Their Eminences spoke: there should be an election now
The Patriarch Mesrob II Mutafyan has been unable to perform his duty for 8 years and still, there is no planned election for determining the new patriarch. This situation continues to occupy the society's agenda. After Mari Mutafyan is assigned as the guardian for the Patriarch Mesrob II Mutafyan, the debate about the elections started all over again and Archbishop Aram Ateşyan, who has been serving as the patriarch by proxy, is at the center of these debates. We talked to Metropolite of the Diocese of Gougark of the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church Archbishop Sebouh Chouldjian, who says that some actions should be taken by putting personal interests aside, and the Primate of the Diocese of Germany of the Armenian Church Archbishop Karekin Bekdjian, who says that he would be a candidate again, if there is an election.
Karekin Bekdjian: Aram Atesyan is the only obstacle to hold an election
The Primate of the Diocese of Germany of the Armenian Church Archbishop Karekin Bekdjian said: “The will of people is essential, unless there is something against the state law and practices. Thus, saying 'the state doesn't allow us to hold an election' is nothing but an excuse.”
One of the natural candidates for patriarch elections, the Primate of the Diocese of Germany of the Armenian Church Archbishop Karekin Bekdjian joined the debates that stirred again after guardian assignment. Severely criticizing His Eminence Aram Ateşyan, Bekdjian thinks that every member of the society, especially the administrators of foundations, should give voice to the will for election more seriously and boldly.
Assignment of a guardian to the Patriarch Mutafyan is an important development. Do you think that this development will lead to election?
As a technical matter, guardian assignment and patriarch election are not related to each other. However, this development triggers the election by putting it on the agenda as a serious issue. You know that I was a candidate, when the election was on agenda a couple of years ago. That candidacy still stands; so, my candidacy is binding. Other candidates also haven't withdrawn. Looking back, we see that there have been a lot of mistakes. The biggest mistake was this: after state's response, the Clerical Committee urgently convened and quickly elected a “General Vicar”. Though I and His Eminence Sebouh Chouldjian put ourselves as candidate after we received a letter whether we would be candidate for patriarch election, we were not informed about the general vicar election. I expressed my objection and publicly presented ten questions. I haven't received any answers. In fact, I didn't expect them to answer, because you should be working honestly in order to be able to answer those questions.
According to the practices, what should have been the process of election?
At that time, I advised that a medical report showing Mutafyan's condition should be issued and an application for holding an election should be made to the state with that report. 2nd article of our code “Sahmanatrutyun” is clear: “If the patriarch is unable to perform his duty for any reason, a 'patriarch governor' would be elected and the elected person would make preparations for an election.” This hasn't been done. And “co-patriarch” issue is also controversial. Traditional way is clearly stated in the code and this way is to hold an election. Rober Haddeciyan was the first person who brought this issue of “co-patriarch” up to the agenda. He provided some examples from “Azkabadum” (a book on the history of Armenian Church by the Patriarch Mağaka Ormanyan). I read and examined all of those examples. In the book, there is something called “co-patriarch” (atoragits), but none of them were equal to the patriarch. They served as patriarch by proxy, when the patriarch is abroad or not on duty for some reason. Their service ends when the patriarch returns. Thus, I want to emphasize that this issue of “co-patriarch” is something we shouldn't talk about anymore.
On the other hand, unfortunately, there is no person in Istanbul who is brave enough to force Ateşyan to hold an election. Mind you, I don't say that they are “unqualified”, they are just not brave. I think that some of them have personal interest and some of them don't care about the situation.
The medical report you mentioned is issued with the approval of Institution of Forensic Medicine. People who made effort to obtain that report have been subjected to grave accusations of Aram Ateşyan...
His Eminence Aram Ateşyan has no right to accuse people. He knows very well that people have a certain demand. Moreover, he says that he made an application to the state for holding an election. On September, Supreme Spiritual Council convened at the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin. Ateşyan was also in Armenia for the meeting. There, I asked him: “Why don't you make the details of your application public? What is its content?” Ateşyan answered: “This doesn't concern you; this is an internal issue.” The Catholicos was presiding over the meeting. I responded Ateşyan by saying that he is wrong: “Firstly, I am a member of the Miyapanutyun (clerical community) in İstanbul. Secondly, since I am a candidate, this issue directly concerns me. Moreover, you cannot evade by saying that this is an internal issue. Patriarchate concerns the entire church.” He got angry, stood up started shouting. He caused a situation that the Catholicos wouldn't approve. I asked him to calm down and answer my question properly. And he said that he wouldn't reveal the private correspondences of the patriarchate. This is also wrong, because such official letters that concern the entire society had always been made public. Unfortunately, he managed to come to this day with inconsistent statements, bursts of anger and reproaches.
Who are these people whom you expect to be brave? What should be done for expressing the bravery?
The society has a serious demand today, though it is not that obvious compared to 2009. Foundation chairs are the ones who should take the responsibility. After all, the state recognizes two authorities. One of them is the patriarchate and the other is our foundations. Thus, the chairs have a right to question this issue. They can come together and press for solving this issue until a certain date. They have the right to say that they will take some precautions on their own, if the issue is not resolved. However, up to now, they haven't acted brave enough to express such determination.
After all, there has been no patriarch for 8 years. In your opinion, who is ultimately responsible for it?
The only reason is His Eminence Ateşyan's wish to act like a patriarch by seizing an opportunity. There is no other reason. Of course the state always wants somebody who would act in accordance with it, but the essential point is the demand of the society. For instance, the state didn't want Mesrob II Mutafyan as patriarch. However, he was elected, because that was the society's wish. The will of people is essential, unless there is something against the state law and practices. Thus, saying 'the state doesn't allow us to hold an election' is nothing but an excuse.
Sebouh Chouldjian: We should have chosen our patriarch by now
Metropolite of the Diocese of Gougark of the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church Archbishop Sebouh Chouldjian: in the last 8 years, the society has lost many things. A young generation is raised as deprived of the care of a spiritual leader.
Assignment of a guardian to the Patriarch Mutafyan is an important development. Do you think that this development will lead to election?
This is just one of the ways that would lead to election. There were a lot of things that could be done for avoiding to come to this point, but religious and civilian authorities of the society hadn't chosen them. In the end, my sacred brother Mesrob's incapacity to work is certified with a court decision and I feel sorry for this. Nevertheless, this is a way to solve the problem about the election. But of course, the problem can be solved, only if the current religious and civilian authorities hear the demand of Armenians in Istanbul and see the worsening situation.
The medical report is issued with the approval of Institution of Forensic Medicine. People who made effort to obtain that report have been subjected to grave accusations of Aram Ateşyan. What do you think about that?
The physicians provided written statements about the condition of the Patriarch Mesrob II well before. There is nothing new. I guess, the fact that this issue was brought to trial is a shame for us, since we didn't need a court decision. However, I don't know who has been hiding these details from the public and why that person has been doing it. In any case, I appreciate our Armenian friends in İstanbul who made efforts to extricate our society and resorted to the legal procedure for doing this. To be honest, His Eminence Ateşyan's anger is beyond me.
There has been no patriarch for 8 years. In your opinion, who is ultimately responsible for it?
Everybody knows who is responsible. In Armenia and Diaspora, this issue is obvious for many people. The ones who have been stalling off for years are responsible. They are liable to God, Armenian society and the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople, because they are harmed by this process. In the last 8 years, the society has lost many things. A young generation is raised as deprived of the care of a spiritual leader. Undoubtedly, the history will judge them. We should remind ourselves that such cases also happened between 1923-27 and 1944-50. Our duty is to urge people to solve this problem by putting their personal interests aside.
According to the practices, what should have been the process of election?
We should have chosen our patriarch by now. The conditions were convenient for electing a co-patriarch or a patriarchate. People's demand wasn't that big, but there were personal interests involved. During the Supreme Spiritual Council at the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, Catholicos of All Armenian Karekin II ordered General Vicar Ateşyan to make preparations for election, but he was like talking to a brick wall.
In your opinion, what should Armenian society do for holding an election?
Some actions should be taken by putting personal interests aside. Electing a patriarch is a matter of existence for Armenian society in Turkey. For saving this centuries-old seat of the Armenian Church, every religious Armenian should do something to break this silence. I respectfully greet the people who have been making efforts for electing a patriarchate. This is their most natural right as a member of the church and citizen of Turkish Republic.
In 2009, when the election was on agenda, you were a candidate. Will you be a candidate again?
As a man of God who was born in Turkey, I have the right to be a candidate for patriarch election and used this right of mine in the past. And, there is no obstacle to be a candidate now either. If the society finds me qualified for solving the problems of Armenian society and the patriarchate, I am ready to serve by considering it as a holy duty.
