Insight

Reflections by Vazgen I Catholicos of All Armenians

Characteristic Feature of the Armenian people

The Armenian people have been producers of culture throughout the past and continue to produce culture today. That is the most characteristic feature of our people. Тhat is the meaning of our people’s existence. And our nation’s right to exist is found in this truth.

1961

The Way of the Armenian People

The history of our ancient people is a living monument rising on the horizon of mankind, built on and held together by the blood of our martyrs, by the creative genius for serving the good and beautiful, and by a sacred passion for our own statehood and free homeland, particularly since the time when the light of Gospel descended upon the Armenian world.

1964

Attitude towards Motherland

Let all the Armenians in Armenia and diaspora place their ancient motherland above everything else and revere it, as the good sons revere their own mother and their father’s home.

1967

The big issue for Diaspora

The bigger and critical issue for the Armenian diaspora is the issue of preserving national identity, a task which demands coordination of all our moral, intellectual and physical resources and efforts. Of special importance is the expansion of the network of Armenian educational institutions.

1968

Befitting the Ancestors

It is true that many centuries ago Erebuni laid the foundation for the new Yerevan. However, what is even truer is that Yerevan through the spark of its imagination and the efforts of its hands after three thousand years sought, unearthed and brought to light the cornerstone of its long history.

1968

Inward National Freedom

On the banner of the Armenian nation’s heroic struggle through the centuries, the motto of Avarayr, “For our Fatherland! For our Faith!” has always been emblazoned. For this reason although often overcome outwardly, the Armenians have inwardly always remained free and invincible in the pursuit of its cultural-spiritual mission. In spite of the passing storms, it continues to be a powerful creator of lasting spiritual values. The Armenian people, throughout their history, have remained true to freedom-loving Hayk and Christ-loving Vardan.

1972

On Cilician Armenia

In the human history it is almost a unique phenomenon that a small nation on the edge of an abyss could establish a new national state distant from its historic homeland, on other lands, where, relocating its Holy See there, for centuries thereafter its cultural and spiritual life survived, continued, and flourished, and then returned to its homeland imbued with a vision of renaissance.

The Cilician epoch not only revived the Armenian Church and Patriarchal See, Armenian culture and literature, the Armenian Church and Patriarchal seat, the Armenian culture and literature, the national conscience for freedom and sovereignty which was gasping for breath on native soil, but furthermore strengthened them and enriched the treasure chest of the Armenian creative soul and mind with lasting new values.

1975

Modern Sardarapat

Let’s ask ourselves what is the duty of reverence to the heroes of Sardarapat? Of course, it is not enough to just evoke their memory in prayers or eloquent words, but first and foremost through our active deeds to build the homeland. The spirit of Sardarapat should be given its rightful place in our present-day national life. Sometimes we encounter shortcomings in this regard, especially abroad in the Diaspora. We often overlook that the Genocide still continues drop by drop. This is the situation we must confront with the spirit of Sardarapat, in all possible ways. We must do the impossible to preserve and defend our identity, the integrity and unity of the entire Armenian nation in Armenia and the Diaspora.

1979

Christianity and Armenians

One could say that the Armenian people has been a nation-church throughout all of its history beginning with the 4-th century. Christianity is the cornerstone of the spirituality of the Armenian people, the primary source of its creative power, its destiny and proud heritage to this day.

1982

The Artsakh Issue

The main task for us now is to lead and act in a way to preserve our national unity on the Karabakh issue – in a way that will not endanger our just cause, but will attain success. To this end we should be very careful and discreet, maintain our poise, our good sense, our prudence and notably our faith in the triumph of our just cause. I would like to add that our brothers and sisters in Diaspora, everyone, of every stripe and color, have formed a firm consensus. Hence, our appeal to everyone is the same – remain steadfast in heart, soul, and a bright mind to the just expectations of the Armenians of Karabakh, faithful to our pan-national covenant. We shall live forever on the slopes of Ararat, our mountains at our side, for our nation still has new things to tell the world around.

1988

Our Faith and Artsakh

Our Church has recently experienced a revival. In the wake of the stormy blast of Artsakh, we look, with spiritual comfort and even a bit of amazement, at how the spiritual world of our people made an about-face and is experiencing an awakening of national consciousness and sentiment, finding its identity and gaining a deeper self-understanding. This is truly wondrous to behold.

1989

Self-determination and Sovereignty

It’s really inexplicable how the Soviet Union could take such a position against a faithful people which since the end of the previous [XIX] century made such important contributions to the victory of the Soviet rule – i.e., to take a position that denies part of its historical homeland – the people of Nagorno-Karabakh, the right to self-determination and unification with Soviet Armenia. Against this just and democratic principle, the neighboring state insists on its territorial sovereignty. We consider the sovereignty of Soviet republics as lawful and just, but not at the expense of violating the right to self-determination of other peoples, which is the case with Nagorno-Karabakh. Defining sovereignty in such a way as to deny the right to free self-determination of people is a colonialist approach to sovereignty . . .

1989

What is unity?

A question may arise – what should we understand when we speak of unity? I believe the unity is very desirable, however, we should not understand it as absolute uniformity. As with other nations, so with the public life of our nation there may be, and it would be beneficial if there are various trends and lines of reasoning aiming at the common good of our nation and homeland.

Some of us may disagree with on this or that view. There will always be questions about which reasonable minds may differ, but these should not turn us into enemies of each other. This is the real spirit of democracy. Otherwise democracy is negated. If everyone treats those who hold different opinions with intolerance, this is no longer democracy, but the road to dictatorship.

Hence, what are the main issues on which consensus is necessary, consensus in the midst of the diversity of our present-day national life? In my view, there are three imperative issues to take into account:

First, safeguarding and strengthening the political security of our republic […]

Second, securing the economic restructuring and development of our economy […]

Third, the necessity to reach consensus on the development and prosperity of our national culture in our homeland […]

1989

National and Universal

We should go beyond the narrow national framework of thinking and we should strengthen our truly authentic national roots by reinvigorating them with creativity and elevating them to the level of present-day universal concepts and values in the cultural, social and political life.

1990

Independence as an imperative

The call for freedom and independence is the imperative of our centuries’ long history, a dictate of our national consciousness and the guarantee of our future existence.

1991

 

Sources:

Etchmiadzin official monthly publication of the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin

http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/4110/ (1961), pp. 5-7
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/4764/ (1964), pp. 3-5.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/5672/ (1967) , pp. 1-2
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/5830/ (1968), pp. 16-18.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/5930/ (1969), pp. 14-16.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/9498/ (1972), pp. 3-5.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/6439/ (1975), pp. 3-5.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/10334/ (1979), pp. 12-16.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/12417/ (1982), pp. 5-9.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/8565/ (1988), pp. 7-14.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/6479/ (1989), pp. 12-18.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/6036/ (1989), pp. 6-7
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/6053/ (1989) , pp. 12-18.
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/6590/ (1990) , pp. 21-22
http://echmiadzin.asj-oa.am/7056/ (1991) , p. 4.