DO NOT BE TEMPTED
Lragir.am
05/05/10
The information distributed by the Azeri media that during his visit to
Baku, according to Allahshukur Pashazade, Catholicos of All Armenians,
Garegin II visited the Alley of Martyrs, was yet another excuse for our
domestic television to literally slash Aliyev. It is amazing how after
all this Mehriban Aliyeva does not divorce from her husband. Maybe
she just does not watch Armenian television. It turns out that not
watching Armenian channels saves the number one Azerbaijani family
from collapse.
But the question now is not about the family of Aliyev. But
the information that spread the Azerbaijani mass media, and, with
reference to the spiritual leader of Caucasian Muslims Pashazadeh,
which was immediately refuted by Echmiadzin, and then – by Pashazadeh.
But the question is not even in this case. The case is that this
incident painfully reminds the biblical "do not be tempted". Maybe,
it was not worth that the Armenian Catholicos was tempted to travel
to Baku for a summit of religious leaders, the more so because of many
reasons not to be tempted. First, was it worth to go to the capital of
a country, where Armenians were persecuted and killed, and it is still
not recognized. Is it logical to go to the capital of a country, whose
president, seven days a week, in fact, threatens Armenians by the war?
Is it logical to meet with the very president? Is it logical to
travel in the country, the press of which is known for its "ducks"
and numerous examples of misinformation?
The question is in what circles the visit of the Armenian Catholicos
to Baku was discussed. Who participated in the decision making to weigh
all the pros and cons, all the risks of this trip? Will the effect not
have been more if Garegin II refused to go to Baku, referring to the
above reasons? Was official Yerevan involved in the decision taking?
It is clear that the answers to most of these questions will be
unknown, and it will be even objective. The problem is whether
there is an effective system for discussion of such decisions of
the Armenian Church, and these decisions are directly dictated by
the official Yerevan or someone else, and perhaps decisions are made,
and then submitted for approval by the official Yerevan? These are the
questions that occur after the misinformation of the Azerbaijani media.
The question is the creativity of the Armenian Church, its adequacy to
modern challenges and mechanisms to ensure this adequacy. And perhaps
it is not necessary that the solutions would be discussed in public.
Above all, it is important that the church holds these discussions in
its bowels considering all the issues and draw appropriate conclusions.
And so, the Azerbaijani misinformation has not the slightest
importance, one must have the worst opinion about the Armenian society
to think that the information of the Azerbaijani media could affect
the public attitudes toward the church or the Catholicos. This ratio
is influenced by much more fundamental factors.
HAKOB BADALYAN From Ed.: Summit in Baku, incidentally, was not
as representative as it is trying to be presented. The heads of
major churches did not take part in it, in addition, the status of
Allahshukur Pashazade is not so high that he could talk on equal
terms with the Armenian Catholicos.