"We must die to one life before we can enter another”.

Vaհe H Apelian 

Change chisels a generation, I believe Anatole France framed it best when he famously said: ““All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another.”

This year will be coming to its end in a few days. 2026 will be pivotal year for me. On June 22 of 2026, I will be inducted into an exclusive club, the club of the octogenarians.  I was born in 1946 as a member of that remarkable generation that came to be known as Baby Boomers. It is generally accepted those born from 1946 to 1964, during the mid-20th-century baby boom that followed the end of World War II, make that remarkable generation. May be more than any other generation in history, it experienced change at an unforeseeable scale. 

The following companies came to my mind. Each defined the era at the time. Kodak became synonymous with camera, xerox with photocopying. Pan Am and Sears were America on the ground and in the air. Telephone was AT&T. Nowadays; they are not heard as they were once. In fact, many may not even have heard their names. The challenge for each generation is to keep pace with the changing world and continue on retaining core values to be able to keep up pace with this fast changing world.

 This is what happened to these companies, according to the all-knowing Google AI. 

PAN AM, ONCE A SYMBOL OF AMERICAN AVIATION, ceased operations in December 1991due to a combination of factors, primarily failing to adapt after airline deregulation, costly poor management decisions (like the National Airlines merger), high fuel costs, and a devastating financial blow from the 1988 Lockerbie bombing (Flight 103). The airline filed for bankruptcy, sold off valuable assets, and despite a last-ditch effort to restructure, couldn't keep flying, ending its iconic run. 

SEARS, ONCE A RETAIL GIANT, collapsed due to a failure to adapt to changing times, facing intense competition from Walmart and Target, and mismanagement under CEO Eddie Lampert, leading to bankruptcy in 2018 and massive store closures, leaving only a handful of locations as of late 2025. The company sold off key assets like Craftsman and its real estate, dismembering its core business while failing to innovate online or in its mall-based stores, essentially becoming a "zombie brand". 

KODAK, ONCE A PHOTOGRAPHY GIANT, struggled with the digital revolution, filed for bankruptcy in 2012, but emerged as a smaller, focused company in 2013, shifting to commercial printing, advanced materials, and licensing its brand, while still making film, but recently faced new financial concerns in 2025 despite strategic pivots and a brief pharma venture. 

XEROX, NOT THE ICONIC LEADER IT ONCE WAS. It hasn't disappeared but has struggled as a legacy tech giant, shifting from its copier dominance by spinning off services (Conduent) and focusing on digital/IT solutions, facing shrinking revenue, tough competition (HP, Canon), and missing early PC/digital trends despite inventing key tech (GUI, mouse at PARC). They're trying to reinvent through acquisitions (Lexmark) and new models but remain challenged in a changing digital world, still a big player but not the iconic leader it once was.

AT&T HAS GONE THROUGH HUGE CHANGES. SBC Communications bought the original AT&T in 2005, took the name, and expanded by buying BellSouth, becoming today's AT&T Inc.. More recently, AT&T divested media assets (WarnerMedia/Discovery) to reduce debt, faced significant data breaches in 2024 leading to massive settlements, and dealt with customer complaints about price hikes and network congestion, while continuing to build out its 5G network.

 

 

 

 

What AI says about personal wealth: the pope and the catholicos

Google search AI states the following about the personal wealth of Pope Francis I, Pope Leo XIX; Catholicos Karekin I and Catholicos Karekin II. Vaհe H Apelian

What was Pope Francis’ personal wealth?

Pope Francis lived a life of extreme personal poverty despite his high office, with reports suggesting his personal wealth was as low as $100 at his death, as he donated his papal salary and lived simply, while his access to Vatican assets (residence, cars, expenses) was estimated by some sources around $16 million, though mostly directed to charity. He took a vow of poverty as a Jesuit and never kept personal wealth, using his access to papal perks for good causes, never taking the Pope's salary.

 

What is Pople Leo's personal wealth?

There's no specific figure for Pope Leo XIV's personal wealth as popes don't typically accumulate private fortunes; their needs (housing, food, healthcare) are covered by the Vatican, though he earned a cardinal's salary (€4k-€5k/month) before his election. In contrast, historical figures like Pope Leo XIII (late 1800s) were rumored to amass huge sums (millions) for the Holy See, while Pope Francis reportedly had a significant net worth from prior roles, but lived modestly and donated his papal salary.

 

What was Catholicos Karekin I's personal wealth?

Catholicos Karekin I (Neshan Sarkissian) died in 1999, and specific details regarding his personal wealth are not publicly available. Church leaders, particularly those in high positions, generally do not have significant personal assets as their lives and finances are tied to the church institution. 

The Armenian Apostolic Church, like many religious institutions, holds considerable assets as an organization (real estate, art, investments, and donations from wealthy benefactors), but these are institutional assets, not the personal wealth of the Catholicos.

 

What is Catholicos Karekin II's personal wealth?

Karekin II's personal wealth is not publicly declared, but a 2015 leak of HSBC files indicated he was connected to an account that held as much as $1.1 million in 2006/2007. 

Financial transparency within the Armenian Apostolic Church is a subject of public debate and criticism, with some sources claiming that while some clergy live in poverty, others, including the Catholicos, have accumulated significant personal wealth and lead extravagant lives. However, no concrete recent figures for his current net worth are publicly available, as the church does not publicize certain financial details.

                                                                            ***

 

How much is a pope’s salary?

The Pope doesn't receive a traditional salary; instead, the Vatican covers all living expenses (housing, food, travel, healthcare) and provides a modest monthly stipend, though recent popes like Francis have declined it, donating the funds, with some estimates putting a potential stipend around $2,800-$3,000/month or €30,000/month for a new American Pope (Leo XIV), reflecting a spiritual role, not a corporate job.

How much is a catholicos salary?

Ho Catholicos (head of an Eastern Christian Church) doesn't have a standard "salary" like a secular job; they receive stipends, benefits (housing, utilities, transport), and endowments, often modest, but control vast diocesan assets, so their total compensation is substantial, varying by denomination (like Armenian, Greek Orthodox) and region, but generally ensuring a comfortable, high-level living, not a wage. 

 

About a book, but not a review

Vaհe H Apelian

The book is Tenny Arlen’s only book of poetry, “To say with passion, why am I here?”. Recently I purchased a copy of the newly published bilingual version of the book from NAASR bookstore. Sometime back I had purchased the Armenian copy from Abril Bookstore in Glendale, CA, “կիրքով ըսելու՝Ինչո՞ւ հոս եմ”. Little I knew then its bilingual version is upcoming.

Much has been written about the book for me to add anything of substance. But I have a thought or two, I would like to share. I recommend gifting this book. Although there is no season for gifting, but it is the end of year when we present to each other more gifts than during any other time of the year. 

 Books, especially personalized copies, make lasting gifts. I recommend preferably gifting the recently bilingual version because it is a reproduction of the earlier Armenian original, with a few additional poems that were recently discovered. Each poem in the Armenian original is reproduced, immediately followed by its translation by her brother Jesse Siragan Arlen, in a facing page bilingual format. This bilingual version is published by Tarkmaneal Press, New York, NY, which a joint venture by Jesse S. Arlen, who is the director of  the Krikor Zohrab and Clara Zohrab Information Center, and Mathew J. Sarkissian, who has done the layout of the book.

The bilingual book “Կիրքով Ըսելու՝Ինչո՞ւ հոս եմ - To say with passion, why am I here?”, is 216 pages long. Its content is comprised of a foreword, the poems in bilingual, followed by two appendices about the few newly discovered poems, the afterword of the first edition, and an essay about Tenny Arlen and her contribution to contemporary Armenian poetry. They are presented in the same facing page bilingual format.

As for the prospective reader of the book, I recommend, before starting to read the poems, reading the appendices first. Especially the afterword to the first edition written by professor Hagop Gulludjian, Tenny Arlen’s teacher and mentor.

William Saroyan stated, "I do not write in Armenian, but I look at the world in Armenian.” His statement is probably true for most Armenian American writers, given the fact that there are those who wrote in Armenian, such as Hamasdegh and Aram Haigaz. Both of whom wrote in Western Armenian. Hamasdegh was born and raised in an Armenian village in Kharpert in Western Armenia and wrote masterfully about Armenian village life. Aram Haigaz was born and raised in Shabin Karahisar. He wrote in Armenian not only about his experiences during genocide, but also about his American life, about his Irish neighbor, about his American born son and his son's college graduation. 

Hamasdegh and Aram Haigaz were naturalized American citizens, but they are regarded as Armenian-American (amerigahay) writers. What distinguishes them from William Saroyan, and say Peter Balakian, in legal terminology is the following. The former are Naturalized American citizens and the latter are Birthright citizens. 

Tenny Arlen is the FIRST Birthright Armenian-American writer who wrote in Western Armenian. Tenny wrote her poems in about 15 to 20 months after she began learning Armenian. Her book, regrettably, her only literary legacy, can be truly understood and appreciated knowing her first. That is why I recommend the prospective readers to read the appendices first and then resort to reading the poems she wrote, to truly understand and appreciate why she stated: “Կիրքով Ըսելու՝Ինչո՞ւ հոս եմ - To say with passion, why am I here?”

Happy reading.

  

 

A native son of the USSR reflects

Բնագիրը կցուած է ներքեւը. Attached is my AI aided translation of Tatul Hakobyan’s reflection today on his Facebook page. It is indeed a cause for reflection when outcries are heard against the crossroad for peace initiative to forge peaceful relations with Armenia’s neighbors, even it means re-evaluating, re-examining and interpreting our age old entrenched  understanding of Armenia’s  history. Vaհe H Apelian

 

The Soviet Union consisted of republics that made the union, and of autonomous republics, autonomous regions, and autonomous okrugs.

All the 15 republics of Union of Soviet Socialist Republics became independent as a result of the collapse of the USSR. Armenia was the smallest republic of the union, in terms of territory.

The autonomous republics, autonomous regions, and okrugs were subordinate to the union republics, that made the USSR.

In Transcaucasia, there were:

Three union republics: Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan.

Two autonomous republics: Nakhichevan (within Azerbaijan) and Abkhazia (within Georgia).

Two autonomous regions: the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (within Azerbaijan) and South Ossetia (within Georgia).

It is regrettable that both in Transcaucasia and throughout the USSR, the only autonomous entity that does not exist today is Nagorno-Karabakh.

All autonomous republics, autonomous regions and okrugs that existed at the time of the collapse of the USSR, exist today, with one or another size and attributes of statehood / sovereignty/  administrative borders. And, most importantly, their people, whether as a minority or a majority, have been preserved. The only one is the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic, where not a single Armenian remains.

Thus, we Armenians, who boasted that we destroyed the Soviet Union with the Karabakh movement, have lost Artsakh and the Armenians of Nakhichevan.

We can blame Turkey, Azerbaijan and Russia for losing Nakhichevan and Artsakh.

But I want to ask ourselves another question. How and why did all the autonomous republics, regions and okrugs remain; moreover, preserve their ancestral people, and only we Armenians were unable to do?

It's something to think about, something to think deeply about, even if you are irremediably convinced that your misfortune is the Russian, the Turk, and the Azerbaijani, doing.

Բնագիրը՝

 

Գեղջկական մտորումներ

Խորհրդային Միությունը կազմված էր միութենական հանրապետություններից, ինքնավար հանրապետություններից, ինքնավար մարզերից և ինքնավար օկրուգներից: 

Բոլոր 15 միութենական հանրապետությունները ԽՍՀՄ փլուզման ընթացքում և դրա արդյունքում անկախացան:

Հայաստանը միութենական հանրապետություններից տարածքով ամենից փոքրն էր: 

Ինքնավար հանրապետությունները, ինքնավար մարզերն ու օկրուգները գտնվում էին միութենական հանրապետությունների ենթակայության տակ:

Անդրկովկասում կային երեք միութենական հանրապետություններ՝ Հայաստան, Վրաստան, Ադրբեջան,

երկու ինքնավար հանրապետություններ՝ Նախիջևան (Ադրբեջանի կազմում) և Աբխազիա (Վրաստանի կազմում),

երկու ինքնավար մարզեր՝ Լեռնային Ղարաբաղի Ինքնավար Մարզ (Ադրբեջանի կազմում) և Հարավային Օսիա (Վրաստանի կազմում):

Ցավալի է, որ ինչպես Անդրկովկասում, այնպես էլ ամբողջ ԽՍՀՄ տարածքում միակ ինքավար միավորումը, որը այսօր գոյություն չունի, Լեռնային Ղարաբաղն է: 

ԽՍՀՄ փլուզման պահին առկա բոլոր ինքնավար հանրապետությունները, ինքնավար մարզերն ու օկրուգները, պետականության/ինքնիշխանության/վարչական սահմանների այս կամ այն չափերով ու ատրիբուտիկայով և ամենակարևորը՝ իրենց ժողովրդով, լինի փոքրամաասնություն կամ մեծամասնություն, պահպանվել են:

Ու միակը Նախիջևանի Ինքնավար Հանրապետությունն է, որտեղ չի մնացել գեթ մեկ հայ:

Այսպիսով, մենք՝ հայերս, որ պարծենում էինք, թե ղարաբաղյան շարժումով կործանել ենք Խորհրդային Միությունը, կորցրել ենք Արցախը և Նախիջևանի հայությունը:

Նախիջևանը և Արցախը կորցնելու հարցում կարող ենք մեղադրել Թուրքիային, Ադրբեջանին և Ռուսաստանին: 

Բայց ես ուզում եմ այլ հարց տալ մեզ. այդ ինչպես և ինչու բոլոր ինքնավար հանրապետությունները, մարզերն ու օկրուգները մնացին, ավելին՝ պահեցին իրենց տոհմիկ հայրենիքը և միայն մենք՝ հայերս չկարողացանք դա անել: 

Մտածելու բան է, խորը մտածելու բան, եթե անգամ անուղղելի համոզված ես, որ քո դժբախտությունը ռուսը, թուրքը և ադրբեջանցին են:

Թաթուլ. Հակոբյան

 

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Vaհe H Apelian 

A Sovereign Armenia

 Vaհe H Apelian

 

It is commonly understood that a sovereign state is an independent state that has the highest authority over its territory, on which its government is free to interact with other sovereign states.

When I was growing up, our teachers would tell us that we may not see a free and independent Armenia and that our children may not even see it happen, but one day Armenia will be free and independent. Meanwhile, our teachers told us, to study hard. Thus, I also grew up advocating for a free and independent Armenia. But I will have to admit that I REALLY did not envision what it REALLY takes to have a SOVEREIGN Armenia. At the time, it was more a pleasant dream than an understanding of the hard reality for having a country of our own, is all about. 

 An INDEPENDENT state is not necessarily a SOVEREIGN state.

Stateless we have been for centuries, independence and sovereignty seem to have converged in our minds and in our thoughts onto one, an independent state.  «Գերիշխան, պետութիւն” may not be viewed with the same comfort as “sovereign state” would in English, although both mean the same thing, using Armenian dictionary spelled words for sovereign and sovereignty.

During the recent years, the following historical events  will go down in history in conjunction of the re-establishment of a free and independent Republic of Armenia. 

On August 23, 1990, in collaboration with Nagorno Karabagh Oblast, Armenia wrote its Declaration of Independence. The document is known as Hrchagakir. When I read that document, I come across no mention as to why or for what reason the Soviet Socialist Armenia is declaring independence. But when I read the American Declaration of Independence, I read a litany of misdeeds the Crown committed that compelled the 13 colonies declare independence from the British Crown.

On September 21, 1991, almost thirteen months after the Hrchakagir, Armenians voted overwhelmingly (over 99%) in a national referendum to declare independence from the collapsing Soviet Union. 

On December 21, 1991, three months after the referendum, Armenia and the rest of the former soviet republics, save the Balkan countries and Georgia, met in Alma Ata and declared the Soviet Union dissolved and formed the Community of Independent States (CIS).

But Armenia’s foray into sovereignty began on May 8, 2018, when a popular bloodless revolution, called Velvet Revolution, led by Nikol Pashinyan and a group of younger Armenians changed the course and the order of the day and assumed power by a  snap parliamentary election that was cemented by a popular election seven months later. On December 9, 2018. Nikol Pashinyan led My Step Alliance was elected with absolute majority, 70% of the votes, while the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 15% of the votes. The remaining 15% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National Assembly.

The newly formed government was tested in ways that could have incapacitated a government being unable to withstand the enormous responsibilities piled on It, and hold on to the rein of power, against a fierce opposition.  But Nikol Pashinyan government did. It turned out to be that it is made up of officials who are inordinately cohesive around shared core values they espouse. Also, and naturally thanks to popular support the government enjoyed. The Nikol Pashinyan government not only endured but also prevailed. The ruling Nikol Pashinyan government secured a second popular mandate. It had 54% of the votes during the post 44-Day war snap general election. While the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 26% of the votes. The remaining 20% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National assembly.

A sovereign Republic of Armenia

Armenia’s INDEPENDENCE is not at stake. But Armenia’s SOVEREIGHTY is at stake. 

As students, we were also told that Armenia, has always been “AN APPLE OF DISCORD” -  կռուախնձոր/grvakhntsor -  between East and West. 

Decades later from those days, and more than any time in my lifetime, the confluence of what we were told, is zeroing on that the tiny, landlocked Armenia, the homeland for three quarter of us Armenians scattered worldwide. 

At the present, we are being tested whether we will be able to secure for ourselves and for generations to come a SOVEREIGN Armenia, the absolute culmination of our age-old aspiration.

 

 

 

 

A Sovereign Armenian Republic

Vaհe H Apelian

 

It is commonly understood that a sovereign state is an independent state that has the highest authority over its territory, on which its government is free to interact with other sovereign states.

When I was growing up, our teachers would tell us that we may not see a free and independent Armenia and that our children may not even see it happen, but one day Armenia will be free and independent. Meanwhile, our teachers told us, to study hard. Thus, I also grew up advocating for a free and independent Armenia. But I will have to admit that I REALLY did not envision what it REALLY takes to have a SOVEREIGN Armenia. At the time, it was more a pleasant dream than an understanding of the hard reality of having a country of our own, is all about. 

 An INDEPENDENT state is not necessarily a SOVEREIGN state.

Stateless we have been for centuries, independence and sovereignty seem to have converged in our minds and in our thoughts onto one, an independent state.  «Գերիշխան, պետութիւն” may not be viewed with the same comfort as “sovereign state” would in English, although both mean the same thing, using Armenian dictionary spelled words for sovereign and sovereignty.

During the recent years, the following historical events  will go down in history in conjunction of the re-establishment of a free and independent Republic of Armenia. 

On August 23, 1990, in collaboration with Nagorno Karabagh Oblast, Armenia wrote its Declaration of Independence. The document is known as Hrchagakir. When I read that document, I come across no mention as to why or for what reason the Soviet Socialist Armenia is declaring independence. But when I read the American Declaration of Independence, I read a litany of misdeeds the Crown committed that compelled the 13 colonies declare independence from the British Crown.

On September 21, 1991, almost thirteen months after the Hrchakagir, Armenians voted overwhelmingly (over 99%) in a national referendum to declare independence from the collapsing Soviet Union. 

On December 21, 1991, three months after the referendum, Armenia and the rest of the former soviet republics, save the Balkan countries and Georgia, met in Alma Ata and declared the Soviet Union dissolved and formed the Community of Independent States (CIS).

But Armenia’s foray into sovereignty began on May 8, 2018, when a popular bloodless revolution, called Velvet Revolution, led by Nikol Pashinyan and a group of younger Armenians changed the course and the order of the day and assumed power by a  snap parliamentary election that was cemented by a popular election seven months later. On December 9, 2018. Nikol Pashinyan led My Step Alliance was elected with absolute majority, 70% of the votes, while the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 15% of the votes. The remaining 15% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National Assembly.

The newly formed government was tested in ways that could have incapacitated a government being unable to withstand the enormous responsibilities piled on It, and hold on to the rein of power, against a fierce opposition.  But Nikol Pashinyan government did. It turned out to be it is made up of officials who are inordinately cohesive around shared core values they espouse. Also, and naturally thanks to popular support the government enjoyed. The Nikol Pashinyan government not only endured but also prevailed. The ruling Nikol Pashinyan government secured a second popular mandate. It had 54% of the votes during the post 44-Day war snap general election. While the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 26% of the votes. The remaining 20% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National assembly.

A sovereign Republic of Armenia

Armenia’s INDEPENDENCE is not at stake. But Armenia’s SOVEREIGHTY is at stake. 

As students, we were also told that Armenia, has always been “AN APPLE OF DISCORD” -  կռուախնձոր/grvakhntsor -  between East and West. 

Decades later from those days, and more than any time in my lifetime, the confluence of what we were told, is zeroing on that the tiny, landlocked Armenia, the homeland for three quarter of us Armenians scattered worldwide. 

At the present, we are being tested whether we will be able to secure for ourselves and for generations to come a SOVEREIGN Armenia, the absolute culmination of our age-old aspiration.

 

 

 

 

His Eminence Archbishop Khajag Barsamian: Armenia state and church relations:

 I have attached my AI aided translation of His Eminence Archbishop Khajag Barsamian’s reflection on the current church and state turmoil . The original was posted on December 13, 2025  in Keghart online journal and is linked below. Vaհe H Apelian

The Armenian people are living through a historic turning point. For the first time in centuries, we have a stable and independent Republic of Armenia. At the same time, about three-quarters of the Armenian Apostolic faithful, are scattered across the vast and diverse continents of the Diaspora, and are outside the borders of Armenia.

This new reality poses urgent and often confusing questions for each of us: what is the proper role of the Armenian Apostolic Church, and what is the proper role of the state?

Armenian identity and Christian faith are historically intertwined. Medieval Armenian authors often spoke of God and homeland, in the same breath. This bond helped the Armenian people to endure foreign domination, genocide, and disintegration.

However, what helped us survive in the conditions of statelessness can create confusion in the conditions existing in the modern republic.

Today, the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin is located on the territory of the sovereign Armenian state.

Today, the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin is located on the territory of the sovereign Armenian state. The Catholicos of All Armenians resides in Armenia. However, the majority of Armenians who perceive Etchmiadzin as their spiritual home live abroad. Is the Church in reality, the religious wing of the Republic of Armenia or is it a global spiritual body, serving all Armenians with a mission that cannot be limited to any one state?

In the Catholic world, the Holy See (Vatican) and the Italian State have clearly defined their relationship over time (Lateran Treaty, February 11, 1929). One is a spiritual center with a global reach, the other is a nation-state with political responsibility. Armenia faces the need for a similar clarification, adapted to our own history and circumstances.

However, it is not a political party and should not be one.

Such a clarification begins with several fundamental principles:

First, the Armenian Apostolic Church has a spiritual and moral mission, not a political one. Its main functions are the preaching of the Gospel, the celebration of the sacraments, the formation of conscience, the consolation of the suffering, and the preservation of Armenian Christian culture and memory. The Church has the right, and sometimes the duty, to speak out on moral issues affecting society: justice, corruption, dignity, war and peace, and the protection of the vulnerable. However, it is not a political party and should not be one.

the Republic of Armenia is a secular state. This does not mean an anti-religious state.

Second, the Republic of Armenia is a secular state. This does not mean an anti-religious state. It means a government that serves all citizens, believers and non-believers, followers of the Apostolic and other faiths, without imposing or enforcing any theology. The state is obliged to guarantee freedom of conscience, equality before the law, and the protection of human rights.

At the same time, mature secularism can recognize the special historical role of the Armenian Apostolic Church in the life of the nation and cooperate with it within clear legal boundaries in the spheres of education, social services, and cultural preservation.

Why are tensions so high in this case?

Both positions misunderstand the difference between party politics and moral witness.

One of the reasons is the formed expectations, born of another era. For centuries, when Armenia did not have a state, the Church was often the main structure of organized Armenian life: mediator, educator, advocate, diplomat. Some still expect it to continue that political role. Others, in response, demand that the Church remain completely silent on all public issues. Both positions misunderstand the difference between party politics and moral witness.

Another reason is politicization itself. 

Today, political actors sometimes try to use the symbols and language of the Church to advance their own agendas, or conversely, attack the Church to weaken their rivals. This damages both the spiritual credibility of the Church and the quality of democratic debate.

Finally, there are differences in perceptions between Armenia and the Diaspora. For many Diaspora-Armenians, the Church is their primary national institution. For many inside Armenia, it is just one institution, operating in a fragile and contested political environment. Without careful listening, these different experiences breed mutual frustration.

How to move from confusion to clarification?

There is one way: to follow, in our own way, the experience that other states and churches have gone through: to publicly define Church-State relations. 

This could mean:

Reaffirming the Church’s independence in spiritual and internal matters, affirming the secular nature of the Republic and its neutrality with regard to beliefs, recognizing by law the unique historical and cultural role of the Armenian Apostolic Church, establishing rules to prevent the use of church structures for partisan purposes, creating regular and transparent channels of dialogue between the state and the church leadership.

Armenian Christianity has always uniquely combined patriotism and piety. That heritage should not become a weapon of power struggle.

None of these alone resolves all contradictions. Disagreements continue, and must continue, in a free society. But it weakens the temptation to turn every dispute into an ontological struggle between “old Armenia” and “new Armenia” or “religion” and “progress.”

In a time of serious national challenges: security threats, social difficulties, mass emigration, and unresolved /spiritual/shocks, Armenia needs both a solid state and a credible church. The state should focus on justice, security, and the material well-being of its citizens. The church should focus on faith, moral formation, hope, and identity. They serve the same people, but in different ways.

Armenian Christianity has always uniquely combined patriotism and piety. That heritage should not become a weapon of power struggle. It should be a source of wisdom as we, perhaps for the first time, learn to live as citizens of a modern republic and as heirs of an ancient Christian people.

Clarifying the respective roles of Church and State in Armenia does not diminish anyone

Clarifying the respective roles of Church and State in Armenia does not diminish anyone. If properly implemented, it allows both to serve more honorably and effectively, preventing the abuse of both political power and spiritual authority. In this way, the Armenian people in the homeland and throughout the Diaspora can face the future with a clearer mind and a more steadfast heart. This important mission can be accomplished through a strong partnership between the leaders of Church and State, based on a moral vision that protects the well-being of our people both in the homeland and in the Diaspora.

Link: Հայաստանի եկեղեցի-պետութիւն յարաբերութիւնները պարզաբանում, եւ ոչ թէ հակամարտութիւն կը պահանջեն: https://keghart.org/archb-barsamian-church-state-relations/

 

 

 

Կէթիսպըրկի Ուղերձը

 Կցած եմ նախագահ Աբրահամ Լինքոլնի Կեթիսպըրկի ուղերձին թարգմանութիւնս։ Ուղերձը տեւած է մօտաւորապէս երկու վարկեան եւ բաղկացած է մօտաւորապէս 275 բաոերէ։ Բայց նախագահ Աբրահամ Լինքոլնի այդ ուղերձը կը համարուի Ամերիկեան պատմութեան մեջ ամէնայայտնի ուղերձներէն։ Թարգմանութեանս սրբագրութիւնը կը պարտիմ երբեմնի ուսուցչիս Արմենակ Եղիայեանին։  Վահէ Յ Աբէլեան

՚

Կէթիսպըրկի Ուղերձը

«Չորս քսանամեակներ և եօթը տարիներ առաջ մեր հայրերը այս ցամաքամասին վրայ յառաջացուցին նոր ազգ մը բեղմնաւորուած Ազատութեան մեջև նուիրուած այն առաջադրութեան որ բոլոր մարդիկ ստեղծուած են հաւասար։

Այժմ մենք բոնկուած ենք քաղաքացիական մեծ պատերազմի մը, փորձարկելու որ արդիո՞ք այդ ազգը, կամ որեւէ ազգ՝ այդպէս բեղմնաւորուած և այդպէս առաջադրուած կրնայ երկար տոկալ: Մենք կը հանդիպինք այդ մեծ պատերազմին մարտադաշտին վրայ: Մենք եկած ենք նուիրելու այդ մարտադաշտին մէկ մասը որպէս վերջին հանգստավայրը անոնց որոնք այստեղ իրենց կեանքերը նուիրեցին որպէսզի այդ ազգը կարողանայ գոյատեւել: Բոլորովին տեղին և պատշաճ է որ մենք այս ընենք:

Բայց աւելի խոր իմաստով՝ մենք չենք կրնար նուիրագործել - չենք կրնար սրբադասել - չենք կրնար սրբացնել այս հողը: Կենդանի և մեռած խիզախ մարդիկ որոնք պայքարեցան այստեղ, արդէն սրբացուցած են ան շատ աւելի բարձր քան մեր աղքատ ոյժը կարողանայ աւելցնել կամ նուազեցնել:

Աշխարհը քիչ ուշադրութիւն պիտի դարձնէ եւ ոչ ալ երկար ժամանակ պիտի յիշէ թե մենք ինչ կ՚ըսենք հոս, բայց երբեք պիտի չի կարողանայ մոռանալ այնինչ որ ըրին այստեղ: Ընդհակառակը` մենք ողջերս ենք որ պէտք է նուիրուինք այստեղ ամբողջացնելու իրենց անաւարտ գործը, որուն համար անոնք մաքարեցան հոս եւ ազնիւօրեն առաջ մղեցին:

Աւելի շատ մեզի համար է որ հոս ըլլանք նուիրուած մեր առաջ մնացած մեծ գործին – այստեղի պատուելի մեռելներէն մենք նուիրում ստանանք այն դատին՝ որուն համար անոնք տուին իրենց նուիրումին վերջին ամբողջական չափը – որ մենք՝  մեծապէս ուխտենք որ այդ մեռնողները ի իզուր մեռած չըլլան - որ այս ազգը, Աստծոյ ներքեւ ունենայ ազատութեան նոր ծնունդ մը  - եւ որ ժողովուրդին կառավարութիւնը, ժողովուրդին կողմէ, ժողովուրդին համար չի ջնջուի այս աշխարհէն:» 

Աբրահամ Լինքոլն

 

 

 

Vartan O. mobilizing the English language

Vaհe H Apelian

 

I just read Vartan Oskanian’s commentary in Horizon Daily, the bilingual Armenian newspaper in Canada and I was reminded of the following famed sentence, "He mobilized the English language and sent it into battle.” However, for brevity, I did not title this blog post, claiming that Vartan Oskanian is mobilizing the English language against prime minister Nikol Pashinyan and sending it to the wrong audience, and in the wrong language. Vartan Oskanian is not addressing the citizens of Armenia in Armenia, in Armenian.

Let me sort and structure my thoughts.

The movie “Darkest Hour”, is a dramatized documentary about Winston Churchill assuming the post of the prime minister of the British Empire during the Second World War. Almost right after he assumed the post, France fell to Nazi Germany, and the British had their army cornered on the Dunkirk beach.  It was also feared that the Nazi Germany would invade England, Churchill’s island nation and there was talk in his war cabinet for seeking terms with Hitler. But Churchill refused and gave a speech in the parliament claiming that the British “shall fight them on the beaches” and expected that everyone in his government is willing to die “chocking on his own blood upon the ground”. Lord Halifax, in his war cabinet was for seeking terms with the Nazi Germany through Mussolini. After the speech he uttered that sentence. But that was in the film. In real life the sentence is attributed to famous American journalist Murrow speaking about Churchill.

 Coming to Vartan Oskanian; it should be noted that he has good, if not an excellent command of the English language and he uses it expertly attempting to mobilize the diaspora. I imagine, other than a handful citizens of Armenia, no other citizen in Armenia reads Latin Armenian Diaspora press. I remain puzzled. If Vartan Oskanian seeks to constitutionally topple the Nikol Pashinyan government, he should be addressing the citizens of Armenia and not Diaspora; and address them in Armenian and not in English.

I suggest Vartan clarify the political goals he tacitly wants to convey and have them in easily understood slogans. Such as:

First:  “կը մերժենք Ալմա Աթայի համաձայնագիրը», 

That is to say Vartan, on behalf of the opposition, rejects the Alma Ata agreement or protocol. On December 21, 1991, former USSR republics (excluding the Baltics) met in Almaty, Kazakhstan, and officially dissolved the Soviet Union and established the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) consisting the former Soviet Socialist Republics. Nikol Pashinyan’s cross road for peace is based on that initiative, which Vartan objects

Second: “Վերադարձ Դէպէ Ղարաբաղ»

That is to say Vartan Oskanian, on behalf of the opposition declares that returning of the Artsakh Armenians to the Nagorno-Karabagh will constitute the cornerstone of his foreign policy, in contrast to prime minsiter Nikol Pashinyan, who has ruled that Artsakh/Karabagh issue has been resolved and is no more relevant to his government's foreign policy.

I would have suggested Vartan other platforms as well, such as «Պիտի Պահենք Էջմածինը այնպէս Ինչպէս որ է», that is to say Vartan Oskanian will have Etchmiazin continue to function as it has. 

Last, but definitely not the least, if not the foremost.  Once in power, Vartan Oskanian will have those who acquired wealth, privileges, monopolies, such as the electric grid of Armenia, keep their “hard earned” wealth, the crux of the matter, Vartan Oskanian is and has been advocating all along.