Author: Babajanian Karo

news.am, Armenia
Jan 3 2012

2012 must become a year of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’s recognition – ARFD

January 03, 2012 | 11:01

YEREVAN. – 2012 must become a year of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’s
recognition, said Armenian MP from ARF Dashnaktsutyun Hrayr
Karapetyan.

Talking to Armenian News-NEWS.am, Karapetyan said that Armenia must
tear a way through the wall.

`Foreign states and international agencies should realize that
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic can never become a part of Azerbaijan. There
is a generation brought up in independence, without Azerbaijan. This
generation realized their future has nothing in common with
Azerbaijan,’ he emphasized.

Voix de la Russie
1 janv 2012

Arménie: 2012 “année de travail persévérant” (Sargsian)

2012 doit être une “année de travail persévérant”, a annoncé le
président arménien Serge Sargsian dans son message traditionnel de
Nouvel An, rapporte ITAR-TASS.

Il a appelé les Arméniens à laisser dans l’année qui vient de
s’achever l’indifférence, l’incapacité à s’entendre les uns les
autres, l’hostilité, et à s’armer en cette nouvelle année de la
promesse de s’entraider et de l’aspiration vers de nouveaux progrès –
au bénéfice de l’Arménie et dans l’intérêt de la paix et de
l’édification, dans l’intérêt de leurs familles et enfants, dans
l’intérêt de leurs fils qui montent la garde aux frontières
nationales.

On n’ignore pas qu’il nous reste encore beaucoup de travail à
accomplir, a-t-il poursuivi. “Il y a des familles qui ont de la peine
à faire chauffer leurs foyers même ce jour de fête, il y a des villes
et des villages qui ne correspondent encore pas aux critères
d’évaluation des pays civilisés”, a-t-il reconnu.

“L’Arménie procédera en 2012 aux élections legislatives’, a rappelé
Serge Sargsian. “Les élections sont très souvent perçus chez nous
comme moyen d’arriver au pouvoir ou comme moyen de se maintenir au
pouvoir, a-t-il dit. Il est grand temps de comprendre qu’il existe des
objectifs plus élevés”.

Le président arménien a annoncé avoir déjà depuis longtemps décidé de
faire tout son possible pour renoncer aux clichés vicieux et
introduire l’approche réellement nationale dans la vie politique.

“Je ne cacherai pas: j’ai eu et j’ai toujours besoin d’aide”, a-t-il reconnu.

The Dominion Post (Wellington, New Zealand)
January 2, 2012 Monday

Death threats

Death threats against politicians and “cyberattacks” on Paris by
Turkish nationalists have followed the adoption of a law by France’s
national assembly that would make it illegal to deny Turkey’s genocide
against Armenia in the early years of the last century. Valerie Boyer,
an MP in President Nicolas Sarkozy’s Centre-Right party, is under
police protection after receiving anonymous death threats for
proposing the genocide bill that must be approved by the senate before
becoming law. At the same time, various websites, including Boyer’s
and that of the senate, have been blocked by Turkish nationalist
groups.

Canberra Times (Australia)
January 1, 2012 Sunday
Final Edition

Bethlehem’s annual brawl traduces a faith founded on peace

Bethlehem’s annual brawl traduces a faith founded on peace T HE ANNUAL
stoush between custodians of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity is a
poor reflection of a faith which from its foundation has preached
peace.

Luke 2:13-14: “And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of
the heavenly host praising God and saying: ‘Glory to God in the
highest, And on earth peace, good will toward men!”‘ That peace and
good will are sadly lacking among the Greek and Armenian clergy who
frequently fight over which has the right to care for particular areas
of the 1700-year-old church.

After the celebration of Christmas, as observed by the western Church
on December 25 in the Church of the Nativity, preparations began to
mark Christmas as observed by the Orthodox Church on January 7.

Consistent media reports record an Armenian priest supervising
cleaning of the church thought a broom held by a Greek Orthodox priest
encroached on the Armenian space. Angry words degenerated into a
physical fight.

Almost 100 Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic priests fought inside
the church, using brooms as weapons. Bethlehem police said no one was
arrested because all those involved were men of God and it was a
trivial problem which occurred every year.

Other religious groups and tourists found the incident amusing.

Most who respect the tradition of the historic church would not. It is
the sort of nonsense which Christianity and the troubled town of
Bethlehem could well do without.

The Church of the Nativity is said to mark the place where Jesus was
born. There is good reason to question the validity of this;
nevertheless the building holds significant importance for
Christianity generally. But it is in poor repair, largely because the
clergy responsible for maintaining it cannot agree on who should pay
for its upkeep.

Similarly, Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre, on the site
traditionally observed as marking the place of Jesus’ crucifixion and
burial, has seen similar violence between feuding Christian
denominations.

Both churches receive considerable income from pilgrims who are
largely conned into believing they are touching the very birthplace of
Christ or on the ground of the cross and tomb.

Yet the custodians of these churches, symbolising the foundation of
Christianity, seem more intent on petty jealousies than maintaining
the buildings. More importantly, their lack of respect for the other
custodians is a poor reflection on the faith they represent.Of course,
petty jealousies and worse are not confined to Christianity.

Islam in particular is a victim of carnage committed in its name by
people who the faith generally willingly disowns. Neither is stupidity
among Christians confined to Bethlehem and Jerusalem.However, despite,
or perhaps because of, increasing secularism in Western countries,
much of the antagonism and bigotry which prevailed among Christian
denominations has markedly declined over the past 50 or so years.

There has also been some progress toward better understanding and
improved relationships between major world religions.

Given the moral authority they claim, this is long overdue. Indeed,
the major part played by religions in conflict and violence over the
centuries has greatly detracted from the considerable good also done
in their name.

The Sunday Times (London)
January 1, 2012 Sunday
Edition 1; National Edition

Who really started the first world war?

A bold study pinpoints Russia’s role in the outbreak of the 1914-18
war in Europe

by ORLANDO FIGES

THE RUSSIAN ORIGINS OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR by SAM MCMEEKIN Harvard £22.95 pp344

As any schoolchild knows, the first world war began when the
assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand in 1914 was used by the
Austrians to punish Serbia and by the Germans to pick a fight with
Russia, whose growth they feared. In this scenario, what Bismarck had
once called a “damn fool thing in the Balkans” engulfed the entente
powers in a war to stop the expansionist ambitions of Germany, the
power most responsible for the conflict.

But as Sean McMeekin argues in this bold and brilliant revisionist
study, Russia was as much to blame as Germany for the outbreak of the
war. Using a wide range of archival sources, including long-neglected
tsarist documents, he argues that the Russians had ambitions of their
own (the dismantling of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires, no
less) and that they were ready for a war once they had secured a
favourable alliance with the British and the French.

The tsarist archives show that the Russians had been mobilising their
forces for several days before Germany declared war on August 1. They
did so at the risk that it would trigger the beginning of hostilities,
because the Germans could not wait for them to mobilise.

The German Schlieffen Plan was counting on their greater speed to
concentrate their forces in the west and defeat the French in time to
turn them round against the “Russian steamroller” before it was moving
against them from the east. They could not afford a two-front war.

Historians have portrayed Russia as a junior partner in the entente
cause, sacrificing troops in East Prussia to help the British and the
French by diverting German forces from the Western Front. But as
McMeekin reminds us, two-thirds of the Russians were deployed against
the Austrians in Galicia, where they were fighting for specifically
tsarist aims: the extension of Russia’s “natural” frontier to the
Carpathians and the conquest of Polish lands in Silesia.

>From Galicia, the Russians looked towards the annexation of
Constantinople and the Black Sea straits. Nicholas II wanted to
achieve what Nicholas I had failed to do in the Crimean war: expel the
Turks from Europe and liberate the Slavs from Islamic rule. McMeekin
is dismissive of any pan-Slav aims on Russia’s part. He rightly
focuses on the strategic importance of the straits to Russia’s naval
defence of its vulnerable Black Sea borders and to its commerce with
the world. But he might have made a little more of Constantinople’s
historic and religious role in Mc an pa st sde Bl co mo h the Russian
imperial consciousness.

>From the 18th century, the Russians dreamt of turning it into the
capital (Tsargrad) of an Orthodox empire built upon the ruins of
Byzantium.

They had little chance of getting the straits on their own (the Turks
had German dreadnoughts at their disposal). But the Russians managed
to persuade their allies to fight for them on their behalf – without
promised Russian help – in the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.

As McMeekin shows, the absurd logic of the British was to give the
Straits to the Russians in exchange for a non-binding promise by the
tsar not to invade Persia in his war against the Turks. Gallipoli was
the sacrifice the British made to protect the route to India. They
were still playing the Great Game.

The Russian advance into Asia Minor was unstoppable. They were soon in
Persia, where the British had to accept them anyway, if only, McMeekin
suggests, to prevent the greater threat of “some new Germanophile
Islamic regime that might declare war in British India”.

McMeekin’s final chapters chart the Russian campaigns in Persia and
the Caucasus. He details how the Russians armed the Armenian
resistance to the Turks in Eastern Anatolia – a thinly veiled policy
of Russian imperial expansion that helped to bring about the Armenian
“genocide”, the systematic deportation and killing of about 1m
civilians by the Turks in 1915.

By the spring of 1916, the Russians had made so much headway into Asia
Minor that they were able to secure allied support (the Sykes-Picot
agreement) for their long-desired partition of the Ottoman empire. The
Russian empire stood to gain European Turkey and the straits, Eastern
Anatolia and Persian Azerbaijan, more than it had dreamt of getting in
the 19th century.

But then came the 1917 revolution and the collapse of the Russian
military. Here McMeekin lets his mistrust of the Russians spoil his
excellent archival work. He argues that the provisional government
carried on the tsarist policy of capturing the Straits, but, in fact,
it soon renounced all territorial gains and pledged to fight only for
the defence of the revolution and Russia’s prewar boundaries.

Yet even this was not enough to stop the rot in the army. After the
October revolution, millions of soldiers demobilised themselves,
forcing the Bolsheviks to sue for peace on humiliating terms. With the
Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Russia ceased to be a significant power in
Europe. Its gamble on war had failed disastrously.

The Australian
Jan 3 2012

This is hardly the time for Sarkozy to be talking Turkey

by: Theodore Dalrymple

THE whole village is on fire, goes the old Romanian peasant saying,
but grandmother wants to finish combing her hair.
The euro is in danger, and with it the European Union, but President
Nicolas Sarkozy and his party, the Union for a Popular Movement, want
to pass a law forbidding the public denial in France of the Ottoman
genocide of the Armenians. This is not the kind of politicking of
which Europe has deep need just at the moment.

Sarkozy’s motives are not very difficult to fathom. There is soon to
be an election in France; he is trailing in the polls; there are
500,000 voters of Armenian descent in France; his opponents, the
Socialist Party, are in favour of such a law and indeed proposed one
back in 2006 that Sarkozy, via an emissary, promised Turkey — a
rising regional power and an increasingly important trade partner of
France — would not be passed by the French Senate (exactly what
happened last May). Now, with his back to the wall, he needs to
improve or repair his image among the Armenian-descended population.

…The proposed law was passed by the National Assembly, admittedly
with only 65 deputies present, in the week before Christmas (it still
needs to be ratified by the Senate to become law). It envisages fines
of up to E45,000 (about $57,000) and imprisonment for up to one year
for “extreme” public denial of the genocide; but in the context of
genocide, almost any denial is extreme.

It seems probable Sarkozy will support the law until after the
elections are over, and then let it fail again in the Senate.

The proposed law has, with good reason, been received very badly by
French academics and intellectuals, virtually all of whom accept there
was a genocide of the Armenians. A law already exists in France
against the denial of the Nazi genocide; but leaving aside whether it
is ever the business of the law to forbid any historical opinion
whatsoever, this law — la loi Gayssot — at least referred
principally to a genocide in which the French state of the time was
directly implicated. The new law, by contrast, threatens to be the
thin end of the wedge, with various groups clamouring for a similar
recognition of their own historical sufferings. After all, said the
eminent historian Pierre Nora in the newspaper Liberation, the whole
of history is a crime against humanity.

The Turkish response to the passage of the law was only too
predictable, and of course just as full of bad faith as was Sarkozy’s
(no doubt temporary) support of it. The Turkish government can hardly
claim to be a guardian of free speech on the matter: for example, the
Turkish publisher Ragip Zarakolu was arrested as a terrorist for
having published a translation of Does Europe Need Turkish
Intellectuals? by the French historian Vincent Duclert, which
describes the awakening of the conscience of Turkish intellectuals on
the matter of the Armenian genocide.

The very fury of the Turkish official response, moreover, and the
swift official resort to the tu quoque (what about you?) argument,
suggests a conscience that is ill at ease: as, of course, most
national consciences are.

It is not a convincing defence against murder, after all, that your
accuser is himself a murderer. Turkey is reported to be trying to drum
up official complaints by various former French colonies against
France, and in truth there is plenty to complain of, as the French
themselves now recognise.

In citing the case of Algeria as one of genocide, however, Turkey has
probably got it the wrong way round: from the narrowly juridical point
of view, according to which genocide is the deliberate and systematic
destruction of an ethnic, racial, religious or national group by
(among other means) the killing of members of that group, it would
make more sense for the French to accuse the Algerians of genocide
than the other way round, in so far as the pieds noirs, who were 10
per cent of the population, were completely, deliberately and
permanently eradicated by the nationalists. All this shows, however,
is the juridical uselessness of an expanded definition of genocide,
and its potential for raising heat without generating light.

Sarkozy must know, or at any rate ought to have known, that the
proposed law would not only sour relations between France and Turkey
at a time when Turkey is booming and France is in recession and in
dire need of economic dynamism, but that it would inflame in Turkey
the very nationalist sentiment that makes honest and dispassionate
examination of the past so difficult: and all this for the most
paltry, and in any case doubtful, electoral advantage.

In behaving as he has, and acting so blatantly in his own narrow
electoral interest, Sarkozy resembles a machine politician in search
of the trappings of power rather than a statesman. And he is about as
interested in historical truth about Armenia as the average Anatolian
peasant is in the French election results.

Of course he resembles all his European colleagues in his ambitious
frivolity: he is neither better nor worse than they. Faced by the
greatest economic crisis of the past 60 years or more, they are
patently more concerned with their own political survival than in
undoing the damage that they and their ilk have wrought in the past
decades. A crisis brings out the mediocrity in them.

Is this the fault of our political systems, or of human nature itself?
There are dangers, no doubt, in ascribing it wholly to either.

MilAz.info, Azerbaijan
Jan 1 2012

President Ilham Aliyev: The key issues facing the country in 2011 have
been resolved
12:50 01-01-2012

Congratulatory message of President Ilham Aliyev to the people of
Azerbaijan on the occasion of the Day of Solidarity of Azerbaijanis of
the World and New Year

Dear ladies and gentlemen!
Dear compatriots!
I would like to wish you all a Happy New Year.

Year 2011 is being consigned to history. It has been a successful year
for our country. The key issues facing the country in 2011 have been
resolved. Azerbaijan has secured a successful economic development. It
is gratifying that the non-oil sector of our economy has substantially
expanded. Our non-oil economy has grown more than 10 per cent, which
is evidence of the reforms conducted in previous years.
All sectors of our economy are developing. Extensive creative and
landscaping work is under way in the country. Azerbaijan is
invigorating its positions in the region. Our economic development
statistics are very positive. The country’s currency reserves are
growing. We already have over $40 billion of currency reserves.
Billions of dollars in investment are channeled in the national
economy and this process is ongoing. The volume of investment is
growing by the year.
Our districts are developing successfully. This year, up to 100,000
jobs have been created. Overall, more than one million jobs have been
created in the last eight years, the vast majority of which have been
permanent. Population incomes have increased 20 per cent. The level of
inflation is under 8 per cent. The level of poverty is falling. At the
end of 2011, the level of poverty will be below 8 per cent. The
unemployment rate is decreasing. The rate of unemployment in
Azerbaijan is 5.5 per cent. All these indicators suggest that our
country is developing successfully and dynamically. Despite the
negative developments unfolding in world and European economies,
Azerbaijan is moving forward confidently.
All social issues are being resolved. This year, the average pensions
of about 900,000 people have been raised by approximately 40 per cent.
The minimum wage was also raised on 1 December. Other social programs
are under way. Schools, hospitals and sports centers are built. In
other words, Azerbaijan is experiencing all-round and dynamic
development. Political reforms are well under way. Democracy is
successfully developing. Specific steps are taken to modernize the
country. We are vigorously fighting corruption and bribery and seeing
excellent results of this fight. It should be even more focused and
vigorous in the coming years. All the necessary orders have been
issued. In short, we are building a modern state. We are building a
modern, secular state confident of the future on the basis of deep
national and spiritual values and roots.
The problem worrying us the most is the unresolved status of the
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan is
stepping up its efforts in all countries, especially in the recent
period. But as you know, a solution of this issue depends not only on
us.
Unfortunately, Armenia’s non-constructive stance, its hypocrisy in the
negotiations and the practical defiance of talks have dealt a serious
blow to the process. Unfortunately, the world community and the
countries directly dealing with the issue are shying away from naming
the party responsible for disrupting the talks.
There are positive statements. We are hearing and supporting these
statements. In particular, this year’s novelty has been a repeated
indication by co-chairs that the status-quo is unacceptable. We
support these statements. But statements should be followed by
specific steps. Unfortunately, these steps are not taken.
We will continue our diplomatic and political efforts. We have a
principled stance in the negotiations. We will not back down a single
step from it. Nagorno-Karabakh is native and historical Azerbaijani
land. The international community and the United Nations recognize and
support Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. The international
community views Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan. The conflict
must be resolved precisely on these principles. The territorial
integrity of our country must be restored. Occupying forces must
withdraw from all our occupied territories. Azerbaijani citizens must
be able to return to occupied territories, including Nagorno-Karabakh
and Shusha. Only then can a lasting peace be established. We will
never tolerate a second Armenian state on native Azerbaijani lands.
This is our principled position. I want to reiterate that this
position is based on history, international law and justice.
At the same time, as is the case in the economic sphere, we are
conducting all-round reforms in the military area. Our military
strength and potential are growing. In 2011, our military expenditure
exceeded $3 billion. This is more than Armenia’s total expenditure.
Next year our military expenditure will increase further. The latest
weaponry, hardware, warplanes, helicopter gunships and ammunition are
and will be brought to Azerbaijan. In addition, more than 600 types of
military products are manufactured in Azerbaijan through the Ministry
of Defense Industry which was established several years ago. We will
continue doing our utmost to strengthen our military potential in the
future. Our current military potential enables us to free our native
lands from occupiers at any time. We simply haven’t lost hope in the
negotiations and for the time being these negotiations should be
continued.
In 2011, our country achieved great successes in the highly important
energy sector. Azerbaijan has managed to further reinforce its
positions. Earlier this year, the European Union and Azerbaijan signed
a very important declaration on strategic cooperation. Azerbaijan is
already viewed as a country capable of supplying Europe with energy,
in particular natural gas. Our opportunities are growing.
The new gas fields discovered this year and those discovered last year
have substantially bolstered our gas potential. We will have our say
in the world as a gas nation for many years to come.
All the necessary transit agreements were signed in 2011. We now have
the opportunity to transport Azerbaijani gas to world markets through
various routes. I think major investment must be made in our immense
gas fields in 2012. Our gas potential will prove to be a highly
important asset for our country in a matter of several years.
There is development in other sectors of the economy. Agriculture,
industrial production and the non-oil sector are growing.
Additionally, humanitarian issues were also successfully dealt with in
2011. Azerbaijan has asserted itself in the world as a tolerant state.
The First International Humanitarian Forum was held in Baku this year.
All forum participants have left Azerbaijan with wonderful
impressions. Azerbaijan’s rare experience, the experience of
conducting an inter-religious, interethnic dialogue and the dialogue
between civilizations, is of great interest to the world. Of course,
our positive experience, the great atmosphere in Azerbaijan and
Azerbaijani society, the fact that representatives of all
nationalities and confessions live like one family in Azerbaijan are a
rare phenomenon in the present-day world. Unfortunately,
discrimination, mutual distrust and apathy trends are becoming
increasingly widespread in different parts of the world and on
different continents. These are very dangerous trends. Azerbaijan’s
positive experience must be studied and, in a broader sense, other
countries should take advantage of it.
A very important event for country occurred in 2011. Azerbaijan has
been elected to the UN Security Council for the first time. This is a
major historic victory. I think that this is our biggest victory in
the 20 years of independence. We have earned the confidence of the
whole world in a difficult struggle. From the very first to the last
round of voting Azerbaijan was in the lead. As a result, a total of
155 countries of the world voted for Azerbaijan, showed their
confidence in us and supported our policies. There is great confidence
and respect for Azerbaijan. Our policies enjoy support. Because our
policies are based on justice. Our policies are independent. I have
repeatedly stated in the last eight years that Azerbaijan is pursuing
independent policies. Azerbaijan has a road of its own. This is a road
of development, progress and democracy. This road has been chosen by
the Azerbaijani people. All our steps proceed from the interests of
the Azerbaijani people.
Underlying all our work are the interests of Azerbaijani citizens and
Azerbaijan. We have achieved great successes in the area of state
building. The whole world now supports Azerbaijan. When we say the
international community, the first thing that comes to mind is the
United Nations. Because this is the international community. The
opinion of the international community is not the opinion of a small
organization, a regional group or an NGO. The opinion of the
international community is the opinion of the UN, the opinion of 155
countries. This support and confidence inspire us even more. We will
be defending the principles of justice in the Security Council for the
next two years.
This year we have celebrated the 20th anniversary of the restoration
of our independence. There have been difficult and great days in the
20 years. And there have been more great days. I am absolutely sure
that there are only great days in store for us in the future.
Azerbaijan will continue to develop and grow stronger. The 20 years of
independence have shown that the people of Azerbaijan can live as an
independent nation and live well. The state of Azerbaijan has asserted
itself in the region as a stabilizing factor. No projects can be
implemented in the region without Azerbaijan’s participation. The
experience of recent years has shown this yet again. Azerbaijan is
reckoned with in the economic, energy, political, diplomatic and
regional cooperation matters. We have achieved this ourselves and we
must protect this achievement. We must and we will protect our
country.
Dear friends!
It is also the Day of Solidarity of Azerbaijanis of the World today. I
would like to send my greetings to all Azerbaijanis of the world and
express my regards and love for them. The people of Azerbaijan is a
great nation. We have a great history and a bright future. All
Azerbaijanis of the world know that there is an independent and strong
Azerbaijani state on the world map, a state that always thinks about
its compatriots, shares their problems and does its best to ensure
their well-being. I would like to congratulate all Azerbaijanis of the
world on this remarkable holiday.
Dear compatriots!
We are entering 2012. I am confident that our country will continue to
succeed in 2012. I would like to repeat that underlying all our work
are the citizens of Azerbaijan, Azerbaijani families.
I wish all our citizens, all the people of Azerbaijan good health,
happiness and well-being. Congratulations!

Heritage Newspapers
Jan 1 2012

Armenian Orthodox families mark Christmas celebration Jan. 6
Published: Sunday, January 01, 2012

John Zadikian
Journal Register News Service

Many Armenian traditions at this time of year are similar to those of
other Christian denominations.

Trappings of red, green and gold adorn homes and religious buildings,
where hymns are sung and worshipers recognize each other with seasonal
greetings of peace and joy.

At St. Sarkis Armenian Apostolic Church in Dearborn, members and their
families gathered Dec. 25 for a celebration of the Divine Liturgy led
by the Rev. Daron Stepanian. St. Sarkis, located on Ford Road, is one
of the churches of the Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of
America.

Until the 4th Century, Christians worldwide celebrated Christ’s birth
Jan. 6. The Roman Catholic Church changed the birthdate to Dec. 25 to
override a pagan festival dedicated to the birth of the sun. The
Armenian Church and several others under the Eastern Orthodox umbrella
still celebrate the birth and the baptism on the Jan. 6, Stepanian
said.

“Armenian Christmas,” he said, “is a culmination of celebrations of
events related to Christ’s incarnation, which is the central theme of
the Christmas season in the Armenian Church. When we wish someone a
‘Merry Christmas’ in Armenian, we’re actually saying that ‘Christ is
born and revealed, and blessed is Christ’s revelation.'”

Stepanian will celebrate Christmas Eve at St. Sarkis Jan. 5 with an
evening service, scroll reading and Divine Liturgy starting at 6:30
p.m. Activities on Christmas Day, Jan. 6, include church services
beginning at 10 a.m., a water blessing commemorating Christ’s baptism,
and a Christmas program at 1 p.m.

The leader of the St. Sarkis flock will return home later in the day
to enjoy a holiday meal with his family.

Like the Armenians, many local Greeks will also gather in churches
around the area for services Jan. 6.

In their houses of worship, parishioners such as Dearborn Heights
native James Linaras will mark the Epiphany, also known as Theophany,
or the revelation of God to mankind in human form in the person of his
son, Jesus Christ.

“As Christians, we always celebrate the birth of Christ with family
gatherings and gift exchanges on Dec. 25,” said Linaras, a Detroiter
whose parents still reside in his childhood home. “In the Greek
church, we refer to Jan. 6 as ‘the Feast of the Epiphany,’ which,
translated from Greek, means ‘manifestation’ or ‘striking appearance.’
It is one of the great feasts of the liturgical year in our church.”

International Business Times
Dec 29 2011

Clergymen in a Broom Fight at the Birthplace of Jesus

By Amrutha Gayathri: Subscribe to Amrutha’s RSS feed

December 29, 2011 2:09 AM EST

An annual cleaning ritual at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem,
one of the most sacred and oldest continuously operating churches in
the world, ended up in a broom fight between the rival clergy
belonging to three separate monastic communities.

The church built over a cave, which is traditionally regarded as the
birthplace of Jesus, is jointly administered by Roman Catholic, Greek
Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic authorities. According to convention,
the right to own a portion or structure of the Church lies with the
monastic community which cleans it up. This accepted practice may have
led to the clash between clergymen who accused each other of
encroachment by tidying up portions which didn’t belong to the
community.

The ritualistic cleaning up of the church was part of the preparations
leading to Orthodox Christmas celebrations in January, the Associated
Press reported. Unlike the Western Christians who celebrate Christmas
on Dec. 25, Eastern Christians, who follow the Julian calendar (which
has a 13 day difference with the modern Gregorian calendar) celebrate
Christmas on Jan. 6, which translates as Jan. 7 for the rest of the
world. The Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem and the Armenian
Apostolic Church follow the Julian calendar, while the Roman Catholic
Church follows the Gregorian calendar.

The fight erupted between clerics tidying up the borders of their
respective portions, and the agitated monks were reportedly shouting
and hurling brooms at each other. Palestinian security men rushed to
break up the fight, which did not cause any serious human injury.

Clashes between Christian religious sects over the ownership of the
Church of the Nativity aren’t new. The structure, which currently
occupies about 12,000 square meters, was one of the key causes that
led to French involvement in the Crimean war against Russia. The
dispute between Roman Catholic monks supported by France and the
Orthodox clergy supported by Russia, over the possession of keys of
the main door of the church, led to the Crimean war in the 1850s.

The preservation of the Church has been a major concern since 2008,
after it was placed in the watchlist of 100 most endangered sites by
the World Monument Fund. The Palestinian authorities announced a
restoration program in 2010.

Denver Post, Colorado
Dec 29 2011

Battle of the brooms as monks feud over cleaning Church of the Nativity

Posted: 12/29/2011 01:00:00 AM MSTDenver Post Wire Report

BETHLEHEM, West Bank – The annual cleaning of one of Christianity’s
holiest churches deteriorated into a brawl between rival clergy
Wednesday, as dozens of monks feuding over sacred space at the Church
of the Nativity battled one another with brooms until police
intervened.

Wednesday’s fight erupted between Greek Orthodox and Armenian clergy,
with both sides accusing the other of encroaching on parts of the
church to which they lay claim.

Denver Post wire services