Month: October 2008

The Atlantic Monthly
October 8, 2008
an-american-vote

McCain’s Armenia Problem

by Daniel Nichanian

Eight years ago, George W. Bush was battling an unexpectedly competitive
John McCain for the GOP’s presidential nomination. Scheduled to vote
just days after South Carolina, Michigan suddenly looked decisive-and
its substantial Armenian-American population became an attractive voting
block.

Three days before the vote, Governor Bush sent a letter to two
Armenian-American businessmen addressing the Armenian community’s
biggest demand-recognition that the 1915 extermination of Armenians
< n_Genocide> in the Ottoman Empire
was an act of genocide. The Turkish government to this day denies that
any genocide occurred, and no president since Ronald Reagan has used
that term while in office. Bush pledged to correct that. "The Armenians
were subjected to a genocidal campaign," he wrote. "If elected
President, I would ensure that our nation properly recognizes the tragic
suffering of the Armenian people." Bush lost in Michigan, won the
presidency … and then bailed on his pledge. Last fall, the House of
Representatives looked set to adopt a resolution affirming the Armenian
genocide. But as Turkey threatened to disrupt its commercial ties with
the United States and to invade Iraq, President Bush warned that America
could not afford to alienate Turkey and pushed Congress to drop the
measure.

Today, Edgar Hagopian, one of the letter’s two recipients, acknowledges
his disappointment. "I have written to President Bush many times but
have not gotten a response," he said, reeling at the remarkable
turnaround that transformed Bush into the biggest obstacle to an
official recognition.

Bush’s record is sure to haunt McCain’s 2008 presidential run, but it’s
not as if the Arizona senator needed any help in alienating
Armenian-Americans. McCain’s own stance against genocide recognition and
his relative indifference toward bilateral relations with Armenia have
been a matter of record since well before George W. Bush emerged on the
national stage. Barack Obama, conversely, looked committed to the
affirmation of the events of 1915 as a genocide long before he decided
on a presidential run. In fact, in the superheated world of ethnic
grievance politics, rarely do presidential elections feature such a
clear contrast between two candidates. In the case of states with a
substantial Armenian-American presence (including California, New
Jersey, Michigan and Nevada) that contrast could hurt McCain.

Historically, neither party has owned the support of Armenian-Americans.
Rather than stake their fortune with one party, national advocacy
groups-starting with the Armenian National Committee of America
<; (ANCA) and the Armenian Assembly of America
<; -have pursued a bipartisan course.

Thanks in part to this strategy, the Armenian-American community has
grown into a highly effective interest group. Cory Welt of Georgetown’s
Eurasian Strategy Project mentions the Armenian lobby’s strength as an
explanation for what he calls the "exceptional" size of Armenian foreign
aid. The Congressional Caucus on Armenian issues
< > has a bipartisan leadership
(it is co-chaired by a Democrat from New Jersey, Rep. Frank Pallone, and a
Republican from Michigan, Rep. Joe Knollenberg) and a large contingent
of 150 members, including 13 of Michigan’s 15 U.S. Representatives, 38
of California’s 53 and 11 of New Jersey’s 13.

As a result, there has been little partisan divide on issues like
genocide recognition and Armenian foreign aid, and past presidential
candidates on the left and on the right were careful to pander to
Armenian-American concerns. George H. W. Bush and his son both talked of
genocide prior to their election before resorting to euphemisms once in
office; Bob Dole was one of the strongest advocates of recognition
efforts, as was John Kerry, who also championed other issues including
the opening of the Turkey-Armenia border.

Denis Papazian, the Founding Director of the University of Michigan’s
Center of Armenian Studies <; ,
explained that a sizable share of Armenian-American voters considers
candidates’ stances on Armenian issues and can be swayed by a pledge to
support genocide recognition efforts. For instance, Papazian pointed to
the strong support the community offered Bob Dole in 1996. He also
estimated that Bush’s letter during the 2000 campaign boosted his
support in the Armenian-American community. "If two relatively neutral
candidates are running," Papazian explained, "Armenian American voters
will stay within the party [they usually feel the closest to]. But if
one of them makes a promise to recognize the genocide, he will get a lot
of votes."

Papazian himself fits that description. A Dole supporter twelve years
ago, he is now supporting Barack Obama-identifying the Illinois
Senator’s stance on recognition as a crucial factor in that decision.
Another prominent Armenian-American who has undergone the same
transition is Oscar Tatosian, the Chairman of the Diocesan Council of
the Armenian Church of America <;.
He , too, was a Dole supporter; he, too, describes himself as an
independent and identifies genocide recognition as a primary issue; he,
too, is supporting Obama. Both well-connected and highly-involved
members of the Armenian community, Papazian and Tatosian professed to
knowing many who share their outlook.

Voters like Papazian and Tatosian are giving Democrats hope they can
make inroads in the Armenian community. And while this might simply be
due to a coincidental combination of one-time factors-a hostile
Republican Administration, an unusually enthusiastic Democratic
candidate and an uncommonly skeptical Republican
nominee-Armenian-American issues have a decidedly more partisan feel
this year.

For one, the genocide question is only one of many issues on which the
Bush Administration has attracted criticism from the Armenian community.
Stephan Astourian, a professor of history at Berkeley, also lists
"Bush’s attempts at cutting the allocation of foreign help for Armenia
almost every year, his clear orientation towards oil-based money and
pro-Azerbaijan stance"-a reference to Armenia’s conflict with Azerbaijan
over the province of Nagorno-Karabagh.

As importantly, McCain is the first presidential candidate in the past
two decades who is on the record as opposing genocide recognition
without already being a member of the incumbent Administration.
Hagopian, one of the recipients of Bush’s letter in 2000, remains a
strong conservative who supports McCain’s candidacy, but he admits his
frustration with the Arizona Senator’s positions. "He has not been a
friend of the Armenian community," he said.

In 1990, McCain voted against a recognition resolution that was
sponsored by then-Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole. In 2000, campaigning
for the Republican nomination in California, McCain confirmed that he
would not support such a resolution. "It was not under this government
in Turkey," McCain said. "I don’t see what this resolution does to
improve this situation one iota." The Senator has stuck to his position
in 2008, attracting widespread criticism from Armenian groups. "I think
the most dangerous part of Senator McCain is that he is toeing the old
Cold War era line that Turkey is this invaluable ally we cannot offend,"
warned Areen Ibranossian, the Chairman of Armenians for Obama
<; , a group promoting the Illinois
Senator among Armenian-Americans nationwide. (The McCain campaign did
not return my requests for an interview.)

By contrast, Obama has pledged that his Administration would recognize
the 1915 extermination as an act of genocide. His campaign released two
statements on this issue on January 19 and on April 28. "The facts are
undeniable," one statement said. "An official policy that calls on
diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy."
Dennis Papazian predicted that Armenian voters "will shift towards Obama
because of their belief that he will recognize the genocide."

Some Republicans like Edgar Hagopian predict that a President Obama
would renege on his pledge just as President Bush did, but Obama’s
supporters praise the sincerity of his commitment to Armenian-American
concerns and point to his familiarity with these issues. "This is an
individual who is more knowledgeable about Armenian-Americans than most
candidates are and have been," said Rep. Pallone, the New Jersey
Democrat who co-chairs the Caucus on Armenian Affairs. Obama spoke about
the Armenian genocide well before launching his campaign, and many
activists take that as reassurance that his stance is more than an
electoral gimmick. Elizabeth Chouldjian, a spokesperson for the ANCA,
and Areen Ibranossian both cited an Obama press conference during a
congressional trip to Azerbaijan in 2005. Asked about his support for
genocide affirmation in a country that has a tense relationship with
Armenia, Obama did not shy away from reiterating his stance, a moment
Ibranossian described as "extraordinary." "He had no reason to put out
his neck and defend himself," he said.

Nearly all of Obama’s backers also point to his relationship with a
high-profile adviser who is ironically no longer part of his campaign.
In her work on genocide prevention and in her book A Problem from Hell
< 0060541644/theatlanticmonthA/re%20%20f=3Dnosim> ,
Samantha Power has focused on the international community’s failure to
recognize genocides like the one that decimated the Armenians in 1915,
arguing that a proper understanding of past catastrophes is crucial to
preventing genocides in the present. Power resigned from the campaign
after calling Hillary Clinton a "monster" in March, but many in the
Armenian community believe her outlook has shaped Obama’s foreign
policy views.

The campaign’s January 19 statement, for instance, connected the
recognition of the Armenian genocide with broader issues of genocide
prevention. "A principled commitment to commemorating and ending
genocide," the statement said, "starts with acknowledging the tragic
instances of genocide in world history."

The contrast between Obama and McCain extends more broadly to the United
States’ relationship with the Republic of Armenia. Obama’s January 19th
statement pledged to maintain Armenian foreign aid and to move toward a
resolution of the Karabagh conflict that would respect the "principle of
self-determination"-language close to Armenian demands. The ANCA’s
Elizabeth Chouldjian praised Obama’s positions as "the strongest we’ve
gotten from a candidate in over ten years." (The ANCA endorsed Obama in
January, just as it supported John Kerry in 2004; the group remained
neutral in the 2000 election.) On the other hand, John McCain has
remained largely silent on these issues, an attitude his critics deride
as worrisome indifference.

The California-based Armenians for Obama group plans to educate
Armenian-American voters about these differences. The organization is
conducting extensive phone bank operations to contact as many
Armenian-American voters in swing states as possible. "Our first
objective is to make sure that all Armenians know Obama’s stance on
issues," said Ibranossian, the group’s chairman. "We take Obama’s
message and try to make it more consumable by Armenian-Americans, more
relatable to their concerns."

Ibranossian argued that extensive outreach in large Armenian communities
in the Detroit and Las Vegas regions could prove decisive. "If we can
get them out to vote," he said, "that could make the difference in
swinging the election from red to blue." Armenian Republicans are
mounting an effort of their own to help McCain, but they are getting a
late start and the organization they are relying on-the National
Organization of Republican Armenians <;
(NORA)-has been largely inoperative over the past eight years.

Like many others before him, Obama will have to weigh conflicting
interests if he gets to the White House. Georgetown’s Cory Welt points
out that Obama "has been insistent on the importance of reaching out to
international partners and that Turkey will be one of the countries that
he will want to reach out to. He will quickly find the genocide issue to
be an obstacle."

Until then, Obama’s position has given hope to many
Armenian-Americans-even to those who are not planning on voting for him.
A spokesperson for NORA and a McCain supporter, Peter Musurlian is
nonetheless hopeful that President Obama might finally succeed in moving
the United States towards genocide recognition. "I wouldn’t cry in my
beer if Obama is elected, I would say let’s look at what he does on
April 24th," he said, in a reference to the commemorative date of the
Armenian genocide. "Hopefully he will do better than President Bush."

OP-ED DJEREJIAN: U.S.-Iranian relations

The Washington Times
Wednesday, September 17, 2008

By Edward P. Djerejian

You negotiate peace with your adversaries and enemies, not with your
friends. That is what diplomacy is all about. With current sanctions
and talks under the aegis of the United Nations making little progress
in impeding Iran’s nuclear program, concerns are mounting and there is
a steady drumbeat of possible resort to military options. Under these
circumstances, and on the eve of our presidential elections, there
could be no more urgent need than to address the overall United
States-Iranian relationship.

The costs of not talking with our adversaries are clear. This came
home to me when we were engaged in the Iraq Study Group (ISG) in 2006
and met with the Iranian Permanent Representative to the United
Nations. The lack of official and sustained communications between the
United States and Iran not only have led to misperceptions, certainly
on the part of the Iranians as to United States policies, but have
also proved an impediment to our ability to influence Iranian behavior
beyond sanctions and the implied threats of military action. The task
before us is this: How to engage the Iranians in serious discussions
that have the potential to identify whatever common ground may exist
between us on specific issues, and then to try to resolve those issues
in bilateral and multilateral forums, as appropriate.

The Iranians have engaged with us on Iraq, but they do not want a
dialogue on Iraq alone. They seek a broader agenda of discussions
where the major issues, both bilateral and regional, are on the
table. Sustained engagement between the United States and Iran on key
issues (e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan, Arab-Israeli peace, terrorism,
support for Hezbollah and Hamas, human rights, and bilateral
relations) could make real progress possible on the nuclear issue.

We need to put Iran into perspective. Without question, Iran is a
regional power in the Gulf and Middle East, by virtue of its size,
strategic location, rich history and culture, and oil and gas
resources. But Iran is not the Soviet Union, which constituted an
existential strategic threat to the United States.

Iran can threaten its neighbors in the Gulf and the region, including
Israel. However, most of these countries have strong bilateral
relations with the United States. Iran knows that if it threatens or
acts against them, it would seriously risk the active opposition of
the United States and other major powers. The concept of deterrence is
real in this respect from political and economic to military measures.

Given Iran’s domestic, economic, and political problems and
challenges, Iran has strong reason not to antagonize the United States
to the point of confrontation. Such a confrontation would be costly
for both sides; for Iran, it would be devastating.

Therefore, as the world’s preeminent power, the United States can
afford to take the first step in putting the Iranian regime to the
test by offering a broad strategic dialogue on all the key issues
between us. Our willingness to engage with Iran is not and in no way
should be seen as a lack of United States resolve on the key issues
that affect our national security interests and those of our friends,
especially the issue of nuclear weapons. While pursuing the nuclear
issue actively through multilateral means, a first step in a dialogue
could be an exchange of respective assessments regarding the key
regional issues such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Arab-Israeli peace,
Lebanon, Gulf security, and terrorism.

The overall subset of these discussions would be the United
States-Iranian bilateral relationship. Here we will have to make clear
that we are not pursuing regime change. Instead, the United States
will look for a change in behavior and policies by Iran. We would
promote our positions on human rights, democracy, the role of civil
society, and the rule of law as structural parts of the bilateral
dialogue.

With regard to the nuclear issue, some analysts have suggested that
there are at least three key schools of thought in Iran. The first
school consists of hardliners who are determined to achieve a nuclear
weapons capability. A second is comprised of those who seek what might
be called the Japanese model. Namely, acquire the means to produce
nuclear weapons – without crossing that threshold, yet retain the
ability to do so. A third school argues that nuclear weapons are not
necessary. For these Iranians a more important goal is to address
pressing socio-economic needs through integration into the global
economy. These different factions should be taken into consideration
by U.S. diplomacy in a sophisticated manner to test the possibilities
for forward movement on the nuclear issue.

The stakes are simply too high in the United States-Iranian
relationship to not adopt a comprehensive, strategic and direct
dialogue at the highest levels. In sum, we should not miss this
opportunity to engage realistically and without illusions one of the
most important and adversarial regimes we face in the region.

Edward P. Djerejian, who served as ambassador to Syria and Israel, is
founding director of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public
Policy at Rice University.

sep/17/us-iranian-relations/

PanARMENIAN.Net

Hulusi Kilic: Turkey will always advocate Azerbaijan’s sovereignty and
territorial integrity
11.10.2008 14:10 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ A new round of trilateral talks between Turkey,
Armenia and Azerbaijan will take place after the Azeri presidential
election, said Hulusi Kilic, Turkey’s Ambassador to Baku.

`Isolated Armenia will most benefit from normalization of relations
and I am hopeful that we will resolve all problems
jointly. Nevertheless, Turkey will always advocate Azerbaijan’s
sovereignty and territorial integrity,’ he said, Novosti Azerbaijan
reports.

PanARMENIAN.Net

Nalbandian, Zavgayev discuss Armenia-Russia cooperation
11.10.2008 14:06 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian met
Russian MFA Director General Doku Zavgayev, the RA MFA press office
told PanARMENIAN.Net.

The top diplomats focused on the agenda of bilateral relations,
including cooperation between Foreign Ministries of the two states.

PanARMENIAN.Net

EU pleased with Turkey’s position on Caucasus
11.10.2008 13:41 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey should speed up the process of reform for its
integration into the European Union as a full-fledged member, said the
EU Commissioner for Enlargement.

`I would like to see Turkey more active in carrying out reforms
envisaged by its accession program,’ Olli Rehn told a conference in
Istanbul.

`Despite some negative elements the process is underway and talks will
include new provisions by the end of the current year,’ he said,
hailing Turkey’s Caucasus pact.

`The EU is pleased with Turkey’s position on the Caucasus, which calls
for participation of Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkey and is
based on the OSCE principles,’ Rehn said, RIA Novosti reports.

PanARMENIAN.Net

Next Dink hearing scheduled for Oct. 23
11.10.2008 15:23 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The next hearing in the murder case of
Turkish-Armenian journalist, Agos editor Hrant Dink will take place at
the Istanbul Criminal Court on October 13, Today’s Zaman reports.

The trial so far has revealed dubious connections between the suspects
and the police. Dink family lawyers have frequently brought
allegations that police attempted to obscure evidence. Two gendarmerie
officers are currently standing trial for having ignored tip-offs
about the plot to kill Dink, who was shot dead outside his Agos
newspaper in Istanbul in January 2007. Police arrested the suspected
gunman, Ogun Samast, and his alleged associate, Yasin Hayal, within
days.

Samast, 17 years old at the time, was charged with murdering Dink and
with membership in a criminal group. The first five hearings were
closed to the media because suspect Samast was a minor at the time – a
situation that changed in the sixth hearing in June of this
year. There are a total of 20 suspects in the case, eight of them
currently under arrest.

Panorama.am
19:31 10/10/2008

POLITICIAN: WHAT COULD ARMENIA GAIN

Russia started to support Armenia to have improved relationship with
Turkey and opened boarders, said politician Ervand Bozoyan in a press
conference and added that the new policy surely has its own
aftermaths. According to him Russia is working on a long term struggle
policy against Georgia, and Moscow has an apprehension that Armenia,
its strategic companion, will appear in a complete blockade.

`Russia has a mission to create such situation in Georgia to prove the
West that without Russia they will not manage to have energy
security. Russia and United States fight for strengthening their
influence and for their interests in general,’ said the politician.

Georgia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan are nominated to join NATO, which is a
threat for Russia for creating a closed circle. Politician Manvel
Sargsyan was present at the press conference. He agreed with the
colleague that many questions are being solved for Armenia with
Russian support.

Source: Panorama.am

Armenian prime minister: Statements taking into account only
Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity create wrong ideas and expectations

2008-10-11 13:54:00

ArmInfo. The statements taking into account only the principle of
Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and neglecting other accepted
principles create wrong ideas and expectations and are extremely
dangerous, Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan said during his
meeting with US Vice President Dick Cheney.

Armenian Prime Minister’s Press Secretary Diana Mnatsakanyan quotes
Tigran Sargsyan as saying: "Armenia is willing to continue the peace
process on the basis of Madrid principles. Attempts to bring the
Karabakh conflict settlement out of the OSCE Minsk Group frames are
inadmissible". During the meeting Sargsyan and Cheney dwelled on the
bilateral relations, prospects and possibilities of their development,
as well as touched upon the issues of regional security. In particular,
the meeting covered the South Ossetian conflict’s negative effect on
Armenia’s economy; Armenia-Turkey relations, Turkish President Abdullah
Gul’s visit to Armenia, ways of the Karabakh conflict settlement,
implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation’s programs, as
well as the international financial crisis.

Speaking of the consequences of the Georgian-South Ossetian conflict,
Sargsyan noted that the material damage caused to Armenia by the
conflict makes up about 670 mln USD as uncollected taxes and delayed
investments.

Sargsyan and Cheney also discussed the results of the visit of
President of Turkey Abdullah Gul to Yerevan. Sargsyan said that the
visit might give a positive impulse to the improvement of
Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, he expressed concern over
the statements made by Gul and the Azeri Foreign Minister at the UN
after the visit. Constructive approaches both inside Armenia and on the
international arena are often regarded as weakening of positions in
negotiating process while, in fact, this is expression of political
will and readiness for concessions.

ARMENIA-IRAN RAILWAY

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
10 Oct 2008
Armenia

According to all the expert observations the construction of
Armenia-Iran railway will take 5 years.

Minister of Transportation and Communication Gurgen Sargsyan said
yesterday, the study of the railway’s construction is coming to an end.
There are three versions, the best will be chosen.

The Minister said the re-operation of Gyumry-Kars railway has not been
yet discussed. `In case of operation it will be beneficial not only for
Armenia and Turkey but also for the whole region. As of September 6
Armenia was ready to receive trains by Kars-Gyumry railway.

Los Angeles Times, CA

Armenian clergy worldwide embark on a quest to collect holy oil

Email Picture
Michael Robinson Chavez / Los Angeles Times

A PORTION FOR EACH: Archbishop Hovnan Derderian, right, of the Western
Diocese of the Armenian Church, based in Burbank, distributes vials of
muron Tuesday to priests from across Southern California. Photo

In an age-old tradition, priests visit the Cathedral of Etchmiadzin in
Armenia to pick up jars of muron, derived from the original mixture
blended at the time of the church’s founding.

By Louis Sahagun, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 11, 2008

Every seven years since AD 301, priests from around the world have
trekked to the ancient Cathedral of Etchmiadzin in Armenia to retrieve
jarfuls of freshly brewed muron — muron — a sweet-scented holy oil
stirred with what is said to be the tip of the lance driven through
Jesus’ side — and carry them back to their respective dioceses.

Prepared in a massive silver caldron, the mixture of herbs, flower
extracts, spices, wine and pure olive oil was derived from an original
batch mixed at the Armenian Church’s founding 1,707 years ago. It is
replenished every seven years by pouring old into new, continuing a
mysterious connection between distant generations.

The priests usually travel home with their portions cradled in their
arms because muron, according to tradition, can be handled only by
ordained clergy.

That all changed late last month when the ancient tradition met with a
21st century obstacle that has been put in place since the last trip
for the holy oil: As a liquid, muron cannot be taken aboard commercial
airliners, according to airport security rules.

"We were very worried — in the old days, we carried the muron in our
hands," recalled His Eminence Archbishop Hovnan Derderian, primate of
the Western Diocese of the Armenian Church of North America, which is
based in Burbank. "I would never have given away that privilege, but
we had no option."

Derderian bundled up his six containers in layers of cloth, and then
packed them snugly into three suitcases. Airport baggage handlers took
it from there.

"I was confident that nothing would happen to it," he said. "You do
your best, and then trust in God."

Derderian’s containers arrived safely after a 20-hour flight.

A genial man with a black beard, Derderian declared mission
accomplished on Tuesday when priests from churches across Southern
California gathered around a massive oak table in his Burbank office.

Their 7-ounce portions of the amber-hued oil were presented on a
silver tray: 15 small glass jars with white screw-cap lids, each one
marked with a label written in English and Armenian: "Holy
Muron. September 28, 2008. Holy Etchmiadzin."

After prayers and solemn hymns, the clergy in black robes got up and
formed a line. Fist-sized silver crosses — some studded with precious
stones — dangled from silver chains around their necks. They
approached the table, in turn, with heads bowed and kissed the jars of
muron that Derderian placed in their hands.

A few minutes later, they were heading back to their churches, where
the oil would be transferred into dove-shaped sterling silver
containers symbolizing the Holy Spirit that visited Jesus.

Over the next seven years, the muron will be used — a few drops at a
time — primarily for christenings in Armenian churches here and the
world over.

"Armenians everywhere are bound by muron," said Zaven Arzoumanian, a
theologian with the Western Diocese. "It receives special powers from
relics used in its preparation. The gifts of the Holy Spirit come from
it in church ceremonies."

"That is why," he added with a smile, "our people have always said,
‘My child must be muronized.’ "

The origins of muron are as old as the Armenian Church, which was
established in the early 4th century by St. Gregory the Illuminator,
patron saint of Armenians. He also established the Cathedral of
Etchmiadzin, one of the oldest cathedrals in the world.

St. Gregory, according to tradition, blended the first sample of muron
there as a unifying religious symbol of forgiveness and peace, and as
a medicine for healing.

Over the centuries, church leaders say, muron helped sustain a people
decimated and dispersed by war, conquest and genocide.

This muron season, more than 70,000 people braved drenching rains to
watch His Holiness Karekin II, supreme patriarch and catholicos of
Armenians worldwide, lead a procession from the Cathedral of
Etchmiadzin to an outdoor altar where the mixture had been
steam-heated for 40 days and nights.

To outsiders, the incense-tinged gatherings of celibate Armenian
Church clergy with their pointed black hoods, towering miters and
golden staffs can look very strange. But for congregants and clergy,
they are essential ingredients of a critical religious event.

The ceremony culminates with a pitcher of fresh muron combined with
the old in a gigantic engraved silver caldron and stirred with an
assortment of religious relics: a cross believed to contain a fragment
of the wooden cross on which Jesus was crucified; a foot-long iron tip
of the lance believed to have pierced Jesus’ side, and a life-sized
gold-plated "Right Arm of St. Gregory the Illuminator" said to be
embedded with a fragment taken from St. Gregory’s grave.

When clergy bring back muron to their home churches, its arrival
process, as Arzoumanian described it, is "a beautiful tiding for our
communities."

The interplay between past and present continues Sunday when churches
throughout the Western Diocese’s 11-state region will hold special
ceremonies in which urns of water will be anointed with a small drop
of muron.

Congregants will be invited to scoop up samples to take home or to
drink then and there.

"It’s important to be a part of the muron process," Derderian
said. "It really takes you back in time."

[email protected]