Tweet
THE ARMENIAN OBSESSION WITH CHURCHES
by Raffi Bedrosyan
Published: Wednesday October 23, 2013
The new Moscow cathedral opened in September 2013. Phoyolure
When someone visits Armenia for the first time, the tour itinerary
invariably includes a multitude of churches and monasteries. Modern
Armenia is the land of churches.
Historic Armenia in Anatolia was also a land of churches, with nearly
4000 churches and monasteries. The Van Lake region alone had over 300
churches. The ancient City of Ani, dubbed the City of 1001 Churches,
contained 40 churches.
We are proud of our churches, awed at their architectural beauty and
intricate construction techniques, amazed at their settings perched
on inaccessible mountaintops.
On the other hand, this obsession with churches, when combined with
our tragic history, makes me wonder: 'I wish we had fewer churches to
visit and instead, many more victory monuments like Sardarabad. I wish
our Armenian kings, princes, political leaders and wealthy notables
in the past had spent less time, talent, resources and money on these
churches and instead, more on fortifications and defense of our lands
and territories'. When one delves more into the historic reasons
why these churches are built, it becomes apparent that they are not
necessarily built to meet the religious needs of the population,
but rather to bring glory to the benefactor and perhaps to help him
'ease into heaven'.
Throughout history, our religious leaders have conditioned the
benefactors that there is no better way to serve God, Jesus Christ and
its Armenian folk than to build another church. Therefore, regardless
of political, economic or social realities and upheavals, Armenians
have continued building churches in both historic and modern Armenia,
as well as in all corners of the world, often times disregarding other
needs and priorities. This has been the case in medieval Armenian
kingdoms in historic Armenia, continuing in Cilicia and Eastern
Anatolia up until 1915, then in Diaspora and now in modern Armenia.
The tradition continues today. When future generations look back into
our present history of 22 year-old Armenia and Diaspora Armenians,
they will see the challenges of establishing a new country from the
ruins of the Soviet Empire, at the same time fighting the deadly
Karabagh war, the closed borders and economic blockade by Turkey and
Azerbaijan, simultaneously dealing with the disastrous 1989 earthquake,
and most critically, the continuing depopulation of Armenia due to
lack of employment and investment opportunities. And yet, despite
these monumental tasks, they will also see examples of vast church
building activities both in Armenia and Diaspora.
In 1997, in the midst of urgent needs to reconstruct Armenia ravaged
by the earthquake and Karabagh destroyed by war, Armenians did find
the money to build the Saint Gregory Illuminator Cathedral in Yerevan.
In 2001, Diaspora Armenians in Los Angeles did start the construction
of a huge cathedral, while there was and is scarce money to keep
Armenian schools open.
In 2011, an oligarch donated all the funds to build the St Hovhannes
Cathedral in Abovyan, while the starving local population had almost
emptied the town.
Just last month, wealthy Russian Armenians opened a vast new cathedral
in Moscow.
The Echmiadzin Catholicosate has become a state within a state,
a Vatican-like complex expanding continuously with new buildings.
The combined total expenditure on these large churches, as well as
several other smaller church projects, easily exceeds $200 million.
These projects are not funded from revenue-generating sources or
regular budgets, but instead, from one-time significant donations of
benefactors, mostly from the Diaspora. They will not generate any
revenues, either, but will create a continuing need for additional
donations for upkeep and maintenance.
One wonders if these donations could be used for more worthwhile
projects, such as helping Armenians remain in Armenia, or helping
Armenians remain Armenian in the Diaspora. There seems to be a widely
accepted belief that neither the government nor the church are in touch
with the concerns and needs of the common people. During a recent
private audience with the Catholicos, he was asked what the Church
can do to keep our youth more interested in the Armenian church and
attached closer to their Armenian roots. His curt response was that
'this should be done at home and at school'.
The much anticipated Bishops Synod, assembled last month for the first
time in 600 years, did not produce any tangible resolutions to address
concerns of the common Armenian, be it in Armenia or the Diaspora.
Most benefactors do not want or trust to invest in Armenia due
to the fear that government corruption and bribes will make their
investment useless and therefore, will not generate economic benefits
for themselves nor help the Armenian population.
Unless the government takes concrete steps to change the valid
perception that investments only end up in the hands of the governing
oligarchs, there will not be much participation in the desperately
needed economic growth of Armenia, which is essential to keep the
Armenians from leaving Armenia. In the meantime, the church leaders
just continue preaching the tried and true convincing argument that
the most beneficial donation a benefactor can make for himself and
his family is giving to the church.
Of course, there are truly worthwhile church building and restoration
projects, with strategic and significant benefits for all Armenians.
One example is the restoration of the Ghazantchetsots Church in Shushi,
undertaken immediately after the Karabagh war. During the war, Azeris
controlling Shushi had used this historic church as an arms depot and
military centre, while continuously bombarding Stepanakert down below
in the valley. Their reasoning was that Armenians would never attack
and fire on their own church. When Armenian commandos victoriously
entered Shushi in May 1992, they found the church in shambles, burnt,
desecrated and full of human excrement. Today, it stands as a symbol
of victory against all odds.
The other critical restoration project is the total reconstruction
of the Diyarbakir/Dikranagerd Surp Giragos Church in Turkey in 2011,
the first time an Armenian church was restored as an Armenian church
in historic Armenia after being destroyed in 1915. This project is
strategically significant for a number of reasons:
First, the restored church became concrete evidence against the
denialist state version of history of the government of Turkey,
demonstrating that there was a large Armenian presence in Anatolia
before 1915.
Secondly, it immediately became a religious and cultural centre helping
the Turkish and Kurdish population of Turkey understand the realities
of 1915, through media events, conferences and concerts.
Thirdly, the foundation which restored the church started the process
to reclaim the properties belonging to the church but confiscated after
1915, with several properties already secured through negotiations
and courts, for the first time since 1915.
Fourth, the church became a living genocide memorial, attracting tens
of thousands of Armenian visitors from Diaspora and Armenia annually,
helping start a dialogue and better relationship with liberated Kurds
and Turks who have faced the historical truths of 1915, and now demand
their government to do so.
Last but not least, the most significant outcome of the restoration
of this church, has been the emergence of the hidden Armenians.
Islamicized Armenians have started 'coming out', visiting and praying
in the Church, getting baptized, participating in Armenian language
courses, helping build an Armenian museum on the church grounds,
contributing to the security and administration of the church,
demanding acceptance of their real identity by the government, and
so on. The church acts like a magnet for these people, with over
one hundred people visiting daily on average, coming from all over
Anatolia, not just Diyarbakir, trying to find their Armenian roots.
New initiatives underway to restore and reclaim other destroyed
Armenian churches and monasteries in historic Armenia will help
accelerate all these outcomes.
In conclusion, it is my sincere hope that future government and church
leaders, as well as future benefactors, will decide more wisely on
what projects to invest in, giving higher priority to the needs and
wants of the Armenian people than their own.
http://www.reporter.am/index.cfm?furl=/go/article/2013-10-23-the-armenian-obsession-with-churches&pagewanted=all
by Raffi Bedrosyan
Published: Wednesday October 23, 2013
The new Moscow cathedral opened in September 2013. Phoyolure
When someone visits Armenia for the first time, the tour itinerary
invariably includes a multitude of churches and monasteries. Modern
Armenia is the land of churches.
Historic Armenia in Anatolia was also a land of churches, with nearly
4000 churches and monasteries. The Van Lake region alone had over 300
churches. The ancient City of Ani, dubbed the City of 1001 Churches,
contained 40 churches.
We are proud of our churches, awed at their architectural beauty and
intricate construction techniques, amazed at their settings perched
on inaccessible mountaintops.
On the other hand, this obsession with churches, when combined with
our tragic history, makes me wonder: 'I wish we had fewer churches to
visit and instead, many more victory monuments like Sardarabad. I wish
our Armenian kings, princes, political leaders and wealthy notables
in the past had spent less time, talent, resources and money on these
churches and instead, more on fortifications and defense of our lands
and territories'. When one delves more into the historic reasons
why these churches are built, it becomes apparent that they are not
necessarily built to meet the religious needs of the population,
but rather to bring glory to the benefactor and perhaps to help him
'ease into heaven'.
Throughout history, our religious leaders have conditioned the
benefactors that there is no better way to serve God, Jesus Christ and
its Armenian folk than to build another church. Therefore, regardless
of political, economic or social realities and upheavals, Armenians
have continued building churches in both historic and modern Armenia,
as well as in all corners of the world, often times disregarding other
needs and priorities. This has been the case in medieval Armenian
kingdoms in historic Armenia, continuing in Cilicia and Eastern
Anatolia up until 1915, then in Diaspora and now in modern Armenia.
The tradition continues today. When future generations look back into
our present history of 22 year-old Armenia and Diaspora Armenians,
they will see the challenges of establishing a new country from the
ruins of the Soviet Empire, at the same time fighting the deadly
Karabagh war, the closed borders and economic blockade by Turkey and
Azerbaijan, simultaneously dealing with the disastrous 1989 earthquake,
and most critically, the continuing depopulation of Armenia due to
lack of employment and investment opportunities. And yet, despite
these monumental tasks, they will also see examples of vast church
building activities both in Armenia and Diaspora.
In 1997, in the midst of urgent needs to reconstruct Armenia ravaged
by the earthquake and Karabagh destroyed by war, Armenians did find
the money to build the Saint Gregory Illuminator Cathedral in Yerevan.
In 2001, Diaspora Armenians in Los Angeles did start the construction
of a huge cathedral, while there was and is scarce money to keep
Armenian schools open.
In 2011, an oligarch donated all the funds to build the St Hovhannes
Cathedral in Abovyan, while the starving local population had almost
emptied the town.
Just last month, wealthy Russian Armenians opened a vast new cathedral
in Moscow.
The Echmiadzin Catholicosate has become a state within a state,
a Vatican-like complex expanding continuously with new buildings.
The combined total expenditure on these large churches, as well as
several other smaller church projects, easily exceeds $200 million.
These projects are not funded from revenue-generating sources or
regular budgets, but instead, from one-time significant donations of
benefactors, mostly from the Diaspora. They will not generate any
revenues, either, but will create a continuing need for additional
donations for upkeep and maintenance.
One wonders if these donations could be used for more worthwhile
projects, such as helping Armenians remain in Armenia, or helping
Armenians remain Armenian in the Diaspora. There seems to be a widely
accepted belief that neither the government nor the church are in touch
with the concerns and needs of the common people. During a recent
private audience with the Catholicos, he was asked what the Church
can do to keep our youth more interested in the Armenian church and
attached closer to their Armenian roots. His curt response was that
'this should be done at home and at school'.
The much anticipated Bishops Synod, assembled last month for the first
time in 600 years, did not produce any tangible resolutions to address
concerns of the common Armenian, be it in Armenia or the Diaspora.
Most benefactors do not want or trust to invest in Armenia due
to the fear that government corruption and bribes will make their
investment useless and therefore, will not generate economic benefits
for themselves nor help the Armenian population.
Unless the government takes concrete steps to change the valid
perception that investments only end up in the hands of the governing
oligarchs, there will not be much participation in the desperately
needed economic growth of Armenia, which is essential to keep the
Armenians from leaving Armenia. In the meantime, the church leaders
just continue preaching the tried and true convincing argument that
the most beneficial donation a benefactor can make for himself and
his family is giving to the church.
Of course, there are truly worthwhile church building and restoration
projects, with strategic and significant benefits for all Armenians.
One example is the restoration of the Ghazantchetsots Church in Shushi,
undertaken immediately after the Karabagh war. During the war, Azeris
controlling Shushi had used this historic church as an arms depot and
military centre, while continuously bombarding Stepanakert down below
in the valley. Their reasoning was that Armenians would never attack
and fire on their own church. When Armenian commandos victoriously
entered Shushi in May 1992, they found the church in shambles, burnt,
desecrated and full of human excrement. Today, it stands as a symbol
of victory against all odds.
The other critical restoration project is the total reconstruction
of the Diyarbakir/Dikranagerd Surp Giragos Church in Turkey in 2011,
the first time an Armenian church was restored as an Armenian church
in historic Armenia after being destroyed in 1915. This project is
strategically significant for a number of reasons:
First, the restored church became concrete evidence against the
denialist state version of history of the government of Turkey,
demonstrating that there was a large Armenian presence in Anatolia
before 1915.
Secondly, it immediately became a religious and cultural centre helping
the Turkish and Kurdish population of Turkey understand the realities
of 1915, through media events, conferences and concerts.
Thirdly, the foundation which restored the church started the process
to reclaim the properties belonging to the church but confiscated after
1915, with several properties already secured through negotiations
and courts, for the first time since 1915.
Fourth, the church became a living genocide memorial, attracting tens
of thousands of Armenian visitors from Diaspora and Armenia annually,
helping start a dialogue and better relationship with liberated Kurds
and Turks who have faced the historical truths of 1915, and now demand
their government to do so.
Last but not least, the most significant outcome of the restoration
of this church, has been the emergence of the hidden Armenians.
Islamicized Armenians have started 'coming out', visiting and praying
in the Church, getting baptized, participating in Armenian language
courses, helping build an Armenian museum on the church grounds,
contributing to the security and administration of the church,
demanding acceptance of their real identity by the government, and
so on. The church acts like a magnet for these people, with over
one hundred people visiting daily on average, coming from all over
Anatolia, not just Diyarbakir, trying to find their Armenian roots.
New initiatives underway to restore and reclaim other destroyed
Armenian churches and monasteries in historic Armenia will help
accelerate all these outcomes.
In conclusion, it is my sincere hope that future government and church
leaders, as well as future benefactors, will decide more wisely on
what projects to invest in, giving higher priority to the needs and
wants of the Armenian people than their own.
http://www.reporter.am/index.cfm?furl=/go/article/2013-10-23-the-armenian-obsession-with-churches&pagewanted=all