There is view among the Copts comparing this issue between the Syriac Orthodox church and the

excommunicated Indian Orthodox faction to the Coptic Orthodox granting "freedom" ( if you can call that) to the Ethiopian orthodox tewehedo church .Both these situations are different because: 1.In the EOTC the whole church asked for the autocephaly ( So called freedom)but in the Syriac Orthodox church in India the whole church didnot ask for that. 2.EOTC has different rites , liturgical language , fasts and feast cycle, liturgical vestments from the Coptic Orthodox church.But Syriac Orthodox (even when the excommunicated Indian "orthodox " faction was a part of the Syriac Orthodox church and even now when they are excommunicated) ) in India and middle east do not have that . 3.The EOTCs autocephaly was granted by the Coptic Orthodox Synod under LL Pope Shenouda .But the Syriac Orthodox synod under the Patriarch of has not granted that . 4.In the church in India many bishops and laity applied to Patriarch of Antioch and all the East saying we do not want to break the body of Christ , the holy Church(Syriac Orthodox church of the canonical Orientla Orthodox communion) based on nationality , but the Orthodox church bishops and laity in Ethiopia did not ask the Coptic Orthodox Patriarch ( and the Synod ) for unity of the Orthodox church under Pope of Alexandria. 5.EOTC did not bribe the bishops of CO church to join them if any disciplinary action was taken by the CO church but the Indian "Orthodox " faction did that against the SOC ( eg NicholovasZackarias of USA), Militheos Yuhannon of Thrissur and Athanasius Thomas of Kandanad ( who was with SOC but was excommunicated and were welcomed by IO faction ) and still tries to do that. Also , the said Militheos Yuhannon of Thrissur and Athanasius Thomas of Kandanad ordained ( doubts on the canonical validity of this so called ordination , as the persons who did this act did not have valid priesthood because of their excommunication and canonically even the IO faction only Catholicos (pseudo) has the right to do so .During persecution 3 bishops can ordain with the permission of the head of the church ( which in this case is an excommunicated faction ).But that is an exception.Even if we take it as a case of persecution ( which was not the case) , we need at least 3 bishops .but that was not followed , as only 2 were present in the so called ordination ) Gurgan , who was an ex Syriac Orthodox monk excommunicated from the holy Syriac Orthodox church for behavior unbecoming of an Orthodox monk. 6.EOTC didnot forcefully occupy or bribe priest and the Court of law to capture CO churches , but Indian " orthodox " faction did that and still does it . 7.EOTC did not file cases against the CO patriarch refusing HH entry into Ethiopia, Indian " orthodox ' faction did file cases against the entry of Patriarch of Antioch and all the East , the head of the Syriac Orthodox church from entering the India to visit the Syriac Orthodox faithful in India. 8.The Indian " orthodox " faction so called " Catholicate " is not canonically valid as it was supposed to be established by Abdul Mesisha , who was excommunicated from the throne of the Patriarch of

Antioch and all the east .It is the Patraiarch of Antioch and all the East who has the right to do it with the permission of the Holy Syriac Orthodox synod .There was neither a synod decision nor was the person wo is said to have done it a canonically valid Patriarch .Mr Abdul meshiha was excommunicated when he supposedly gave the title of Catholiocose to the first IndianOrthodox faction Catholicose. If you are stripped of priesthood and eccelesial office needed to give a canonical position to a person , how can any o called ordination be valid. Morover the real canonical Patriarch of Antioch and all the East was alive at that time.Its funny that even the creator of Indian orthodox faction Mor Dionysius Geevarughese Vattaserial got his high priesthood (bishopric) ordination from the canonical Patriarch and not from the excommunicated Abdul Meshiha.So their validity of their priesthood is still in doubt.None of this kind of situation occurred between the COC and the EOTC. 9. Good relation between any canonical Oriental orthodox (Coptic , Syrian ( including the Jacobite syrian) , Armenian (2 catholicates , 2 patriarchates), EOTC ( not the schismatic excommunicated "synod in exile" ), Eritrean (the one under the canonical patriarch Antonios and not under the Dioskoros appointed by the Govt controlled so called " Synod") and the excommunicated Indian " Orthodox " faction does not make Indian "Orthodox " faction canonically valid Oriental orthodox church.