Tweet
"ARMENIANS MUST BE APOSTOLIC"
Siranuysh Papyan
13:20 10/01/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/interview/view/28600
Last year the ECtHR passed a judgment on the case Khachatryan and
others v. Armenia, as a result 17 members of the organization of
Jehovah's Witnesses will receive compensation for moral damage. In
your opinion, what has this decision changed in the internal life
and policy of Armenia?
I think the decisions of the European institutions lead to very little
change in our foreign and domestic policy. The European institutions
use the authorities for propaganda and their answering steps have
propaganda purposes. Perhaps there is some progress in this sphere
but it is not irreversible. Those decisions would be essential if the
Armenian elite adopted European values but it has a mostly anti-Western
balance. Hence, violations of human rights will not end.
The word sect is not a legal term, and the punishment provided for it
is not set out in the law. Why do some countries, including Armenia,
use this word and punish for it, including by court decisions?
The countries all over the world are increasingly using religion
for political ends, not only Islamic countries but also Christian
countries. Armenia and Russia are examples. In the early 5th
century Byzantium passed a law which equalized being a sect member
to high treason. This theocratic principle is deeply planted in the
consciousness of part of the Armenian elite. The principle of oligopoly
works - monopoly against freedom. However, both political and religious
persecution create an atmosphere of fear, which strengthens the elite.
Everyone who criticizes the Apostolic church undergoes criticism. Do
you think criticism splits the nation or are these backed by political
interests?
I also hear words of criticism but I get along with them. They
are backed by some social perceptions, namely an Armenian must be
apostolic, conservative, adore stewed cow legs and dolmades and so on.
The key word in this sentence is must, which means there are invisible
mechanisms of coercion, limitation of freedom. Diversity is considered
a vice. This is barrack thinking.
Under the two ex-presidents the Armenian Apostolic Church did not
have such a huge role. The ruling party highlights religion both
during the elections and when the president addresses international
organizations. What is the reason? Are the president and his followers
believers or are they using the church and faith?
The RPA believes in conservative ideas, and religion has an important
place among these values. However, religion has a limited role in
their understanding - preach people obedience to the government. The
church sets a good model because it never criticizes the government.
Faith has no place. The Armenian Apostolic Church places loyalty
to itself and to the public administration higher than faith. It is
clear why the RPA commends the Church.
There are people in Armenia who preach nationalism and their views
are pagan. They claim that the Armenians did not use to be Christian
by origin but do not undergo violence or encounter problems for their
views. Does it mean that the followers of the Apostolic Church agree
subconsciously with pagans?
The Armenian word for pagan has the same root as the word ethnicity.
Its first meaning is not tribe but place. Pagan is the worship of local
gods. One cannot be Christian by origin, origin is from the pagan
word stock. One becomes Christian due to spiritual transformation,
conversion. The Armenian Apostolic Church has declared itself a
national church which can be viewed as a deviation from orthodox
faith. It also means that it has adopted a lot of local religious
faiths which also can be viewed as a deviation from the Christian
faith. As to right fundamentalists, including pagans, they undergo
criticism by the left wing. Therefore, they are indulgent to them.
In your opinion, to what extent does religion affect geopolitics? The
EU decisions and behavior are those of a union of Christian countries.
It is thought that the age of secularization has ended, and the age of
desecularization has started, in other words, religion is increasingly
having an important role in political, social and cultural sphere of
life. The main reason was the collapse of the socialist camp. The new
religious congregations occupy the place of left labor parties. They
give the poor a feeling of hope and solidarity, fill in the existential
gap, they bring meaning into their life.
What role do atheists have in the world, in Armenia and in politics?
Atheism had an important role in the past two centuries. Its success
was due to the popularity of the scientific outlook. Now science does
not bring outlook, it is a laboratory which supplies consumer goods
to people. Modern capitalism does not encourage cognitive curiosity,
hence the influence of science and other religious trends diminishes.
In Armenia politics is highly nationalistic and conservative. Hence,
the opposition of Armenia-based and foreign Armenian studies.
Unfortunately, textbooks preach nationalism rather than objectivism.
From: Baghdasarian
Siranuysh Papyan
13:20 10/01/2013
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/interview/view/28600
Last year the ECtHR passed a judgment on the case Khachatryan and
others v. Armenia, as a result 17 members of the organization of
Jehovah's Witnesses will receive compensation for moral damage. In
your opinion, what has this decision changed in the internal life
and policy of Armenia?
I think the decisions of the European institutions lead to very little
change in our foreign and domestic policy. The European institutions
use the authorities for propaganda and their answering steps have
propaganda purposes. Perhaps there is some progress in this sphere
but it is not irreversible. Those decisions would be essential if the
Armenian elite adopted European values but it has a mostly anti-Western
balance. Hence, violations of human rights will not end.
The word sect is not a legal term, and the punishment provided for it
is not set out in the law. Why do some countries, including Armenia,
use this word and punish for it, including by court decisions?
The countries all over the world are increasingly using religion
for political ends, not only Islamic countries but also Christian
countries. Armenia and Russia are examples. In the early 5th
century Byzantium passed a law which equalized being a sect member
to high treason. This theocratic principle is deeply planted in the
consciousness of part of the Armenian elite. The principle of oligopoly
works - monopoly against freedom. However, both political and religious
persecution create an atmosphere of fear, which strengthens the elite.
Everyone who criticizes the Apostolic church undergoes criticism. Do
you think criticism splits the nation or are these backed by political
interests?
I also hear words of criticism but I get along with them. They
are backed by some social perceptions, namely an Armenian must be
apostolic, conservative, adore stewed cow legs and dolmades and so on.
The key word in this sentence is must, which means there are invisible
mechanisms of coercion, limitation of freedom. Diversity is considered
a vice. This is barrack thinking.
Under the two ex-presidents the Armenian Apostolic Church did not
have such a huge role. The ruling party highlights religion both
during the elections and when the president addresses international
organizations. What is the reason? Are the president and his followers
believers or are they using the church and faith?
The RPA believes in conservative ideas, and religion has an important
place among these values. However, religion has a limited role in
their understanding - preach people obedience to the government. The
church sets a good model because it never criticizes the government.
Faith has no place. The Armenian Apostolic Church places loyalty
to itself and to the public administration higher than faith. It is
clear why the RPA commends the Church.
There are people in Armenia who preach nationalism and their views
are pagan. They claim that the Armenians did not use to be Christian
by origin but do not undergo violence or encounter problems for their
views. Does it mean that the followers of the Apostolic Church agree
subconsciously with pagans?
The Armenian word for pagan has the same root as the word ethnicity.
Its first meaning is not tribe but place. Pagan is the worship of local
gods. One cannot be Christian by origin, origin is from the pagan
word stock. One becomes Christian due to spiritual transformation,
conversion. The Armenian Apostolic Church has declared itself a
national church which can be viewed as a deviation from orthodox
faith. It also means that it has adopted a lot of local religious
faiths which also can be viewed as a deviation from the Christian
faith. As to right fundamentalists, including pagans, they undergo
criticism by the left wing. Therefore, they are indulgent to them.
In your opinion, to what extent does religion affect geopolitics? The
EU decisions and behavior are those of a union of Christian countries.
It is thought that the age of secularization has ended, and the age of
desecularization has started, in other words, religion is increasingly
having an important role in political, social and cultural sphere of
life. The main reason was the collapse of the socialist camp. The new
religious congregations occupy the place of left labor parties. They
give the poor a feeling of hope and solidarity, fill in the existential
gap, they bring meaning into their life.
What role do atheists have in the world, in Armenia and in politics?
Atheism had an important role in the past two centuries. Its success
was due to the popularity of the scientific outlook. Now science does
not bring outlook, it is a laboratory which supplies consumer goods
to people. Modern capitalism does not encourage cognitive curiosity,
hence the influence of science and other religious trends diminishes.
In Armenia politics is highly nationalistic and conservative. Hence,
the opposition of Armenia-based and foreign Armenian studies.
Unfortunately, textbooks preach nationalism rather than objectivism.
From: Baghdasarian