Diamper, Synod of
Diamper, Synod of
Header
Diamper, Synod of (20–27 June 1599)
迪安珀会议 (Synod of Diamper) (1599 年 6 月 20–27 日)
Body
Diocesan synod of the Thomas Christians, or the Syriac rite Christians of Kerala, held in the village of Udayamperur (Diamper) to the south of Kochi (Cochin).
多马基督徒 (Thomas Christians)(或喀拉拉邦 (Kerala) 叙利亚礼基督徒 (Syriac rite Christians))的教区会议 (Diocesan synod),于科奇 (Kochi/Cochin) 以南的乌代姆佩鲁尔 (Udayamperur/Diamper) 村举行。
Diocesan synod of the Thomas Christians, or the Syriac-rite Christians of Kerala, held in the village of Udayamperur (Diamper) to the south of Kochi (Cochin). It marked a watershed in the process of strengthening Roman and Portuguese control over the Thomas Christians.
多马基督徒 (Thomas Christians),即喀拉拉邦 (Kerala) 的叙利亚礼基督徒 (Syriac-rite Christians) 的教区会议 (Diocesan synod),于科契 (Kochi)(科钦 (Cochin))以南的乌代扬佩鲁尔 (Udayamperur)(迪亚佩尔 (Diamper))村举行。它标志着在加强罗马 (Roman) 和葡萄牙 (Portuguese) 对多马基督徒 (Thomas Christians) 控制进程中的一个分水岭。
Prior to the Synod of Diamper, the Thomas Christians had been ruled by E. Syr. and, since the middle of the 16th cent. — after the recognition of Patr. Yoḥannan Sullaqa by Rome in 1553 and the arrival of his brother Mar Yawsep in Kerala in 1558 — by Chald. bishops. At the same time, the second half of the 16th cent. had seen an increase in the activities of Latin missionaries in Kerala and moves by the Portuguese to strengthen their control over the Thomas Christians, who were indispensable for them as partners in the spice trade, with the result, for example, that the Chald. bp. Mar Abraham, who had arrived in India in 1568, was summoned in 1585 to attend the Third Provincial Council of Goa and was made to agree to the introduction of a number of Latin practices in the liturgy of the Thomas Christians.
在迪亚珀尔会议(Synod of Diamper)之前,托马斯基督徒(Thomas Christians)一直受东方叙利亚教会(E. Syr.)管辖,且自 16 世纪中叶以来——即在 1553 年罗马(Rome)承认宗主教(Patr.)约哈南·苏拉卡(Yoḥannan Sullaqa)以及 1558 年其兄弟马尔·亚乌塞普(Mar Yawsep)抵达喀拉拉(Kerala)之后——由迦勒底教会(Chald.)主教管辖。与此同时,16 世纪下半叶见证了拉丁(Latin)传教士在喀拉拉(Kerala)活动的增加,以及葡萄牙人(Portuguese)加强控制托马斯基督徒(Thomas Christians)的举动,后者作为香料贸易的伙伴对他们来说不可或缺,致使例如 1568 年抵达印度(India)的迦勒底教会(Chald.)主教(bp.)马尔·亚伯拉罕(Mar Abraham)于 1585 年被召参加果阿第三届省会议(Third Provincial Council of Goa),并被迫同意在托马斯基督徒(Thomas Christians)的礼仪中引入若干拉丁(Latin)习俗。
Following the death of Mar Abraham in 1597, Archbishop Aleixo (Alexis) de Menezes of Goa (1559–1617, Archbishop of Goa 1595–1612) arrived in Kerala in Jan. 1599. After gaining the support of the local rulers and some of the local clergy, partly by ordaining a large number of new priests, and forcing Archdeacon George of the Cross (archdeacon 1594–1640), the leader of the Thomas Christians, to submit to him, Menezes called for a synod to be convened in June 1599. Udayamperur, more easily accessible from the Portuguese stronghold at Kochi than the traditional center of the diocese at Angamali, was chosen as the venue of the synod.
1597 年马·亚伯拉罕 (Mar Abraham) 去世后,果阿 (Goa) 大主教 (Abp.) 阿莱克索 (Aleixo)(亚历克西斯 (Alexis))德·梅内塞斯 (de Menezes)(1559–1617 年,1595–1612 年任果阿 (Goa) 大主教 (Abp.))于 1599 年 1 月抵达喀拉拉 (Kerala)。在获得当地统治者和部分当地神职人员的支持(部分是通过祝圣大量新神父),并迫使托马斯基督徒 (Thomas Christians) 的领袖十字架的乔治 (George of the Cross) 执事长 (Archd.)(执事长 (Archd.) 1594–1640)向他屈服后,梅内塞斯 (Menezes) 号召于 1599 年 6 月召开一次会议 (synod)。乌代姆佩鲁尔 (Udayamperur) 比教区传统中心安加马里 (Angamali) 更容易从葡萄牙 (Portuguese) 在科钦 (Kochi) 的据点抵达,因此被选为会议 (synod) 的举办地。
The synod, attended by 153 local priests and 660 lay representatives, lasted from the 20th to the 27th of June, and passed more than 200 decrees in rapid succession and evidently without any serious debate. The decrees covering doctrinal, liturgical, and customary matters were designed to bring the Church of the Thomas Christians in line with the post-Tridentine Roman Church, as well as to sever her links with the E.-Syr. (Chald.) Church, and included condemnations of ‘Nestorian’ heresy and prohibition of any recognition of the ‘Patriarch of Babylon’.
该会议有 153 名本地神父和 660 名平信徒代表参加,历时 6 月 20 日至 27 日,迅速接连通过了 200 多项法令,显然未经任何严肃辩论。涵盖教义、礼仪及习俗事项的法令旨在使多马基督徒教会 (Church of the Thomas Christians) 与特伦托会议后 (post-Tridentine) 的罗马教会 (Roman Church) 保持一致,并切断其与东叙利亚(迦勒底)教会 (E.-Syr. (Chald.) Church) 的联系,其中包括对“聂斯脱里” (Nestorian) 异端的谴责以及禁止承认“巴比伦宗主教” (Patriarch of Babylon)。
The Jesuit Francisco Ros (Roz), writing in 1604, reported that Menezes had altered the text of the acts and decrees of the synod which he sent to Rome after the synod had ended, and there are indeed significant differences between the Malayalam text of the decrees and the text which was made known in Europe, although we cannot be sure that the Malayalam text we have today, preserved only in 18th-cent. mss., faithfully represents the decrees as read out and passed at the synod. Serious doubts have also been cast on the canonical validity of the synod itself by scholars including J. Thaliath. Valid or not, however, the synod and its decrees, the latter somewhat modified at the diocesan synod of 1603 and by the so-called Rozian Statutes of 1606, were to determine the way of life and the course of events for the Thomas Christians, especially those who remained in communion with Rome, in the subsequent centuries.
耶稣会士 (Jesuit) 弗朗西斯科·罗斯 (Francisco Ros)(罗兹 (Roz))于 1604 年著文报告称,梅内塞斯 (Menezes) 篡改了他在会议结束后送往罗马 (Rome) 的会议记录与法令文本,且法令的马拉雅拉姆语 (Malayalam) 文本与在欧洲 (Europe) 公布的文本之间确实存在显著差异,尽管我们无法确定今天所拥有的、仅保存于 18 世纪手稿 (18th-cent. mss.) 中的马拉雅拉姆语 (Malayalam) 文本,是否忠实反映了会议上宣读并通过的法令。包括 J. 塔利亚特 (J. Thaliath) 在内的学者也对会议本身的教会法有效性提出了严重质疑。然而,无论有效与否,该会议及其法令(后者在 1603 年教区会议 (diocesan synod of 1603) 及所谓的 1606 年罗兹法规 (Rozian Statutes of 1606) 中有所修改)决定了随后几个世纪托马斯基督徒 (Thomas Christians) 的生活方式及事件进程,尤其是那些与罗马 (Rome) 保持共融的基督徒。
After the synod, Menezes remained in Kerala until Nov. 1599 and made a tour of the diocese, during which books preserved in the local churches were submitted to his entourage for examination and those deemed heretical were consigned to the flame. It is believed that a large proportion of those Syriac mss. which were in Kerala at the time were lost in this way, although it is difficult now to determine the exact extent of the loss.
公会议后,梅内塞斯 (Menezes) 留在喀拉拉 (Kerala) 直至 1599 年 11 月,并巡视了该教区。在此期间,保存在当地教会的书籍被提交给他的随行人员进行审查,那些被视为异端的书籍被付之一炬。据信,当时位于喀拉拉 (Kerala) 的大部分叙利亚文手稿 (Syriac mss.) 都以这种方式遗失了,尽管如今难以确定损失的确切程度。
In Dec. 1599, Ros was appointed new bp. of the diocese of Angamali, which was now formally placed under the Portuguese Padroado and made suffragan to the archdiocese of Goa, although it regained its archiepiscopal status in name in 1608 (the see was transferred around the same time to Kodungallur/Cranganore). Ros was followed by a succession of Jesuit archbishops. The dissatisfaction of the Thomas Christians with their rule was to lead to the revolt against them at the Coonan Cross Oath of 1653 and the subsequent division of the Thomas Christians between those who remained in communion with Rome and those who turned to the Syr. Orth. Church.
1599 年 12 月,罗斯 (Ros) 被任命为安加马里 (Angamali) 教区的新任主教 (bp.),该教区此时正式置于葡萄牙保教权 (Portuguese Padroado) 之下,并成为果阿 (Goa) 总教区的附属教区,尽管其在名义上于 1608 年恢复了总主教地位(教座大约在同一时间迁至科东加卢尔/克兰加诺尔 (Kodungallur/Cranganore))。罗斯 (Ros) 之后是一连串的耶稣会 (Jesuit) 总主教。多马基督徒 (Thomas Christians) 对其统治的不满导致了 1653 年库南十字誓言 (Coonan Cross Oath) 上的反抗起义,以及随后多马基督徒 (Thomas Christians) 的分裂,分为那些保持与罗马 (Rome) 共融的人和那些转向叙利亚正教会 (Syr. Orth. Church) 的人。
On the different texts of the decrees of the synod, see Thaliath, The Synod of Diamper, 175–216. The English translation of the decrees by Michael Geddes, based on the Portuguese version and first published in 1694, has often been reprinted, e.g., in J. Hough, History of Christianity in India, vol. 2 (1939), 511–683; G. Menacherry (ed.), Indian Church history classics. I. The Nazranies (Ollur, 1998), 54–104; S. Zacharia (ed.), The acts and decrees of the Synod of Diamper 1599 (Edamattam, 1994). For the Malayalam version, see S. Sakkaṟiya, Udayaṁpērūr Sūnahadōsinṟe kānōnakaḷ, 1599 (Edamattam, 1994).
关于会议法令的不同文本,参见塔利亚特 (Thaliath),《迪阿姆珀尔会议》(The Synod of Diamper),175–216 页。迈克尔·格迪斯 (Michael Geddes) 根据葡萄牙语 (Portuguese) 版本翻译的法令英译本,首版于 1694 年,曾多次重印,例如收录于 J. 霍夫 (J. Hough),《印度基督教史》(History of Christianity in India),第 2 卷 (vol. 2) (1939),511–683 页;G. 梅纳切里 (G. Menacherry) 编 (ed.),《印度教会史经典》(Indian Church History Classics)。I.《纳兹拉尼人》(The Nazranies)(奥卢尔 (Ollur),1998),54–104 页;S. 扎卡里亚 (S. Zacharia) 编 (ed.),《1599 年迪阿姆珀尔会议的法令与决议》(The acts and decrees of the Synod of Diamper 1599)(埃达马塔姆 (Edamattam),1994)。关于马拉雅拉姆语 (Malayalam) 版本,参见 S. 萨卡里亚 (S. Sakkaṟiya),《1599 年乌代扬佩鲁尔会议法规》(Udayaṁpērūr Sūnahadōsinṟe kānōnakaḷ, 1599)(埃达马塔姆 (Edamattam),1994)。
References
P. Malekandathil (ed. and trans.), Jornada of Dom Alexis de Menezes: a Portuguese account of the sixteenth century Malabar (Jornada do Arcebispo originally written in Portuguese in 1603 by António de Gouvea) (Kochi, 2003).
G. Nedungatt (ed.), The Synod of Diamper revisited (Kanonika 9; 2001).
I. Perczel, ‘Have the flames of Diamper destroyed all the old manuscripts of the Saint Thomas Christians?’ Harp 20 (2006), 87–104.
J. Thaliath, The Synod of Diamper (OCA 152; 1958, repr. Bangalore, 1999).
J. Thekkedath, History of Christianity in India, vol. 2 (revised ed. Bangalore, 2001), 64–75.
J. Wicki, ‘Die Synoden der Thomaschristen (auch Syromalabaren genannt) (1583–1602)’, AHC 18 (1986), 334–447.
Citation
Hidemi Takahashi. 2011. “Diamper, Synod of.” In Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage. Beth Mardutho. https://gedsh.bethmardutho.org/Diamper-Synod-of.