a Catholicos had to be elected and consecrated to lead the
Church and the people into the 21st century.Barlow Der
Mugrdechian
One by one the delegates entered the Church as their
names were called, each feeling the weight of responsibility as an elector who would
decide the leader of the Armenian Church into the next millennium.
Presiding over the election were Archbishop Torkom
Manoogian, Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem, Archbishop Mesrob Mutafyan, Armenian Patriarch
of Constantinople, and Archbishop Nerses Bozabalyan, Locum Tenens (interim head of the
Armenian Church).
Four hours later, His Holiness Karekin II Nersisian was
elected as the new Catholicos of All Armenians, by a majority vote of 263 (226 votes were
necessary for election on the first ballot). The only other candidate in the election,
Archbishop Nerses Bozabalyan, received 176 votes, with 11 invalid votes.
The delegates had gathered at Etchmiadzin earlier in
the week, to participate in the National Ecclesiastical Assembly, which began on Tuesday,
Oct. 26. The Assembly had been convened to elect a successor to the late His
Holiness Karekin I, Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians, who had passed away
on June 29, 1999. His Holiness' reign of a little more than four years as
Catholicos—he had been elected in April of 1995—was cut short by illness.
The National Ecclesiastical Assembly also had on its
agenda a discussion of a draft constitution for the Armenian Church worldwide.
As a delegate elected from the Western Diocese of the
Armenian Church of North America, I was privileged to participate in only the 3rd National
Ecclesiastical Assembly held in the past 44 years. Although I had been to Armenia on
several previous occasions, this was the first time that I participated in the election of
a Catholicos. I was joined by 22 other delegates from the Western Diocese, including four
other delegates from the Central Valley.
The election of a Catholicos has historically been an
important event in Armenian history, for the primary reason that during periods when the
Armenians had lost their sovereignty, the Armenian Church had provided not only spiritual
but political leadership as well (for example the role of the Armenian Patriarch of
Constantinople as head of the Armenian millet during the period of Ottoman Turkish rule
over Western Armenia). But this election was even more significant, taking place on the
threshold of two important milestone anniversaries: the 2000th anniversary of the birth of
Jesus Christ celebrated in the year 2000 and the 1700th anniversary of the acceptance of
Christianity as the state religion of Armenia in the year 2001. By this reasoning, a Catholicos had to be elected and consecrated to lead the
Church and the people into the 21st century.
In addition, Armenia and the Diaspora need continued
spiritual renewal, especially in Armenia, where 70 years of communist rule had severely
impacted Christianity and the Church, and in the Diaspora, where administrative
differences have substantially affected many communities, especially in the United States.
His Holiness Karekin I had begun to implement some of the necessary changes but his
relatively short tenure made it impossible to make substantial progress.
47 bishops were eligible candidates for the highest
office in the Armenian Church, and in the months preceding the election, there was much
discussion about who would be the best candidate. Although many names were suggested
and there was substantial discussion in the press, especially in the Diaspora, only
Archbishops Nersisian and Bozabalyan accepted final nomination.
As a delegate I was motivated by the duty to select a
candidate whose leadership qualities would take the Armenian Church into the 21st century.
What made this already formidable task even more difficult, was the fact that there was no
formal campaign for office, and without a campaign, it was harder to formulate an opinion.
Although a political style campaign would not have been desirable, it would have been
preferable for the candidates themselves to present their own opinions and views on a
variety of issues. Neither of the two final candidates publicly spoke to the delegates at
the Assembly about what their goals would be when elected to this high office. I
personally spoke to many delegates who had only a cursory knowledge of the two candidates.
Biographies of the two candidates were not even available to the delegates prior to
the election. The issue of informing the delegates about candidates prior to election
should be remedied at future Assemblies.
There was no consensus candidate among the bishops
themselves, who were publicly divided over which candidate to support. Several
bishops had publicly accused the government of Armenia of meddling in the election by
supporting one candidate over others (interestingly enough, this issue was not as hotly
debated four years earlier during the previous election for Catholicos).
Thus, the election took place in an unusual atmosphere,
but always with the thought in mind that the choice was an important one for the Church.
The anticipation of the delegates as the voting began
in Holy Etchmiadzin was palpable. As the vote count began, most delegates had paper and
pens in hand as they followed the vote count. Some delegates had even brought cell phones
into the Cathedral and were employing them as the vote was in process. As the count
neared the majority vote, a rise in the level of anticipation could be felt. With the
announcement of the 226th vote for Archbishop Nersisian, a flurry of applause rippled
through the assembled delegates.
At the conclusion of the election, the Catholicos-elect
addressed the delegates with emotion and sincerity in his words. He offered his prayers in
acknowledging the difficult role that he would be undertaking, walking in the footsteps of
St. Gregory himself. He recognized the two clergy who had had the most impact on him, the
late Catholicos Vazken I and the late Catholicos Karekin I. He also spoke about his own
family, about his parents, and about his own journey as a young man growing up in a
faithful family.
The Catholicos emphasized the need for a united Church,
firmly planted in the hearts of the people. The Church has a great responsibility to the
faithful both in Armenia and in the Diaspora.
It was at his moment that the Catholicos, and all of
the delegates, learned of the tragic events which had taken place only moments earlier in
Yerevan (see story by Michael Krikorian, page 1). News of the assassinations shocked
those present and marred the happy occasion of the election of a Catholicos.
But a new Catholicos of All Armenians had been elected
and the process which had begun several months earlier had come to its completion. The
consecration of the Catholicos was planned to take place on Sunday, Oct. 31 during the
Divine Liturgy at Holy Etchmiadzin. Instead, because of the assassination of Prime
Minister Vazgen Sarkisian and Parliament Speaker Karen Demirchian, the consecration was
postponed until Thursday, Nov. 4. Most of the delegates who had assembled unfortunately
missed this important event because of prior travel arrangements.
Thus I had the unique opportunity to be in Armenia for
two significant events, the election of the Catholicos and the tragic events at the
Parliament. These two events arguably were the two most important events in the life of
the young Republic of Armenia, both in a religious sense and also in the political arena
and will provide material for discussion for students at Fresno State for many years.
I will never forget those few days in Armenia which
will have a historical meaning that only time and future generations will have a chance to
more fully evaluate and reflect upon.