The Synod of Diamper (Udayamperoor)

To understand the tragedy of the Synod of Diamper, one must first appreciate what was lost. The Saint Thomas Christians of Malabar (Kerala) traced their origins to the Apostle Thomas himself, who, according to our ancient and unwavering tradition, arrived on the Malabar Coast in 52 AD and established seven churches. For over fifteen centuries, this community flourished as a unique expression of apostolic Christianity, maintaining its distinct identity while remaining in communion with the broader Church.

The Malankara Church, as we know it, was an integral part of the East Syriac ecclesiastical world, maintaining liturgical, theological, and hierarchical connections with the Church of the East centered in Mesopotamia. Our forefathers celebrated the Holy Qurbana in the majestic East Syriac liturgical tradition, sang hymns composed by the great Church Fathers of the Syriac-speaking world, and organized their ecclesiastical life under the spiritual authority of the Catholicos of the East.

Before Portuguese interference, the Malankara Church enjoyed remarkable autonomy and spiritual vitality. The community was led by indigenous Archdeacons (Arkadyakons), who exercised both spiritual and temporal authority over the faithful. These Archdeacons were not mere administrators but spiritual fathers who embodied the apostolic succession handed down from St. Thomas himself.

The liturgical life was conducted entirely in Syriac, the sacred language that connected us directly to the Aramaic-speaking world of our Lord Jesus Christ and the early Church. Our theological libraries contained precious manuscripts in Syriac—commentaries on Scripture, lives of saints, liturgical texts, and theological treatises that represented centuries of accumulated spiritual wisdom.

The Saint Thomas Christians maintained cordial relations with the Hindu rulers of Kerala, enjoying freedom of worship, trading privileges, and social respect. We were known as "Nazranis" (Christians), and our community included members from various social strata, though many belonged to the upper castes, reflecting our ancient establishment in the region.

When Vasco da Gama landed in Calicut in 1498, he was astonished to find an ancient and thriving Christian community in India. However, the Portuguese arrival marked the beginning of a century of increasing tension and eventual catastrophe for the Saint Thomas Christians. The Portuguese came not merely as traders but as representatives of an aggressive colonial-ecclesiastical project that sought to impose Latin Christianity wherever their ships landed.

From the outset, the Portuguese viewed the Malankara Church with suspicion and disdain. They could not comprehend how an authentic Christian community could exist outside the immediate jurisdiction of Rome, celebrate liturgy in Syriac rather than Latin, and maintain theological formulations different from the recently concluded Council of Trent. In their eyes, the Saint Thomas Christians were at best schismatics who needed to be "corrected," and at worst, heretics who had fallen into "Nestorian errors."

The Portuguese Padroado (patronage) system claimed exclusive rights over all ecclesiastical matters in Portuguese territories. This meant that the ancient connection between the Malankara Church and the Church of the East was viewed as illegitimate interference in Portuguese ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The Portuguese systematically prevented East Syriac bishops from reaching Kerala, intercepting them at sea or imprisoning them when they did arrive.

Aleixo de Menezes, appointed as Archbishop of Goa in 1595, arrived in India with a clear mission: to bring the Malankara Church completely under Roman jurisdiction and to eradicate what he perceived as theological errors. A product of Counter-Reformation zeal, Menezes was convinced that any deviation from Latin theological formulations and Roman ecclesiastical practice was dangerous heresy that threatened the salvation of souls.

Menezes was not merely an ecclesiastical administrator; he was an agent of Portuguese colonial power. He arrived in Kerala with the full backing of the Portuguese Viceroy and local Portuguese military forces. His "visitation" of the Malankara churches was not a pastoral visit but an ecclesiastical invasion, characterized by intimidation, threats, and the systematic destruction of our heritage.

Before convening the Synod, Menezes spent months traveling through Kerala, visiting Saint Thomas Christian churches, examining their liturgical books, interrogating clergy, and building a case for comprehensive reform. His methodology was thorough and ruthless—he confiscated manuscripts, imposed penalties on those who resisted, and used Portuguese military presence to enforce his authority.

The Synod was convened at St. Mary's Church in Udayamperoor (which the Portuguese called Diamper), near Kochi. From a Syriac Orthodox historical perspective, what transpired during those seven days in June 1599 was not a legitimate ecumenical council seeking truth through dialogue, but rather a coercive assembly designed to rubber-stamp predetermined conclusions and impose foreign practices on an ancient apostolic community.

The assembly included approximately 153 priests and 660 lay representatives from the Saint Thomas Christian community. However, the proceedings were dominated by Menezes himself, assisted by Portuguese Jesuit fathers who had spent years studying the Syriac texts in order to identify "errors" and prepare counter-arguments. The Archdeacon George of the Cross (Geevarghese Archdeacon), the traditional leader of the Malankara Church, was present but had already been pressured and intimidated into a position of compliance.

The language barrier itself created an inherent injustice. The proceedings were conducted primarily in Portuguese and Malayalam, with Syriac texts being "translated" and interpreted by Portuguese priests who were hostile to the very tradition they were examining. How could such a process yield fair results? The Saint Thomas Christian clergy, many of whom could read Syriac liturgically but did not understand Portuguese theological terminology, were at a severe disadvantage.

The Synod produced hundreds of decrees organized into nine "Actions," covering virtually every aspect of church life. From a Syriac Orthodox scholarly perspective, these decrees represent a systematic attempt to erase the distinctive identity of the Malankara Church and replace it with a Portuguese-Latin ecclesial structure.

Decree on Ecclesiastical Authority

The Synod formally declared that the Malankara Church was henceforth subject to the Archbishop of Goa and, through him, to the Pope of Rome. This decree severed fifteen centuries of ecclesiastical connection with the Patriarchate of the Church of the East. The ancient relationship whereby bishops and metropolitans came from Mesopotamia was condemned as illegitimate. The Portuguese claimed that the "Chaldean" (East Syriac) bishops who had served the Malankara Church were heretics and schismatics whose ordinations and consecrations were questionable.

This was not merely an administrative reorganization; it was a theological claim that the Malankara Church had been in error for fifteen centuries. How could the Church founded by St. Thomas, which had maintained apostolic succession and orthodox faith through all those centuries, suddenly be declared deficient in its very foundations? This decree represented an arrogant dismissal of our apostolic heritage.

Destruction of Liturgical Books

Perhaps the most devastating aspect of the Synod was the decree ordering the examination, correction, or destruction of all Syriac liturgical and theological books. Menezes and his Jesuit assistants had identified what they considered "Nestorian errors" in the East Syriac liturgical texts. Rather than engage in genuine theological dialogue about how these expressions should be understood within their proper context, the Portuguese simply ordered the texts to be destroyed or "corrected."

Countless irreplaceable manuscripts were burned, defaced, or confiscated. Ancient Syriac gospels, lectionaries, liturgical books, and theological commentaries—some dating back many centuries—were lost forever. This was not merely a loss of books; it was cultural genocide, the deliberate destruction of a community's sacred heritage. The Portuguese showed no respect for the antiquity or sanctity of these texts, viewing them merely as sources of error to be eliminated.

The "corrected" versions of liturgical texts that emerged from this process were Latinized hybrids that removed distinctively East Syriac theological expressions and replaced them with Latin terminology. The beautiful, poetic Syriac hymns were altered or replaced. The ancient anaphoras (Eucharistic prayers) attributed to the Apostles Addai and Mari, and to Theodore of Mopsuestia, were condemned and forbidden.

Theological Condemnations

The Synod condemned various theological expressions found in East Syriac tradition, particularly those related to Christology. The Portuguese labeled these as "Nestorian heresies," referring to the ancient controversy surrounding Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople in the 5th century. However, modern scholarship has demonstrated that the Christology of the Church of the East, while using different terminology than the Greek fathers, was essentially orthodox in affirming both the full divinity and full humanity of Christ.

The tragedy is that the Portuguese condemned without understanding. The Syriac theological tradition had its own vocabulary, developed in a different linguistic and cultural context from Greek and Latin theology. Terms like "qnoma" (person/hypostasis) and "kyānā" (nature) in Syriac had nuances different from their Greek equivalents. Rather than appreciate this theological diversity within orthodoxy, the Portuguese demanded conformity to Latin formulations.

The Synod imposed the Tridentine profession of faith, required acceptance of all Roman Catholic dogmas including those that had no basis in ancient tradition (such as certain Marian doctrines and papal claims), and forbade any theological expression that deviated from Latin scholasticism. This represented not just a rejection of East Syriac theology but a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of theological development and legitimate diversity within orthodox Christianity.

Reorganization of Ecclesiastical Structure

The ancient office of Archdeacon, which had governed the Malankara Church for centuries, was systematically weakened and subordinated to Portuguese bishops. The Synod decreed that henceforth, bishops would be appointed from Goa, and that they would be Europeans trained in Latin theology and loyal to Portuguese interests. The indigenous clergy were viewed with suspicion and subjected to new educational requirements designed to re-train them in Latin theology.

Seminaries were to be established following the Tridentine model, where young men would be formed not in the Syriac patristic tradition but in Latin scholasticism. The goal was clear: within a generation, the Malankara Church would have clergy who knew nothing of their own heritage and everything of Latin theology and ecclesiastical practice.

Liturgical Changes

The Synod imposed numerous changes to liturgical practice. Latin ceremonial elements were introduced, including genuflection, unleavened bread for the Eucharist, and various devotional practices foreign to the Syriac tradition. The ancient East Syriac liturgical calendar was replaced with the Roman calendar. Saints venerated in the Syriac tradition but unknown in the West were removed from the calendar, while Latin saints were added.

Even the physical arrangement of churches was altered to conform to Latin practice. The traditional East Syriac sanctuary arrangement was modified. Images and statues in the Roman style were introduced, despite the fact that the Syriac tradition had its own rich iconographic heritage.

While the Synod's decrees were proclaimed with great ceremony, their implementation met with immediate and sustained resistance. The Saint Thomas Christians, despite being intimidated and confused by Portuguese power, had not abandoned their ancestral faith. Many priests secretly continued to use the old Syriac books that had escaped destruction. Families preserved manuscripts in hidden places. The collective memory of the community retained knowledge of the authentic tradition even as Portuguese authorities tried to suppress it.

The Portuguese implemented the Synod's decrees through force. Priests who resisted were suspended or imprisoned. Churches that refused to adopt the new practices faced closure. The Inquisition, which had been established in Goa in 1560, cast its shadow over Kerala, with accusations of heresy being used to suppress dissent. The Santo Ofício (Holy Office) became an instrument of terror, investigating and punishing those suspected of maintaining "Nestorian" practices.

Portuguese bishops appointed to govern the Malankara Church were foreign in every sense—they did not speak the local languages fluently, did not understand the cultural context, and showed contempt for the ancient traditions they were supposed to shepherd. They viewed their appointment as a civilizing mission, bringing "true" Christianity to what they considered semi-heretical natives.

The accumulated grievances of decades finally erupted in January 1653, when the Saint Thomas Christians learned that yet another bishop sent from Rome—Mar Ahatallah, a Carmelite from the Church of the East who had converted to Catholicism—had been arrested by the Portuguese and had mysteriously died. Rumors spread that he had been killed by the Portuguese to prevent him from reaching Kerala. Whether true or not, this incident symbolized everything wrong with Portuguese ecclesiastical domination.

On January 3, 1653, a vast multitude of Saint Thomas Christians gathered at the Mattancherry Church in Kochi. There, at an ancient stone cross (the Coonan Cross—"leaning cross"), they took a solemn oath: they declared that they would no longer submit to the jurisdiction of the Portuguese Archbishop of Goa or any Portuguese ecclesiastical authority. They swore allegiance to their Archdeacon Thomas, whom they would elevate to the episcopate, thereby reasserting their ecclesiastical independence.

This oath represented the complete rejection of everything the Synod of Diamper had tried to accomplish. The people declared, in effect, that the forced submission of 1599 had been illegitimate, that their true ecclesiastical identity was not Latin but Syriac, and that they would rather have an indigenous hierarchy, even if that meant initially not having properly consecrated bishops, than continue under foreign domination.

Following the Coonan Cross Oath, the majority of Saint Thomas Christians (about two-thirds of the community) found themselves in ecclesiastical limbo. They had rejected Portuguese authority but initially lacked bishops with valid apostolic succession. Archdeacon Thomas had been elevated to the episcopate by the laying on of hands by twelve priests and the assembled people—a procedure that, while expressing the will of the community, was canonically irregular.

The community actively sought connection with an authentic apostolic See of the East, free from Portuguese control. In 1665, Mar Gregorios Abdul Jaleel, a bishop of the Syriac Orthodox Church (West Syriac tradition) sent by the Patriarch of Antioch, reached Kerala after a perilous journey. His arrival was providential. He regularized the episcopal consecration of Mar Thomas I and established formal communion between the Malankara Church and the Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch.

This marked a transition from the East Syriac to the West Syriac tradition. While this represented a change in liturgical family, it maintained apostolic succession and orthodox faith. The Malankara Church gradually adopted the West Syriac liturgy (Anaphora of St. James and others), theological expressions, and ecclesiastical practices, while maintaining its own local governance structure under the Malankara Metropolitan.

From a Syriac Orthodox perspective, this transition was not abandonment of the apostolic heritage but rather its preservation under new circumstances. Both East Syriac and West Syriac traditions are legitimate expressions of ancient Syriac Christianity. The key point is that the Malankara Church remained within the Syriac Christian family, maintaining Syriac liturgy, Syriac theological heritage, and apostolic succession— everything the Synod of Diamper had tried to destroy.

The Coonan Cross Oath created a permanent division in the Saint Thomas Christian community. Those who took the oath and maintained independence from Rome became known as "Puthenkoor" (New Party), while those who remained in communion with Rome became "Pazhayakoor" (Old Party)—an ironic nomenclature, since it was actually the Puthenkoor who were attempting to maintain the older, pre-Portuguese tradition, while the Pazhayakoor were maintaining the Portuguese-imposed order.

The Pazhayakoor faction, also known as the Romo-Syrians or today's Syro-Malabar Catholics, underwent further Latinization in subsequent centuries, though they retained some Syriac liturgical elements. The Puthenkoor faction developed into what is today the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church (in communion with the Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch), and related communities.

This division, which persists to this day, is a direct consequence of the Synod of Diamper. It represents a wound in the body of the Saint Thomas Christians that has never fully healed. Families were divided, churches split, and a community that had maintained unity for fifteen centuries was fractured by colonial ecclesiastical politics.

From a Syriac Orthodox theological perspective, the Synod of Diamper was fundamentally flawed on multiple levels. It violated basic principles of ecclesiastical order, pastoral care, and theological discernment.

Violation of Apostolic Autonomy

The ancient Church recognized that apostolic sees—churches founded by apostles—possessed a special dignity and autonomy. The Malankara Church, founded by St. Thomas, had every right to maintain its own ecclesiastical traditions and governance structures. The Portuguese claim to jurisdiction based solely on colonial presence had no basis in ancient canonical principles. If Rome truly respected apostolic tradition, it should have approached the Malankara Church as an ancient sister church deserving of honor, not as a wayward community to be corrected by force.

Cultural Imperialism Disguised as Orthodoxy

The Synod assumed that Latin theology, Latin liturgy, and Latin ecclesiastical practice represented the only legitimate expression of Christianity. This is theological and cultural imperialism. The Church universal has always contained diversity—Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, and other traditions, each expressing the one apostolic faith through its own cultural and linguistic heritage. To demand that Syriac Christians abandon their heritage and adopt Latin practices is to deny this fundamental catholicity.

Misunderstanding of Theological Development

The Portuguese condemned East Syriac Christology without understanding it. Modern ecumenical dialogue has demonstrated that the Christological controversies of the 5th century were often based on linguistic and cultural misunderstandings rather than fundamental theological differences. The Church of the East's Christology, while using different terminology, affirmed the same essential truths about Christ as the Chalcedonian formulation. The Synod's condemnations were based on outdated polemics rather than genuine theological discernment.

Destruction of Sacred Heritage

The burning and defacement of ancient manuscripts was an act of sacrilege. These texts were not merely historical documents; they were sacred vessels of the faith, liturgical books through which generations had encountered Christ in the sacraments, theological works that had nourished the spiritual life of the community. Their destruction represented a profound disrespect for the workings of the Holy Spirit in the Syriac Christian tradition.

The Synod of Diamper had consequences extending far beyond Kerala. It represents a cautionary tale about the dangers of identifying Christianity too closely with any particular cultural or political power. The Portuguese colonial church failed to recognize that the Gospel transcends all cultures and can be authentically expressed through many different cultural forms.

The Synod also contributed to the fragmentation of Christianity in India. Instead of recognizing the Saint Thomas Christians as allies in the mission of the Church, the Portuguese created division, suspicion, and lasting animosity. The divisions created in 1599 and 1653 continue to affect the Christian community in Kerala today, nearly five centuries later.

From a missionary perspective, Diamper represents a failure to practice genuine inculturation. Rather than appreciating how Christianity had already been successfully inculturated in Syriac culture and Indian society, the Portuguese sought to impose a European cultural package along with the Gospel. This approach has been rightly criticized by modern missiology as confusing the essential message of Christianity with contingent cultural expressions.

In the centuries following the Synod and the Coonan Cross Oath, the Malankara Church, now in communion with the Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate, worked to recover and preserve its heritage. This included:

• Reintroducing the West Syriac liturgy and restoring Syriac as the primary liturgical language (though Malayalam translations were developed for pastoral reasons)
• Establishing theological education rooted in Syriac patristics rather than Latin scholasticism
• Recovering historical consciousness about the pre-Portuguese period and the injustices of colonialism
• Maintaining and strengthening ties with the Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch
• Preserving and studying the few Syriac manuscripts that survived the Portuguese destruction

The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church, and related communities today proudly maintain their Syriac Orthodox identity. They celebrate the Divine Liturgy according to the ancient Syriac rites, honor the Syriac Church Fathers, and maintain communion with the wider Syriac Orthodox world. This represents a triumph over the attempts at cultural and ecclesiastical genocide undertaken at Diamper.

Contemporary scholarship, including Catholic scholarship, has become increasingly critical of the Synod of Diamper. Historians recognize it as an example of ecclesiastical colonialism that violated the rights and dignity of an ancient Christian community. The Portuguese Padroado system itself is now widely acknowledged as having caused tremendous harm to the Church's mission in Asia.

The Second Vatican Council's emphasis on respect for Eastern Christian traditions and on the legitimacy of liturgical and theological diversity represents, in some sense, a repudiation of the Diamper approach. While the Catholic Church has not formally apologized for Diamper, many Catholic scholars and ecclesiastics today recognize it as a dark chapter that should not be repeated.

Ecumenical dialogues between the Catholic Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches (including the Syriac Orthodox Church) have led to important Christological agreements that demonstrate that the ancient controversies were based largely on misunderstandings. This vindicates the position that the East Syriac theology condemned at Diamper was not actually heretical, and that the violent imposition of Latin theological language was unnecessary and harmful.

The Synod of Diamper offers important lessons for contemporary Christianity, especially in an age of continued globalization and cross-cultural encounter:

• Respect for Diversity: Authentic Christianity can and should be expressed through diverse cultural and linguistic forms. Unity in faith does not require uniformity in practice.
• Beware of Power: When the Church becomes too closely aligned with political and economic power, it risks using coercion rather than persuasion, force rather than love.
• Value Ancient Tradition: Churches with apostolic origins deserve special respect and should not be subjected to the theological fashions or cultural preferences of more powerful churches.
• Humility in Theological Discourse: Before condemning another tradition's theological expressions, one must first understand them deeply and charitably, recognizing that different linguistic and cultural contexts produce different theological vocabularies.
• Preserve Heritage: The destruction of manuscripts and sacred texts is always wrong. Every Christian tradition's literary and liturgical heritage is a gift to the whole Church.

For Syriac Orthodox Christians and for the Malankara Orthodox Church, the memory of the Synod of Diamper remains a defining element of communal identity. It represents the moment when our ancestors faced the choice between compromise and fidelity, between the easier path of accommodation to power and the harder path of maintaining authentic identity at great cost.

The fact that the majority of the community, after enduring fifty years of Portuguese domination, finally took the Coonan Cross Oath demonstrates the depth of their commitment to the faith of their fathers. They valued their apostolic heritage, their Syriac liturgy, their ecclesiastical autonomy, and their theological tradition more than they valued peace with Portuguese power.

Today, when we celebrate the Divine Liturgy in Syriac, when we honor the Syriac Church Fathers, when we maintain our communion with the Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch, we are continuing the resistance that began in 1653. We are affirming that our forefathers were right to reject Diamper, right to seek authentic apostolic connection, and right to value their heritage above colonial convenience.

The Synod of Diamper attempted to erase the Syriac Christian identity of the Malankara Church. It failed. We remain, by God's grace, a living continuation of the apostolic mission of St. Thomas, maintaining our place within the ancient Syriac Christian tradition, bearing witness to the truth that the Gospel of Jesus Christ can flourish in every culture and should not be subjected to the political ambitions of earthly powers.