Indian Christianity

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA : M. M. NINAN
In the sixth century Cosmas, an Alexandrian merchant, called from his travels Indicopleustes, visited India.
He has given as an account of the Church he found there and speaks of a bishop who had come from
Persia where he had been consecrated.
Towards the close of the eighth century, the Church in Malabar was greatly strengthened by the arrival
of a large party, led by a wealthy merchant named Thomas Cana from Armenia. These settled down in
the country, and by their diligence and success brought themselves under the favourable notice of the then
reigning prince Cheruman Perumal. This enlightened prince, though claimed as a convert by the
Muhammadans, showed the Christians much favour. Through the influence of Thomas Cana many privileges
were conferred upon the whole community, and thus was secured for the Syrian Christians the
independent social status which they continue to enjoy to this day. Two important documents, embodying
grants made at this time, consisting of copper plates engraved in the old Malayalam character, and supposed
to be fully a thousand years old, are still in possession of the Syrian Christians. It may be interesting to
note in passing that the Jews of Cochin are also in possession of similar documents, descriptive of
privileges and grants conferred on them by the same Cheruman Perumal at the same time. The Syrian
Chnrch in Malabar appears to have reached its zenith of prosperity during the reign of this prince and
under the leadership of Thomas Cana. But little is known of their subsequent history until the arrival
of the Portuguese on the Malabar coast, at the close of the fifteenth century.
It may be well, before proceeding to this period of the history,to say a few words on the government?
and distinctive views and tenets of the Syrian Church.
•
The Syrian Chnrch of Malabar is an Episcopal Chnrch. Its first bishop or bishops were
consecrated, according to tradition, by the Apostle who founded the church.
We have seen that at the time of the Nicene Council (325), and in the days of Cosmas in the sixth
century, the Church of Malabar was subject in matters ecclesiastical to the Metropolitan of Persia. The
Persian Church, we know, was with other Eastern Churches subject to the Patriarchate of Antioch.
About $n hundred years after the Council of Nic»a that terrible dispute arose between Cyril, Patriarch of
Alexandria, and Nestorins, Patriarch of Byzantium, on the Divine and human natures of Christ, which rent
the Church, and resulted in sects and divisions, persecutions and troubles, for many generations.
The Archbishop of Selencia, whether in connection with Antioch or not is a vexed question, became
the recognized head of the Nestorian Churches. The See of Seleucia was afterwards removed to Bagdad,
and subsequently to Mosul, the bishop taking the title of Patriarch of Babylon, or Babylonia, the name of
the district comprising the See.
When the Metropolitan of Persia acknowledged the authority of these Nestorian Patriarchs, the Christians of India,
being subject to his authority, were, as a matter of course, reckoned among the Nestorian Churches,
acknowledging the Bishop of Babylon as their Patriarch. Continuing to receive their bishops from Babylon or Persia
they became in time imbued with Nestorian teaching. Cosmas, in his account of them, expressly asserts that they
were Nestorians and held the doctrine of the two Persons. At present, and for a long time past, they hold and have
held, doctrines more akin to Monophysism, and are always ready to disclaim the errors of Nestorius. The following
summary of the condition of the Syrian Church in the sixteenth century, at the time when first European
(Portuguese) influence was brought to bear upon its fortunes, by Xiobley (Maitland Prize Essay, 1870) may not be
out of place here.
" It preserved much primitive simplicity both of doctrine and ritual, but was heterodox upon the subject of our Lord's
Incarnation, and moreover had derived from the heathen and unbelievers around some other corruptions of
doctrine. A remnant there was in it, no doubt, of earnest, pure, God-loving and Godfearing men; but there were
many abuses and much spiritual sloth......Their public services being conducted in the unknown tongue of Syria,
and by priests who were, for the most part, examples of coldness and inactivity, were unable to inspire the people
with that fervour of religious feeling, which is the mark of a living Church. A stirring and quickening of the dry bones
was greatly needed. Perhaps the troubles which shortly came upon them were permitted for a discipline."
154