Tweet
It's Painful When Your Mind And Hands Are In Molds
Interview with Anush Sedrakyan, commentator
What has disgraced the church?
When we consider disgrace of the church, we must not put forth a moral
issue. It is a matter of renaissance, we must ask ourselves the
question whether the church fulfils its function. When the church and
the state coalesce in a contemporary secular Christian society, it
implies that both the church and the state fail their real function,
and they need each other to achieve something and whatever they
achieve becomes a process of disgrace. I would like to be softer, as
there is the presumption of innocence, and say that they might not
want this disgrace but once one follows the wrong path, the path of
coalescence of wrong functions, the process of disgrace is inevitable.
What is the task of the church? The supreme function of the church and
religion is to keep moral standards pure and intact:
a) through one's own example when one shows that they are at the top
of the scale of standardization of morality;
b) you bring the society closer to that example.
What does the state do in normal countries? The state is busy with
efficient governance, social security, salaries, physical security,
public health and other functions.
How did the state-church coalescence take place and how did the
criminal component penetrate into it?
The church with its behavior and lifestyle promotes moral standard
decline of the society. We have some priests who have a bad attitude,
and they should not be identified with the state.
I say I agree, of course, that there may be priests in every society
who may display a bad attitude. However, if high-ranking officials are
involved in offshore, corruption and other scandals, how does the
church condemn its priests who dishonor the church? Armenia is a small
country, we are in the 21st century, everything is videoed is posted
on Youtube, leaked to the press. For instance, the mufti of Kyrgyzstan
featured in a video with some sexual actions, and he immediately
resigned. Here corruption scandals burst, asocial scandals appear, and
no problem. No problem for the state because the state behaves in the
same way. The same corruption, the same neglect for their own people
by the state, we don't have a coalescence of the church and the state
(if we had a coalescence of the church and the state, our church would
be as poor as our state), we have a coalescence of the church and the
government, or rather the church leadership and the government.
If we consider an oligarchic state, we must also add to this the
concept of a criminal-oligarchic fundamentalist state because religion
and the church are used as an instrument of oppression. The church is
a monopoly, note the announcement of a priest that those who do not
belong the Armenian Apostolic Church are not Armenians. In other
words, when the church identifies the ethnic status of citizens,
infringing the principle of freedom of conscience and choice. A lot of
high-ranking clergymen think that only they read the Bible but there
are people who have read it more thoroughly and think that religion
can have a real influence on culture. Had we had a clergyman like the
Pope, Armenia would have a renaissance because the church has a very
big role for every Armenian, they obey this standard by nature. If the
standard is set correctly, and the clergymen meet the New Year not in
Dubai or anywhere else abroad but at home, round the table, like the
poor people, and thus set the standard of conscience and morality, a
lot of things may change in Armenia. However, as far as I can see, not
a single priest has such a wish.
Why aren't there priests who would speak and act like the Pope?
I would also add `like the high-ranking Ukrainian clergyman Filaret
and others who stood up during the developments of Maidan' who said
people have the right to freedom of choice. The Pope, Filaret, and
others are people who have understood the church role of
crystallization and reforms. If they take to the street and call for
justice, fight, they observe the Christian commandments.
When they say the ways of god are inscrutable, the Armenian priests
think they are the heirs of God. Of course, the ways of God are
inscrutable, but the ways of its servants are to be scrutinized well
by the society.
The Pope is almost beatified by people because he has restored the
lost faith of people in the existing standards. The Pope is doing a
great job, after his election the Catholic flock has doubled, people
return to the church because they see the absolutely unique behavior,
virtue and mission of the church leader. I expect that a revolution,
change, movement takes place in the public mind though the church is a
fossilized institution, there the revolution, return to the basic
Christian values will take place a little later.
Why does the church support mining projects, bless them? Can't they
see the destruction of nature, contamination of the environment and
impact on human health by mines?
I can't call the church to assume the environmental function. The
state must take care about people's health, compliant use of mines,
safety of jobs. If the state does not ensure these standards, the
church may not bless but curse but what will it change? It is pleasant
and easy to stand by the government but the main function of the
Christian church is to stand by the miserable, the deprived, the
homeless. If you bless a space, you deviate from the function assigned
by God. Of course, not an ordinary citizen like me should try to
return the church to its Christian beginnings, it would not be modest
but at the same time I would like to remind that Christianity strives
for individual conscience, dominant individual conscience, constant
examination of personality by the person and the highest ideal.
I consider Christianity a big achievement of civilization and culture,
the Western culture is the constant experience of Christian mind, in
other words, man is in a constant dispute with Christian mind, he
argues with the generic Christian ideal.
Christianity is the ideal model of human conscience and soul and, of
course, a human will never achieve it but the road is open, people
strive for inner improvement. Without such aspirations you don't ask
questions to yourself, you avoid yourself, you will certainly avoid
other people's questions.
In Armenia I know clergymen who have spiritual potential and knowledge
but they don't have readiness for sacrifice because they understand
that whoever acts against that institution, that crushing machine will
become a victim. I can't blame our clergymen for not assuming the role
of martyrs. Someone may appear who will assume it. It could be done
gradually, raising the issues one by one, ensuring the ownership that
will impart the church with a human face. Now the church has a
bureaucratic face, like the government. It is painful when your
conscience and hands are in a mold because the state and the church
are both in a mold.
Tehmine Yenokyan, Reporter
14:01 18/01/2014
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/interview/view/31744
Interview with Anush Sedrakyan, commentator
What has disgraced the church?
When we consider disgrace of the church, we must not put forth a moral
issue. It is a matter of renaissance, we must ask ourselves the
question whether the church fulfils its function. When the church and
the state coalesce in a contemporary secular Christian society, it
implies that both the church and the state fail their real function,
and they need each other to achieve something and whatever they
achieve becomes a process of disgrace. I would like to be softer, as
there is the presumption of innocence, and say that they might not
want this disgrace but once one follows the wrong path, the path of
coalescence of wrong functions, the process of disgrace is inevitable.
What is the task of the church? The supreme function of the church and
religion is to keep moral standards pure and intact:
a) through one's own example when one shows that they are at the top
of the scale of standardization of morality;
b) you bring the society closer to that example.
What does the state do in normal countries? The state is busy with
efficient governance, social security, salaries, physical security,
public health and other functions.
How did the state-church coalescence take place and how did the
criminal component penetrate into it?
The church with its behavior and lifestyle promotes moral standard
decline of the society. We have some priests who have a bad attitude,
and they should not be identified with the state.
I say I agree, of course, that there may be priests in every society
who may display a bad attitude. However, if high-ranking officials are
involved in offshore, corruption and other scandals, how does the
church condemn its priests who dishonor the church? Armenia is a small
country, we are in the 21st century, everything is videoed is posted
on Youtube, leaked to the press. For instance, the mufti of Kyrgyzstan
featured in a video with some sexual actions, and he immediately
resigned. Here corruption scandals burst, asocial scandals appear, and
no problem. No problem for the state because the state behaves in the
same way. The same corruption, the same neglect for their own people
by the state, we don't have a coalescence of the church and the state
(if we had a coalescence of the church and the state, our church would
be as poor as our state), we have a coalescence of the church and the
government, or rather the church leadership and the government.
If we consider an oligarchic state, we must also add to this the
concept of a criminal-oligarchic fundamentalist state because religion
and the church are used as an instrument of oppression. The church is
a monopoly, note the announcement of a priest that those who do not
belong the Armenian Apostolic Church are not Armenians. In other
words, when the church identifies the ethnic status of citizens,
infringing the principle of freedom of conscience and choice. A lot of
high-ranking clergymen think that only they read the Bible but there
are people who have read it more thoroughly and think that religion
can have a real influence on culture. Had we had a clergyman like the
Pope, Armenia would have a renaissance because the church has a very
big role for every Armenian, they obey this standard by nature. If the
standard is set correctly, and the clergymen meet the New Year not in
Dubai or anywhere else abroad but at home, round the table, like the
poor people, and thus set the standard of conscience and morality, a
lot of things may change in Armenia. However, as far as I can see, not
a single priest has such a wish.
Why aren't there priests who would speak and act like the Pope?
I would also add `like the high-ranking Ukrainian clergyman Filaret
and others who stood up during the developments of Maidan' who said
people have the right to freedom of choice. The Pope, Filaret, and
others are people who have understood the church role of
crystallization and reforms. If they take to the street and call for
justice, fight, they observe the Christian commandments.
When they say the ways of god are inscrutable, the Armenian priests
think they are the heirs of God. Of course, the ways of God are
inscrutable, but the ways of its servants are to be scrutinized well
by the society.
The Pope is almost beatified by people because he has restored the
lost faith of people in the existing standards. The Pope is doing a
great job, after his election the Catholic flock has doubled, people
return to the church because they see the absolutely unique behavior,
virtue and mission of the church leader. I expect that a revolution,
change, movement takes place in the public mind though the church is a
fossilized institution, there the revolution, return to the basic
Christian values will take place a little later.
Why does the church support mining projects, bless them? Can't they
see the destruction of nature, contamination of the environment and
impact on human health by mines?
I can't call the church to assume the environmental function. The
state must take care about people's health, compliant use of mines,
safety of jobs. If the state does not ensure these standards, the
church may not bless but curse but what will it change? It is pleasant
and easy to stand by the government but the main function of the
Christian church is to stand by the miserable, the deprived, the
homeless. If you bless a space, you deviate from the function assigned
by God. Of course, not an ordinary citizen like me should try to
return the church to its Christian beginnings, it would not be modest
but at the same time I would like to remind that Christianity strives
for individual conscience, dominant individual conscience, constant
examination of personality by the person and the highest ideal.
I consider Christianity a big achievement of civilization and culture,
the Western culture is the constant experience of Christian mind, in
other words, man is in a constant dispute with Christian mind, he
argues with the generic Christian ideal.
Christianity is the ideal model of human conscience and soul and, of
course, a human will never achieve it but the road is open, people
strive for inner improvement. Without such aspirations you don't ask
questions to yourself, you avoid yourself, you will certainly avoid
other people's questions.
In Armenia I know clergymen who have spiritual potential and knowledge
but they don't have readiness for sacrifice because they understand
that whoever acts against that institution, that crushing machine will
become a victim. I can't blame our clergymen for not assuming the role
of martyrs. Someone may appear who will assume it. It could be done
gradually, raising the issues one by one, ensuring the ownership that
will impart the church with a human face. Now the church has a
bureaucratic face, like the government. It is painful when your
conscience and hands are in a mold because the state and the church
are both in a mold.
Tehmine Yenokyan, Reporter
14:01 18/01/2014
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/interview/view/31744