Tweet
CHURCH OF NORASHEN SEIZED
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
13 Dec 2008
Armenia
Why has the Orthodox Church of Georgia undertaken activities
characteristic to terrorists?
The recent developments over the St. Astvatsatsin Church of Norashen
came to prove that the Georgian Orthodox Church (which desecrates
cemeteries with the help of Father Tariel) and the political forces
supporting it are engaged in ordinary provocation. The goal was to
seize the Armenian monuments situated in the capital city of Georgia
and `exchange' them with the chalcedonic temples situated in the
territory of Armenia.'
The fact that Georgia, as a state, has not taken any step towards
preventing the medieval vandalism of seizing the temples of the
Armenian Enlightenment and Roman Catholic churches, desecrating
monuments and ruining the cemeteries of the deceased testifies to the
following: the authorities and some of the political forces of our
neighboring state are somehow involved in those activities.
The political calculation of the latter is more than clear and
transparent: to take advantage of the temporary communication
difficulties in Armenia, impose illegal conditions and finally, make
territorial claims.
The following lines of the `National Christian Movement' organization
are the successive evidence of the above-mentioned objective, `There
are around ten significant orthodox churches and monasteries situated
in the north of Armenia - territory of Lori and Tashir.'
That's to say, is known as northern Armenia at present is not, as a
matter of fact, northern Armenia; it is a place known as Lore-Tashiri
which, as we know, formed part of Georgia in the period of the
strengthening of the Georgian Bagratunis and remained in that status
before the establishment of the Russian rule. This historical truth, as
well as the fact that in the I millennium A.D. not only Lori but also
the entire south of Georgia was under the rule of the Armenian kings
cannot be denied by anyone.
Neither is it possible to deny the fact that despite the successive
raids of the foreign invaders, Lori was always populated by Armenians;
and even the Georgian sources gave that territory and its neighboring
areas the name Somkhet which means Armenia.
So, what's the problem? `The National-Christian Movement' is
dissatisfied with the fact that `certain Armenian groups periodically
attempt to increase the tension and unilaterally demand the return of
the territories which are considered Armenian.' So, what the
`National-Christian Movement' did was nothing more than `reminding the
authors of the provocation about the Georgian orthodox leaders' legal
and logical demand for returning us the orthodox temples of Armenia.'
That's to say, the authors of the statement make it obvious to the
Armenian society that the Georgian clergymen have seized the Armenian
temples situated in Georgia, and if the dispute isn't resolved the way
the want (by exchanging the churches), the temples which are still
Armenian will be `Georgianized', so to say.
This is nothing more than a mode of action characteristic to terrorist
organizations, i.e. taking hostages from the opposite party and then
exchanging them. The only difference is that the Georgian Orthodox
Church and the authorities supporting it have taken a hostage the
inanimate monuments and the bones of the deceased buried below vs.
living humans, and they propose that their pillage be exchanged with
the monuments situated in the territory of Armenia.
At this point, we are faced with several questions:
First: How can a church built by a specific group of believers (in this
particular case, the Armenian community of Tbilisi) be exchanged, for
instance, with the Armenian chalcedonic churches of Kobayr and Akhtala
which do not have a Georgian community?
Second: if the historical monuments are the property of the state, i.e.
Georgia, it doesn't mean that they are only under the ownership of
Georgia because under the international commitments of `Democratic
Georgia', the Armenians of Tbilisi, as citizens of that country, have
the right to use the churches built by their ancestors.
Third: As regards the Armenian chalcedonic churches built by our
orthodox ancestors in the north of Armenia during the Byzantine (and
not Georgian) rule, the demand of handing them over to the Georgian
church also implies a concrete prospect of repopulating the neighboring
areas with believers and eventually, making territorial claims.
At first sight, the justification seems quite clear and even innocent:
if there are Armenians living in Georgia why shouldn't there be
Georgians living in Armenia? Our answer too, should be very clear and
concrete: you are welcome to live wherever you want and as long as you
want; you may build Georgian orthodox churches, but the chalcedonic
monuments of Lori do not belong to you because the bodies of the small
number of Georgians were buried there in the late Middle Ages, in the
period of the Georgian rule.
If the authorities of a `democratic' country like Georgia cannot solve
the problem of returning the Armenian population their places of
worship, we believe that the latter should push the Armenian Diocese of
Georgia and the Georgian-Armenian public organizations to apply to the
relevant European and international tribunals and prove, with the help
of the documents available to them, that St. Astvatsatsin and the other
churches of Norashen belong to the Armenians.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
13 Dec 2008
Armenia
Why has the Orthodox Church of Georgia undertaken activities
characteristic to terrorists?
The recent developments over the St. Astvatsatsin Church of Norashen
came to prove that the Georgian Orthodox Church (which desecrates
cemeteries with the help of Father Tariel) and the political forces
supporting it are engaged in ordinary provocation. The goal was to
seize the Armenian monuments situated in the capital city of Georgia
and `exchange' them with the chalcedonic temples situated in the
territory of Armenia.'
The fact that Georgia, as a state, has not taken any step towards
preventing the medieval vandalism of seizing the temples of the
Armenian Enlightenment and Roman Catholic churches, desecrating
monuments and ruining the cemeteries of the deceased testifies to the
following: the authorities and some of the political forces of our
neighboring state are somehow involved in those activities.
The political calculation of the latter is more than clear and
transparent: to take advantage of the temporary communication
difficulties in Armenia, impose illegal conditions and finally, make
territorial claims.
The following lines of the `National Christian Movement' organization
are the successive evidence of the above-mentioned objective, `There
are around ten significant orthodox churches and monasteries situated
in the north of Armenia - territory of Lori and Tashir.'
That's to say, is known as northern Armenia at present is not, as a
matter of fact, northern Armenia; it is a place known as Lore-Tashiri
which, as we know, formed part of Georgia in the period of the
strengthening of the Georgian Bagratunis and remained in that status
before the establishment of the Russian rule. This historical truth, as
well as the fact that in the I millennium A.D. not only Lori but also
the entire south of Georgia was under the rule of the Armenian kings
cannot be denied by anyone.
Neither is it possible to deny the fact that despite the successive
raids of the foreign invaders, Lori was always populated by Armenians;
and even the Georgian sources gave that territory and its neighboring
areas the name Somkhet which means Armenia.
So, what's the problem? `The National-Christian Movement' is
dissatisfied with the fact that `certain Armenian groups periodically
attempt to increase the tension and unilaterally demand the return of
the territories which are considered Armenian.' So, what the
`National-Christian Movement' did was nothing more than `reminding the
authors of the provocation about the Georgian orthodox leaders' legal
and logical demand for returning us the orthodox temples of Armenia.'
That's to say, the authors of the statement make it obvious to the
Armenian society that the Georgian clergymen have seized the Armenian
temples situated in Georgia, and if the dispute isn't resolved the way
the want (by exchanging the churches), the temples which are still
Armenian will be `Georgianized', so to say.
This is nothing more than a mode of action characteristic to terrorist
organizations, i.e. taking hostages from the opposite party and then
exchanging them. The only difference is that the Georgian Orthodox
Church and the authorities supporting it have taken a hostage the
inanimate monuments and the bones of the deceased buried below vs.
living humans, and they propose that their pillage be exchanged with
the monuments situated in the territory of Armenia.
At this point, we are faced with several questions:
First: How can a church built by a specific group of believers (in this
particular case, the Armenian community of Tbilisi) be exchanged, for
instance, with the Armenian chalcedonic churches of Kobayr and Akhtala
which do not have a Georgian community?
Second: if the historical monuments are the property of the state, i.e.
Georgia, it doesn't mean that they are only under the ownership of
Georgia because under the international commitments of `Democratic
Georgia', the Armenians of Tbilisi, as citizens of that country, have
the right to use the churches built by their ancestors.
Third: As regards the Armenian chalcedonic churches built by our
orthodox ancestors in the north of Armenia during the Byzantine (and
not Georgian) rule, the demand of handing them over to the Georgian
church also implies a concrete prospect of repopulating the neighboring
areas with believers and eventually, making territorial claims.
At first sight, the justification seems quite clear and even innocent:
if there are Armenians living in Georgia why shouldn't there be
Georgians living in Armenia? Our answer too, should be very clear and
concrete: you are welcome to live wherever you want and as long as you
want; you may build Georgian orthodox churches, but the chalcedonic
monuments of Lori do not belong to you because the bodies of the small
number of Georgians were buried there in the late Middle Ages, in the
period of the Georgian rule.
If the authorities of a `democratic' country like Georgia cannot solve
the problem of returning the Armenian population their places of
worship, we believe that the latter should push the Armenian Diocese of
Georgia and the Georgian-Armenian public organizations to apply to the
relevant European and international tribunals and prove, with the help
of the documents available to them, that St. Astvatsatsin and the other
churches of Norashen belong to the Armenians.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress