Tweet
The Advantage of Accession for Life
Mher Arshakyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments22800.html
Published: 16:31:47 - 30/07/2011
Why is the accession to the throne of Catholicos for life? Because he
is the representative of God, and it can't be temporary. They are
temporary as a mortal, not as a living person. This is the way it is.
And God is not present in this way, there is only a human
understanding.
The existence of the church and the presumption of power it has is
that God exists, and the Catholicos is God's representative. The
Catholicos is, to some extent, a supermortal. So it is impossible to
dethrone him. But if accession to throne is referred to God, why
should dethronement bypass God? If the Catholicos himself bypasses
God, who are to judge what boundaries of morality the Catholicos has
trespassed? Generally, who are to judge?
I know that the church is a purely human structure, it is the door of
human understanding, to enter this door does not mean to enter God's
door, it means to enter, bearing God in you, because after leaving you
don't leave behind God. Besides, the church reminds that everything
must become a church, even the mass media, which gladly judges others'
mistakes. If you, bearing the church in you, can see that the leader
of the church does not suit his throne to which he was accepted for
life, it's not you business to demand that he should be dethroned
because you are not his herd, even if he is your pastor. Pastorship is
assigned to man by God from the moment when God says the word to man,
so the Catholicos is, at best, the door to your pastorship as long as
there is no God. But as long as there is no God, the Catholicos does
not have the power to be the pastor. So, it is assigned to man to be a
black sheep rather than a pastor. Black sheep are not judged.
Why does this posturing of the Catholicos - coalescence with the
authorities, lack of respect in talking to an elderly man, the desire
to have a palace in Yerevan - arouse so many questions? Because the
Catholicos has come down to the street and does things that each of us
would do, after all, mortals don't have to live an ascetic life, they
have a family, they are tempted to gain wealth. Mortals wish they were
those who benefit from unlawfulness. Their indignation is kindled by
the Catholicos' urge to answer the concerns voiced about him. And the
problem is not that he should not answer. The answer must be per se.
What does the unity of the Armenian people and the church have to do
with concerns about one man? What shall we do if these concerns are
there, even though sometimes they go beyond ethic? And why can't these
concerns sound in the framework of the unity of the nation and the
church? Generally, what does this suggested unity have to do with
objective concerns?
The Catholicos should know the advantages of accession to the throne
for life. And these advantages say - your activity is entirely
impersonal, your acts are first of all visible to God, the only
addressee of your acts is God, act as if you are accountable to God
and not to someone who would view your behavior as harmful. A
Catholicos differs from a king because he can't have a problem of
personal welfare because a king's welfare is also his family's
welfare. You are free from these conventionalities. And you must also
keep your married priests from conventionalities because they are to
comfort us, not we them.
The source of your overly kind treatment of the authorities is visible
in the fear of losing something? What do you have to lose, what
connects you to them that may make this loss significant? Why don't
you think that the government is erroneous and so needs you for
sobering kindness? Either you are aware of the weakness of your power
or unaware of the power of this government. You have weakened your
power, and thereby strengthened the government. You are overly
dependent on what is temporal, just like the government.
What can they do to you? This is what the society needs to understand.
They need to know when and why to back you. Your power is for life,
isn't it? After all, knowing that these authorities are capable of
much, you are afraid of being overly mortal. Why should the society
think that the church will benefit from its kindness toward the
government, even if it's not so? Why do you force the society to
thrust into its erroneousness, who do you leave those entitled to be
the church in the status of the herd if they can help you strengthen
the church in Armenia and in the Diaspora?
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Mher Arshakyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments22800.html
Published: 16:31:47 - 30/07/2011
Why is the accession to the throne of Catholicos for life? Because he
is the representative of God, and it can't be temporary. They are
temporary as a mortal, not as a living person. This is the way it is.
And God is not present in this way, there is only a human
understanding.
The existence of the church and the presumption of power it has is
that God exists, and the Catholicos is God's representative. The
Catholicos is, to some extent, a supermortal. So it is impossible to
dethrone him. But if accession to throne is referred to God, why
should dethronement bypass God? If the Catholicos himself bypasses
God, who are to judge what boundaries of morality the Catholicos has
trespassed? Generally, who are to judge?
I know that the church is a purely human structure, it is the door of
human understanding, to enter this door does not mean to enter God's
door, it means to enter, bearing God in you, because after leaving you
don't leave behind God. Besides, the church reminds that everything
must become a church, even the mass media, which gladly judges others'
mistakes. If you, bearing the church in you, can see that the leader
of the church does not suit his throne to which he was accepted for
life, it's not you business to demand that he should be dethroned
because you are not his herd, even if he is your pastor. Pastorship is
assigned to man by God from the moment when God says the word to man,
so the Catholicos is, at best, the door to your pastorship as long as
there is no God. But as long as there is no God, the Catholicos does
not have the power to be the pastor. So, it is assigned to man to be a
black sheep rather than a pastor. Black sheep are not judged.
Why does this posturing of the Catholicos - coalescence with the
authorities, lack of respect in talking to an elderly man, the desire
to have a palace in Yerevan - arouse so many questions? Because the
Catholicos has come down to the street and does things that each of us
would do, after all, mortals don't have to live an ascetic life, they
have a family, they are tempted to gain wealth. Mortals wish they were
those who benefit from unlawfulness. Their indignation is kindled by
the Catholicos' urge to answer the concerns voiced about him. And the
problem is not that he should not answer. The answer must be per se.
What does the unity of the Armenian people and the church have to do
with concerns about one man? What shall we do if these concerns are
there, even though sometimes they go beyond ethic? And why can't these
concerns sound in the framework of the unity of the nation and the
church? Generally, what does this suggested unity have to do with
objective concerns?
The Catholicos should know the advantages of accession to the throne
for life. And these advantages say - your activity is entirely
impersonal, your acts are first of all visible to God, the only
addressee of your acts is God, act as if you are accountable to God
and not to someone who would view your behavior as harmful. A
Catholicos differs from a king because he can't have a problem of
personal welfare because a king's welfare is also his family's
welfare. You are free from these conventionalities. And you must also
keep your married priests from conventionalities because they are to
comfort us, not we them.
The source of your overly kind treatment of the authorities is visible
in the fear of losing something? What do you have to lose, what
connects you to them that may make this loss significant? Why don't
you think that the government is erroneous and so needs you for
sobering kindness? Either you are aware of the weakness of your power
or unaware of the power of this government. You have weakened your
power, and thereby strengthened the government. You are overly
dependent on what is temporal, just like the government.
What can they do to you? This is what the society needs to understand.
They need to know when and why to back you. Your power is for life,
isn't it? After all, knowing that these authorities are capable of
much, you are afraid of being overly mortal. Why should the society
think that the church will benefit from its kindness toward the
government, even if it's not so? Why do you force the society to
thrust into its erroneousness, who do you leave those entitled to be
the church in the status of the herd if they can help you strengthen
the church in Armenia and in the Diaspora?
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress