and their Rituals, vol. 2, London: Gregg, 1969, 278-280.

109 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018) treated together here. As early as 544, the third canon of the synod of Mar Aba allowed for divorce for a just cause without mentioning what this cause might be.16 THe first recorded connection of Mt 5,32 with the admission of legitimate separation is found in the synod of Mar Iso’yahb I (patriarch from 581-596). Here, separation and remarriage are permitted only in the case of adultery. Canon 13 of this synod states that “no one is allowed by canon to divorce his lawful wife except for fornication”.17 THere is no mention here of remarriage. THat separation is allowed in the case of adultery is also found in the third canon of the synod of Mar George in 676.18 Canon 14 of this synod allows for testimony of the innocent party in a remarriage case; this is repeated in later documents.19 A new legitimate reason for separation – abandonment by one of the spouses – is listed by Mar Hananiso’ I (686/686-699/700). THe issue is stated indirectly: “a woman who freely separates herself from her husband without any legitimate reason is not legally free of the bond till her husband marries another woman.”20 It nonetheless presumes that this injustice allows for remarriage. A later synod continues to cite adultery as grounds for remarriage for both the man and the woman. THe second synod of Patriarch Mar Timothy I (780-823) says that “an adulterer, either man or woman, who sincerely repents of their sin committed, is allowed to remarry. If the wife commits adultery she will be sent away without her nuptial gifts and dowry. If the husband is the adulterer, the wife inherits 10% of his property.”21 THe one who commits adultery is punished, but even the offender, once he or she has shown true repentance, is allowed to remarry. Later, during the time of Mar Išo Bokt, Metropolitan of Rev Ardasir, and Mar Išo bar Nun (823-828), adultery is repeated as a legitimate reason for remarriage for both the man and the woman,22 but the list of grounds is expanded to include impotence, sterility, serious disease and bodily disorders, apostasy, murder, absence, captivity, the refusal of the betrothed to continue with the commitment, long- lasting disputes, and a vow of chastity.23 THese more extensive reasons are repeated in later texts. THe canonical collection of Mar Gabriel Basra (9th century) states that “if a husband is caught due to robbery, if he brings a prostitute to his house, or if he practices sodomy, or if he raises against her an iron rod, the wife has the right to abandon him”.24 Mar Johannon bar Abgare (patriarch from 900-905)

16 Synodicon Orientale: From the Collection of the Nestorian Synods of the Holy Apostolic , trans. M. J. Birnie, San Jose: of the Western , 1991, 52; L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage in the East Syrian Tradition, 72, 108. 17 M. J. Birnie (trans.): Synodicon Orientale, 110. 18 G. Badger: THe Nestorians and their Rituals, 412. 19 L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 190, quoting W. Selb: Orientalisches Kirchenrecht, vol. 1, Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1981, 210-221. 20 L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 194. 21 Ibid. 79; see also Timothy I: “Definitiones Canonicae”, in: E. Sachau: Syrische Rechtsbücher, vol. 2, Berlin, 1908, 84-87. 22 L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 87. 23 Ibid. 82-87, 108. 24 Ibid. 94; see also Ebediesu: “Collectio Canonicum Synodicorum”, in: A. Mai: Scriptorum Veterum Nova Collectio, vol. 10, Rome: Typis Vaticanis, 1838, 49.

110 S. Kanniyakonil writes, “a fiancé and a fiancée betrothed at an early age can separate due to mutual dislike and both of them may marry whomever they like”.25 Later years see the continued teaching that adultery is legitimate grounds for separation. THis is affirmed by Abu I Frag Abdallah ibn At Tayyib (+1043), Mari ibn Sulayman (+1135), Mar Elia III (patriarch from 1176-1190), and Abdiso bar Bahriz (metropolitain in the 10-11th century).26 Abdišo’ bar Brikha, mentioned above, lists several grounds for divorce in his Concise Collection of the Conciliar Canons (Nomocanone) and Ordo iudicorum ecclesiasticorum (Order of Canon Law). He lists the following: adultery, apostasy, murder, controversy, captivity, kidnap- ping, non-virginity, disease, absence, as well as .27 It is only in the sixteenth century that we see this attitude changing, and it changes through pressure to conform to the Latin practice, occasioned by the arrival of missionaries. Abdišo IV (patriarch from 1555-1571), made a Profession of Faith to Pope Pius IV in which he referred to marriage as the seventh sacra- ment and stated that the consent of the spouses is the efficient cause of marriage. Further, he denied the possibility of a second marriage before the death of one of the spouses. THe reason he cited is that “the marital bond is blessed and eternal”.28 Prior to this western engagement, the tradition consistently affirmed possibilities for separation. In all of these cases, the grounds for separation seem to be linked with the possibility for the spouses to remarry, even when remarriage is not specifically mentioned.TH us, separation is often translated as “divorce”; however, the modern legal concept of divorce should not be assumed here. As we will see when looking at the marriage liturgy, there is still a concept of indissolubility operative even though separation and remarriage may be permitted in certain cases.

2.3. THe Marriage Liturgy

THe THomas Christians of India used the East Syrian marriage rite (Chaldean Rite) until the 16th century. THis rite is still in use by the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church.29 THe rite can be divided into six parts: (1) the pre-betrothal rites in the home (rite of consent or rite of sending of the ring, rite of joining hands, rite of the blessing of the vestments and crowns), (2) the celebration of the betrothal in the church (introductory rites, prayers, blessing of the chalice, ring, cross, hnana), (3) the celebration of the wedding (prayers of crowning, liturgy

25 L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 89. 26 G. Badger: THe Nestorians and their Rituals, vol. 2, 278; L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 91, 97. 27 For a detailed study see A. Alkhori: “THe Engagement, Marriage and Divorce According to Nomocanone of Mar Abdisho”, in: Church of Beth Kokhen Journal 4 (2016), 1-9 available online at http://bethkokheh.assyrianchurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/THeEngagement. pdf (accessed 07.02.2018). 28 L. Edakalathur: THe THeology of Marriage, 107. 29 G. Badger: THe Nestorians and their Rituals, vol. 2, 244-276; A. Ayyer: Anthropology of Syrian Christians, 18.

111 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018) of the word, blessings of the groom, bride, and others), (4) the rite of leading the bride to the house of the bridegroom, (5) the wedding banquet, and (6) the rites subsequent to the celebration of the wedding (erection of the bridal chamber, dismantling of the bridal chamber).30 THe marriage rite is called zuwāgā in Syriac, a word based on a verb for uniting, literally uniting with a yoke.31 THe use of the word evokes the union of life which the couple is undertaking and can also bring to mind the sexual union which will be a part of it.32 THe endurance of the marriage union is first evoked during the betrothal prayers, where both Genesis (2,24) and Ephesians (5,21-32) are used to frame the promises of the man and woman, with the exhortation “Let your endeavor succeed!”33 Various other aspects of the marriage rite evoke the unity and indissolubility of the marriage: the rite of joining hands before the betrothal, the drinking from the same chalice at the betrothal, the reading from Matthew 19,3-11, and the prayer at the erection of the bridal chamber.34 THe prayer that the union succeed evokes the possibility that it may not. It reflects the reality present in the canonical sources that certain actions of one or both of the spouses can render the unity and indissolubility of the bond no longer active in the life of the couple. One version of the text of the betrothal prayers explicitly includes the exception of adultery to the permanence of the marriage bond. THe text reads “according to the law of Christ, canon of the gospels, commandments of the Apostles and law of the Christians while you know that marriage and communion of Christians, true sons of , who confess our Lord Jesus Christ, there is no separation in it until death whether blind or sick, whether dumb or any other illness come upon her except for adultery.”35 THe prayer both underlines the permanence of marriage as well as admits that adultery (zaniutha) can divide the spouses.36 THe text calls the woman to chastity both before and after the wedding, a condition for the validity of the

30 P. Maniyattu: “Inculturation of the East Syrian Liturgy of Marriage by the St. THomas Christians in India”, available online at http://dukhrana.in/inculturation-of-the-east-syrian- liturgy-of-marriage-by-the-st-thomas-christians-in-india (accessed 09.02.2018). For a detailed study of the rite of marriage in the East Syrian tradition, see L. Jomon: T’aks’a D-‘Al R’az’a Q’adish’a D-zuw’ag’a: A Textual and THeological Analysis of the Order of Marriage in the East Syriac Tradition, Ph.D. Dissertation, Kottayam: Mahatma Ghandi University, 2014, available at http://www.mgutheses.in/page/?q=T%202893&search=&page=&rad=# (accessed 09.02.2018). 31 L. Jomon: A Textual and THeological Analysis, 145. THe noun zuwāgā – uniting in marriage – comes from the Syriac verb zaweg, which means to join together or to unite in marriage. Zuwāgā is the act of marriage in which the act may be considered as somebody else uniting the couples. In Syraic theology, it is God uniting the couples. THe word also has the meaning of communion resulting from sexual union. Cf. J. Payne Smith: A Compendious Syriac ­Dictionary, Oxford: THe Clarendon Press, 1990, 111. 32 T. Dharmo, THe Text of the Matrimony of the East Syrian Church, 3. 33 L. Jomon: A Textual and THeological Analysis, 102. 34 See P. Maniyattu: “Inculturation of the East Syrian Liturgy of Marriage by the St. THomas Christians in India.” 35 L. Jomon: A Textual and THeological Analysis, 101, n. 12. 36 T. Dharmo, THe Text of the Matrimony of the East Syrian Church, 3.

112 S. Kanniyakonil marriage. In this case, it is only the adultery of the wife that is mentioned. THe text, like the canonical tradition, interprets the Matthean porneia specifically as adultery. Such a restrictive reading finds a parallel in theJ ewish teaching on divorce by the school of Shammai that interpreted indecency in this narrow sense.37 According to them, divorce was allowed only in the case of adultery, a very serious matter.38 It might be concluded from this that only the adultery of the wife was a concern. THis mention of the woman’s possible adultery and not the man’s, though, should be read not as a theological statement but as the result of a dependency of the East Syrian liturgical text on the Jewish marriage texts.39 Maclean and Brown point to the similarity between East Syrian and Jewish marriage rites, remarking that “it is curious to note the strict parallelism between the betrothals of the East Syrians and that of Rebecca and Isaac as narrated in Genesis 24”.40 While the liturgical text may suggest that the East Syrians followed the Jewish practice of allowing a man to divorce a woman but not vice versa,41 the canonical tradition discussed above shows otherwise. THe mention of only the woman’s adultery in the liturgical text must then be seen as a textual depend- ence on a Jewish-influenced rite rather than a full expression of the practice of the church. THe marriage rite in use before the 16th century thus presents marriage as a true union of the man and woman in a bond that is grounded both in creation and in redemption. It is a union accomplished by God through the mediation of the church and thus mediated by the . THe union is authored by God, and humans cannot break the union. THis permanence is evoked throughout the various parts of the rite. THe prevision that adultery can cause the marriage to fail is also present, both in the explicit mention of the woman’s possible adultery and in the prayer for fidelity and success in the marriage. THe liturgy can thus be seen to reflect the same understanding of marriage as the canons. Given the dif- ferent kind of text, the liturgy places possible failure within the presumed context of permanence. THe canons, as would be expected, speak in a more pragmatic manner in specifying just how permanence can fail.

37 R. Collins: Divorce in the , Collegeville, MN: THe Liturgical Press, 1992,193. 38 T. Mackin: Marriage in the Catholic Church: Divorce and Remarriage, New York: Paulist Press, 1984, 24-28. 39 I. Parappallil: Ecclesial Dimension and Symbolism of Marriage, Trivandrum: Carmel Publish- ing House, 2012, 28. 40 A.J. Maclean/W.H. Browne: THe Catholicos of the East and His People, London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1892, 145-146. 41 T. Mackin: What is Marriage, New York: Paulist Press, 1982, 48-49; Y. Zakovitch: “THe Woman’s Right in the Biblical Law of Divorce”, in: THe Jewish Law Annual 4 (1981), 28-46; I. ­Sassoon: THe Status of Women in Jewish Tradition, Cambridge: THe Cambridge University Press, 2011, 25.

113 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018)

3. THe Changes of the Sixteenth Century

3.1. THe Synod of Diamper

After the arrival of on 20 May 1498 at Calicut on the in what is now , the Portuguese brought monks, , and mis- sionaries (Jesuits, , Dominicans, , Carmelites, and Cap- uchins) with the purpose of Christianizing India.42 Many of the customs and traditions of the THomas Christians were met with misunderstanding by the missionaries. THeir Hindu culture and Syrian Christianity were strange to the Portuguese, and their Christianity was suspect because of its roots in Nestorian- ism.43 For this reason, the Roman Catholic Church sought to integrate the Syro- Malabar Christians by Latinizing them. Pope Clement VIII appointed Alexis de Menezes Archbishop of in 1595 and authorized him to bring the THomas Christians into union with Rome, breaking their Persian connections.44 A synod was held at Diamper (Udayamperoor in modern Kerala) in 1599 to accomplish this by correcting the Nestorian heresy and removing pagan customs.45 About eight hundred Indian Christians participated in the synod, along with the key Portuguese figures.TH e synod decreed that the Indian Christians were to make a profession of faith in union with Rome, accept the authority of the pope, condemn and , and accept Latin customs and practices, including its feasts, fasts, administration of the , church leadership and administration, life and manners, and its manner of treating non-Christians. Portuguese bishops would administer the church, and all relationships to Syrian churches were to be ended. All but about seventy of those present accepted the synod. In order to stamp out Nestorianism, Menezes had many theological books burned. As a result of this, many of the original sources of the history of Indian Christianity were lost.46 THose who accepted the synod became what is known as the Syro-Malabar Church (Pazyakuttukar). THose who did not remained with the Antiochean Rite and were known as Puthenkoottukar. THe Synod of Diamper brought the theology and practice of marriage in the Syro-Malabar Church in line with that of Rome. On the one hand, it corrected genuine abuses. For example, in the seventh session, decree 11 forbid a man from having several partners as concubines. For those relationships that had lasted a long time, it was made the competence of the church to decide which

42 D. Daughrity/J. Athyal: Understanding World Christianity, Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2016, 23. 43 See T. Pallipurathkunnel: “THe Life and Ministry of the Indian Church before the Synod of Diamper”, in: Christian Orient 14 (1993), 170-180; P. Podipara: “Hindu in Culture, Chris- tian in Religion and Oriental in Worship”, in: Ostkirchliche Studien 8 (1959), 82-104; and R. Frykenberg: Christianity in India, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, 105. 44 D. Daughrity/J. Athyal: Understanding World Christianity, 23. 45 Ibid., 29. For a detailed study of synod of Diamper see J. Thaliath: THe Synod of Diamper, Rome: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1958. 46 D. Daughrity/J. Athyal: Understanding World Christianity, 30.

114 S. Kanniyakonil were legitimate and which relationships required separation.47 Decrees 14 and 16 outlawed various superstitious practices. It also imposed Latin theology. Marriage was officially declared to be one of the sacraments,48 and the previously-accepted reasons for separation were invalidated. Indissolubility was stated to remain in effect until death. Fornication, adultery, and the defaulting on promises could not give the possibility for a new marriage.49 Marriage after Diamper, in short, was regulated by the decrees of the Council of Trent.50

3.2. THe Marriage Rite after Diamper

A significant consequence of the Synod of Diamper was a change in the mar- riage liturgy. A synod in Goa in 1585 had already made the decision to translate the Rituale Romanum into Syriac for use in India. THis was accomplished by Jesuit Father Francis Roz, who incorporated the practices of the diocese of Braga in into the rite.51 THis was approved at Diamper and became the official text of the Syro-Malabar Church. As Mannooramparampil states “it was this text which was printed in 1775 and reprinted in 1845 with the addition of some sac- ramentals that were in use in Malabar till [the twentieth century]”.52 THe marriage rite after Diamper was brought into full agreement with the new theology of marriage, since both were impositions of Tridentine practice and liturgy. THe Eastern understanding was lost, and the Syro-Malabar Church became completely Latinized in its understanding and expression of the indissolubility of marriage.

4. THe Present Situation

THe theological and liturgical renewals that began in the late nineteenth century and continued throughout the twentieth century brought about new interest in the particular situation of the Syro-Malabar Church and its East Syrian roots. For at least the past fifty years, much has been done to restore the ancient character of the church of the THomas Christians, especially its liturgical expression.

47 S. Zacharia (ed.): THe Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Diamper 1599, Edamattam, Kerala: Indian Institute of Christian Studies, 1994 177. 48 THis was a new classification for the Indian Christians. See M. Geddes: History of the Church of Malabar, 3. 49 Ibid. 319. 50 K. Vettuvazhy: THe Synod of Diamper in the Ecclesial Life of Syro-Malabar Church in the Light of CCEO, Kottayam: OIRSI, 2016, 293. 51 T. Mannooramparampil: “THe New Text of the Sacraments in the Syro-Malabar Church”, 1, available online at https://nelsonmcbs.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/the-new-text-of-the- sacraments-syro-malabar-church-fr-thomas-mannooramparambil.pdf (accessed 09.02.2018). 52 Ibid.

115 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018)

4.1. Liturgical Renewal

In regard to marriage, the most productive renewal has been in regard to the liturgy. Dissatisfaction with the use of the Latin liturgy in India emerged in the early twentieth century, and on 1 December 1934, Pius XI approved the restora- tion of the ancient liturgy. Committees were formed to prepare the text, but the Malayam translation of the sacraments of confession, , and marriage were not issued until 17 November 1965. THe marriage liturgy underwent subsequent discussion and was only promulgated by the Syro-Malabar Synod on 6 January 2005. It is an adaptation of the Latin rite and the Chaldean rite, which means that it is not a restoration but a new liturgy. THe attempt at a restoration of the ancient liturgy did not bring with it an interest in the restoration of the ancient understanding of indissolubility. THe new liturgy, as is to be expected, does not admit any reasons for separation. THe emphasis on unity and permanence of the old rite is taken up into the new rite beyond any possibility that human weakness may weaken the stability of the bond. Unity is emphasized in the prayer following the Lord’s Prayer: “You have called these servants to be united in matrimony and to live in the unity of their hearts.”53 THe scriptural readings (Eph 5,20-33; Mk 10,2-9) highlight the familiar themes. THe prayer of the faithful specifically mentions indissolubility: “O Christ, who has taught about the indissolubility of marriage, help this couple to lead a happy life with mutual faithfulness and chastity.”54 THe prayer over the joined hands of the spouses highlights the bond signified: “May the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob be with you. May Jesus Christ, our Lord, unite you with the bond of marriage in order to lead a family life with love and with unity of mind.”55 THe integration of the blessing of THaali56 symbolically enact the permanence of the marriage bond and the text of the blessing brings out their significance: “May this THaali which is a symbol of unity, unite them in unbreakable love and total faithfulness.”57 THe blessing of the rings refers to the “symbol of their mutual love and fidelity”. THe marriage vows explicitly state that only death can bring an end to the bond: “We do promise, making the Holy

53 Holy Matrimony: Catholic Mission, Chicago, available online at https://nelsonmcbs. files.wordpress.com/2014/04/holy-matrimony-booklet.pdf (accessed 09.02.2018). 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid. 56 THe practice of thaali is explained by Koonammakkal: “A golden leaf (in shape of ‘aalila’) containing a cross made of twenty-one gold globes is the ‘thali’ of Nazrani bride. THree or seven threads are taken from ‘manthrakodi’ (bridal vestment) in order to form one thread to tie the ‘thali’ around the neck of the bride. As long as the married woman is alive she will not part with the ‘thali’. When she dies it is deposited in the coffer of the Church; often the por- tion with twenty-one crosses is broken for this offering in the Church. THe thread and the ‘kozha’ (hole or handle) are buried with her. THis symbolizes the sacredness and indissolubil- ity of Nazrani marriage.” T. Koonammakkal: “Traditions of Mar THoma Nasranis”, available online at http://www.nasranifoundation.org/articles/traditions.html#_ftnref (accessed 09.02.2018). 57 Holy Matrimony: Knanaya Catholic Mission.

116 S. Kanniyakonil

Gospel the witness, that from today onwards until our death, we will live together with one mind, in mutual love and fidelity in joy and sorrow, in prosperity and poverty, in health and ill health. May God Almighty help us to live according to this promise.”58 THe concluding prayers also highlight permanence: “Protect them under the shade of your providence. O God, who has blessed Abraham and Sarah, we thank you for your mercy which has inseparably united this couple.”59

4.3. THeology of Marriage

THe renewal of the ancient liturgy has not been accompanied by a renewal of the ancient marriage practice. As we have seen, the new liturgy does not mention possibilities of remarriage and instead accentuates even more the permanence highlighted in the pre-Diamper liturgy. THe theology of marriage and pastoral outreach to married couples in the Syro-Malabar Church remains the same as that of the .60 However, recent developments both in society and in the church show that it may be time to look back to a more traditional approach. Canonically, a valid marriage is understood to endure until death in the Code of Canon Law (CIC) and in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (CCEO). Canon 1141 of the CIC says that “a marriage that is ratum et consumatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death”. Canon 776 of the CCEO states that “the matrimonial covenant, established by the Creator and ordered by His laws, by which a man and woman by an irrevocable personal consent establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the generation and education of the offspring.” Further, CCEO 776 §3 states that unity and indissolubility are essential properties of marriage. THe Second Vatican Council affirmed that ­marriage is a covenant and as such is indissoluble, even if no children result.61 Recent papal documents affirm the permanence of the marriage bond.62 As we have seen, this understanding of the permanence of the marriage bond and the unity of the couples existing within the union of Christ with the Church is consistent with the earlier Syro-Malabar tradition. Both canonically and litur- gically the marriage bond is presented as something that God works in the ­couple. THe difference between the older tradition and the current one, as we have seen, lies not with a theology of indissolubility, but with whether remarriage can be

58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. 60 For a detailed study of the dimensions of the indissolubility of marriage in Catholic doctrine see R. Himes/J. Coriden: “THe Indissolubility of Marriage: Reasons to Reconsider”, in: THeological Studies 65 (2004), 453-499. 61 See Gaudium et spes, 48, 49, 50. THese are considered in R. Himes/J. Coriden: “THe Indis- solubility of Marriage”, 459. 62 See, for example, Humane vitae, 9; Familiaris consortio, 20; and Amoris laetitia, 62, 77, 134, 178, 243.

117 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018) admitted within this understanding. THe earlier tradition allows it; the more recent does not. Recent developments in the Catholic outreach to the remarried show that this issue is particularly pertinent today.63 THe recent Synods of Bishops in 2014 and 2015 and the subsequent apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia have directly treated the issue. Chapter eight of the exhortation highlights the difficul- ties involved in caring for remarried Christians. THe pastoral need to come to some way of dealing with marital breakdown is being expressed throughout the Catholic communion. In India, marital breakdown is an increasing problem to which the church must find some way to respond.TH is is particularly true in the state of Kerala. Compared to other states in India, the number of divorce cases there is high. According to the report of the Department of Justice of the government of India, the number of matrimonial disputes handled in the family courts in Kerala has been elevated in recent years. In 2013, the number was 43,914; in 2014, 53,564; in 2015, 51,288; and over 52,000 in 2016.64 THe church in Kerala is faced with coming up with a pastoral response. THe Department of the Synodal Commission for the family apostolate of the Syro- Malabar Church conducted a survey in 2015. THe survey found that there are over 63,000 families in the Syro-Malabar Church and that there are 6540 divorced people, 4914 living together, and 9115 living a mixed marriage. THere were also 1242 applications for a declaration of nullity in 2014.65 Pope Francis’s Moto ­Proprio Mitis et Misericors Iesus simplified the procedures for the declaration of nullity, making this process less time-consuming across the world and in the Syro-­Malabar Church as well.66 THis simplification allows many in failed marriages to be able to remarry more easily, but problems still remain such as a lack of qualified per- sons and the fact that circumstances prevent many failed marriages from being proven null in the diocesan tribunals.

5. Conclusion

I have shown that the Syro-Malabar Church, like its eastern counterparts, traditionally had a nuanced understanding of marital indissolubility that was witnessed to in both its canons and its liturgy. THe marriage bond was held up as permanent, reflecting as it does both God’s plan for humanity and the bond

63 For a detailed study see C. Curran: “Amoris Laetitia and Conscience”, in: Asian Horizons 10/4 (2016), 695-699. 64 Available online at http://164.100.47.190/loksabhaquestions/annex/9/AU3115.pdf (accessed 13.02.2018). 65 The Major Archiepiscopal Tribunal: “Activities of Lower Tribunals in the Year 2014”, in: Synodal News-Bulletin of the Syro-Malabar Church 23/1-2 (2015), 160. 66 A description of the new procedure and its implication for the oriental churches by Fr. ­Martin Palamattam can be found online at https://collegiodamasceno.com/2015/12/08/the-importance- of-the-new-motu-proprio-the-gentle-and-merciful-jesus-mitis-et-misericors-iesus-in-the-year- of-mercy (accessed 13.02.2018).

118 S. Kanniyakonil between Christ and the Church. THe liturgy located the union of the man and wife within the already existing bond between Christ and the Church, thus show- ing that the new bond received its permanence from the saving bond in Christ. THe Chaldean canons spoke of the union of the spouses in reference to Matthew and to Ephesians. At the same time, the canons and at least one text of the liturgy presumed that separation and remarriage was possible given certain circumstances. THe main circumstance was the adultery of one of the spouses, drawing its ­justification from the Matthean text, but this was expanded to include a variety of circumstances as time went on. It is thus reasonable to conclude that the Syro- Malabar understanding of possible remarriage was similar to that of current Orthodox communities; namely, that while the marriage bond is permanent, human sinfulness can damage it to such an extent that a new marriage can be permitted. With the arrival of the Portuguese, Syro-Malabar practice was brought into line with the Latin practice, and this was formalized at the Synod of Diamper. THe canons of the synod exclude any possibility of remarriage when the marriage is valid and the two spouses are still alive. Likewise, the liturgy made no mention of any possibility of the bond breaking down. THis situation means that the Syro- Malabar Church today faces the same pastoral problems of dealing with marital breakdown that are found across the Roman Catholic world. With the recent highlighting of the need for the pastoral care of divorced Christians at the synods of bishops and in Amoris laetitia, it would seem that the ancient practice among the St. THomas Christians in such situations may be a valid response in India today.

Summary The Indissolubility of Marriage in the Syro-Malabar Church THe essay explores the understanding of the indissolubility of marriage in the Syro- Malabar Church throughout its history. Taking its point of departure from the idea of oikonomia found in the Orthodox Church and the parallel concept of m’rahmanoosa/ m’rahmanutha in the Indian tradition, it looks at how THomas Christians understood marital breakdown in its history. THe article first sets forth the various canonical decisions on marriage throughout the history of the church up until the sixteenth century. It shows that while these canonical sources always upheld the permanence of the marriage bond, with reference to Matthew and Ephesians, a possible breakdown was always foreseen. In the earlier texts, the only cause given for breakdown, and thus the possibility for remar- riage, was adultery, while in later texts additional reasons were given as to why a marriage would no longer function. Both the offended party and the offending party were admit- ted to a second marriage, the latter when true repentance was shown. THe article next examines the ancient marriage liturgy and shows that this same duality is present. THe permanence of the marriage bond is celebrated as taking place within the bond between Christ and the Church. Yet, at least one version of the marriage rite specifically mentions adultery as a cause for marital breakdown. THe liturgy also prays for the success of the marital union, showing that this success lies in the hands of the spouses. THe next part of the article deals with the transformation of marriage theology and practice that came

119 Marriage, Families & Spirituality 24 (2018) with the Latinization of the Syro-Malabar Church at the Synod of Diamper. THere the indissolubility of marriage was decreed in its Tridentine form and the marriage liturgy instituted was a translation of the Tridentine liturgy. THe final part of the article looks at the renewal in the marriage liturgy in recent years. THe restoration of the ancient liturgy is seen as the opening of the possibility of a restoration of the ancient theology and practice of marriage. With the recent highlighting of the need for the pastoral care of divorced Christians at the synods of bishops and in Amoris laetitia, the article proposes that the ancient practice among the St. THomas Christians in such situations may be a valid response in an Indian context.

Scaria Kanniyakonil is Professor of Moral THeology at Paurastya Vidyāpītham, Pontifical Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, Vadavathoor, Kerala, India. He is a priest of the archdiocese of Changanacherry, India. He was awarded a doctorate in moral theology from the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, in 2002. His works include: Ethical Perspectives of the Eastern Churches (ed.), Changnacherry: HIRS, 2004; Living Organ Donation and Transplantation, Kottayam: OIRSI, 2005; Bioethical Issues and the Family (ed.), THuruthy: Cana Publications, 2005; THe Fun- damentals of Bioethics: Legal Perspectives and Ethical Approaches, Kottayam: OIRSI, 2007; Wait For God’s Call?: Catholic Perspective on Euthanasia, Kottayam: OIRSI, 2011; New Horizons in Christian Ethics: Reflections from India (ed.), Kottayam: OIRSI, 2014; Pastoral Challenges of Marriage and Family: Responses from India (ed.), Kottayam: OIRSI, 2015; Bioethical Issues: A Catholic Moral Analysis, Kottayam: OIRSI, 2017.

120