Tweet
SAMVEL KARAPETYAN RESPONDS TO READER QUESTIONS - PART 3
Sona Avagyan
http://hetq.am/en/society/samvel-karapety an-4/
2009/10/19 | 18:00
"I disagree with decision of Catholicos to build Saint Anna Church
in Yerevan"
I was recently in Yerevan and saw the blueprint of a new church called
Saint Anna to be erected next to the lovely Saint Katoghike chapel. Do
you agree with the decision of the Catholicos to spend many millions
of dollars on new church construction in the middle of Yerevan?
Wouldn't it be more prudent for the Hovnanians' money to be spent on
preserving what already exists?
I agree with the reader one hundred fold. But there is another problem
here. First, we should ask why this project is being carried out. I
don't agree with the decision of the Catholicos for several reasons.
First, the seat of the Catholicos of all Armenians will not be moved.
It can't be relocated to Yerevan nor will it be. The seat of the
Catholicos has remained unchanged in Etchmiadzin since the year 1441.
This is a centuries-old residence, a tradition, a symbol.
Secondly, there is the simple fact that throughout our 1,700 years of
Christianity, with our several thousands of churches and chapels, we
have had not one named Saint Anna. Believe me on this one. Throughout
the vast stretches of historic Armenia, where each region had 80-100
communities and each community at least one holy site, imagine,
not one was ever named "Anna".
After the dedication of the site, the Catholicos gave an interview and
said that "Anna" was the name of the mother of the Virgin Mary. That's
all fine and dandy; no problem. But if the mother of the Virgin Mary
was a revered saint for the Armenian Church, the Armenian nation,
at least one of our thousands of religious monuments would have been
so consecrated; no?
This will be the second Saint Anna. The first is a recently-built
church located in the Vayk region. The name of the church's patron
was also Anna; thus the choice of the name for the church.
This is the second case where the name of the patron's wife has been
Anna. Ok; but let's assume for a moment that the wife's name was
"Desdemona". Should the church be called Saint Desdemona? It's totally
ridiculous; right?
During the time of our conversation, several churches in Europe have
stopped operating as religious institutions. Some have been converted
to concert auditoriums or exhibition halls. The actual centuries-old
structures are still being used. Why is it that churches in England,
France, Germany and Italy are be closed on a regular basis? Is it
because there's a lack of people? No, the people exist. There is lack
of church goers. Today, in the developed countries, people only visit
a church when it has been converted to concert hall.
This is a serious point to reflect on. Where are we going? What is the
path to be followed? What has the church given us? Almost every village
in Western Armenia just prior to the start of the 1915 Genocide had
its own church or religious site with clergy in attendance. But the
Genocide happened in an event. We read the memoirs. 1,500 residents
of Marash are forced to march in the direction of Deir Zor guarded
by just three soldiers. 1,500 Armenians from Marash driven to their
deaths by just 3 guards.
Thus, no wonder we now declare that "70 years of Soviet atheism
wrecked havoc on us and we must now strive anew to rebuild our
national character, straighten our backs and return to our traditional
faith." This leads to the conviction that "he who doesn't belong
to the Armenian Apostolic Church isn't an Armenian". There are even
so-called intellectuals who claim that for seventy years we weren't
Armenian. What about those Armenians living on their ancestral lands
in eastern Anatolia, who aren't really Muslims but confess they
are because they can't say differently? Aren't they Armenian? Even
Armenian Catholics, up till recently, weren't considered by many to
be real Armenians. People would say, "They're Franks; not Armenians".
Luckily we've made some advances in thinking since then. We no longer
call some people "Franks".
Frankly, I am somewhat disturbed to see recent attempts by the church
to increase its land holdings. For example, take the case of the land
adjoining the Tegher Monastery. We were told about since by the church
gatekeeper and from other sources.
Today, the Agency for the Preservation of Historic and Cultural
Monuments just doesn't have the funds to maintain that many churches,
so the government gladly turns them back over to Etchmiadzin. The
Church is now attempting to get its former land holdings back as well
and is often succeeding.
Let's look at the case of King Pap who stood up against the Church
because it had become a large feudal land owner in its own right.
Remember that the kings used the taxes from royal lands and the
peasants living on those lands to maintain the kingdom and raise an
army in its defense. During the reign of King Pap, there came a time
when it seemed that the country was divided between church and king.
The lands and people living on church lands paid no tribute or soldier
to the government. The king was forced to stand up to the church.
Today, which road will we choose?
Sona Avagyan
http://hetq.am/en/society/samvel-karapety an-4/
2009/10/19 | 18:00
"I disagree with decision of Catholicos to build Saint Anna Church
in Yerevan"
I was recently in Yerevan and saw the blueprint of a new church called
Saint Anna to be erected next to the lovely Saint Katoghike chapel. Do
you agree with the decision of the Catholicos to spend many millions
of dollars on new church construction in the middle of Yerevan?
Wouldn't it be more prudent for the Hovnanians' money to be spent on
preserving what already exists?
I agree with the reader one hundred fold. But there is another problem
here. First, we should ask why this project is being carried out. I
don't agree with the decision of the Catholicos for several reasons.
First, the seat of the Catholicos of all Armenians will not be moved.
It can't be relocated to Yerevan nor will it be. The seat of the
Catholicos has remained unchanged in Etchmiadzin since the year 1441.
This is a centuries-old residence, a tradition, a symbol.
Secondly, there is the simple fact that throughout our 1,700 years of
Christianity, with our several thousands of churches and chapels, we
have had not one named Saint Anna. Believe me on this one. Throughout
the vast stretches of historic Armenia, where each region had 80-100
communities and each community at least one holy site, imagine,
not one was ever named "Anna".
After the dedication of the site, the Catholicos gave an interview and
said that "Anna" was the name of the mother of the Virgin Mary. That's
all fine and dandy; no problem. But if the mother of the Virgin Mary
was a revered saint for the Armenian Church, the Armenian nation,
at least one of our thousands of religious monuments would have been
so consecrated; no?
This will be the second Saint Anna. The first is a recently-built
church located in the Vayk region. The name of the church's patron
was also Anna; thus the choice of the name for the church.
This is the second case where the name of the patron's wife has been
Anna. Ok; but let's assume for a moment that the wife's name was
"Desdemona". Should the church be called Saint Desdemona? It's totally
ridiculous; right?
During the time of our conversation, several churches in Europe have
stopped operating as religious institutions. Some have been converted
to concert auditoriums or exhibition halls. The actual centuries-old
structures are still being used. Why is it that churches in England,
France, Germany and Italy are be closed on a regular basis? Is it
because there's a lack of people? No, the people exist. There is lack
of church goers. Today, in the developed countries, people only visit
a church when it has been converted to concert hall.
This is a serious point to reflect on. Where are we going? What is the
path to be followed? What has the church given us? Almost every village
in Western Armenia just prior to the start of the 1915 Genocide had
its own church or religious site with clergy in attendance. But the
Genocide happened in an event. We read the memoirs. 1,500 residents
of Marash are forced to march in the direction of Deir Zor guarded
by just three soldiers. 1,500 Armenians from Marash driven to their
deaths by just 3 guards.
Thus, no wonder we now declare that "70 years of Soviet atheism
wrecked havoc on us and we must now strive anew to rebuild our
national character, straighten our backs and return to our traditional
faith." This leads to the conviction that "he who doesn't belong
to the Armenian Apostolic Church isn't an Armenian". There are even
so-called intellectuals who claim that for seventy years we weren't
Armenian. What about those Armenians living on their ancestral lands
in eastern Anatolia, who aren't really Muslims but confess they
are because they can't say differently? Aren't they Armenian? Even
Armenian Catholics, up till recently, weren't considered by many to
be real Armenians. People would say, "They're Franks; not Armenians".
Luckily we've made some advances in thinking since then. We no longer
call some people "Franks".
Frankly, I am somewhat disturbed to see recent attempts by the church
to increase its land holdings. For example, take the case of the land
adjoining the Tegher Monastery. We were told about since by the church
gatekeeper and from other sources.
Today, the Agency for the Preservation of Historic and Cultural
Monuments just doesn't have the funds to maintain that many churches,
so the government gladly turns them back over to Etchmiadzin. The
Church is now attempting to get its former land holdings back as well
and is often succeeding.
Let's look at the case of King Pap who stood up against the Church
because it had become a large feudal land owner in its own right.
Remember that the kings used the taxes from royal lands and the
peasants living on those lands to maintain the kingdom and raise an
army in its defense. During the reign of King Pap, there came a time
when it seemed that the country was divided between church and king.
The lands and people living on church lands paid no tribute or soldier
to the government. The king was forced to stand up to the church.
Today, which road will we choose?