Window Quarterly Vol. 2, No. 4, 1992 Copyright 1992 [Permission is granted to use, print, reproduce this article provided the following acknowledgment is given: From Window Quarterly 2, 4 (1992); ACRAG c. 1992. *** TESTING THE MYTH AND BEYONG by Fr. Vazken Movsesian and Hratch Tchilingirian The understanding of myths and their place in religious perception is vital to the understanding of Christianity, as it is the case with most religions. Myths help define and shape beliefs and practices of a group of people, for instance, the Armenian people. It is important to emphasize, however, that by labeling a story as "myth," it does not mean that the story is false or is a product of imagination. Myths may or may not be factual, but they ostensibly point to certain truths. The present discussion will focus on "myths" created by Armenians and used in various forms to perpetuate an Armenian religious dynamic, which sometimes is removed from the basic tenets of Christianity. The truth of a message is not necessarily in the factual details of the story, or the saying, or the parable. But rather in its substance. For example, the Fundamentalists claim to read the Bible literally, while for the Orthodox, the truth of the Bible is not limited by the absolute details of the stories and events. In the story of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11f), the literal reality of whether the son had to tend to swine or any other livestock is inconsequential. The didactic intent of the story is found in the father's unconditional love and acceptance of his son. As such, myths may not always be factual, but they always certainly point to an accepted truth. The Armenians also perpetuate many myths. These myths invite and challenge the person to see the truth rather than search for literal analysis. The story of Christ's apostles-- Thaddeus and Bartholomew--coming to Armenia is one such story from which we can deduce that the Armenian's had a need to claim apostolic origins. The Armenian Church has gone to great pains to prove her apostolic origins and succession--even to a point where she has dropped the title "orthodox" from the official name of the church--to substantiate and prove a point. What is substantiated however, is that the Armenian Church, a very small player in the ecumenical movement, resorts to apology to maintain her distinctiveness among churches of greater followings. A Working Trilogy The Armenian Church is "unique" in Christendom and so are her myths. In particular, three classic myths continue to meet the test of time for Armenians, who recount and enjoy hearing them to the present day: 1) The Enlightenment of Armenia by St. Gregory the Illuminator; 2) The God-inspired creation of the Armenian alphabet; 3) The epic battle of Vartanantz. These myths are perpetuated because they work, i.e., they convey the basic truths of Armenian Church glory. Moreover, these three myths express dominant themes which are common to all myths and fit the mythological configurations. In studying myths, it is accepted that most fall into one of three categories: creation myths; origin of a divine being; renewal and rebirth of the world. As the Armenian Church has tried to define herself to her children throughout the centuries, she has quite capably used these stories to further perpetuate the myths. St. Gregory's conversion of King Tirtad and the Armenian people is the "creation myth" of the Armenian Church. It allows for someone from the outside, in this case a Parthenian, to set up shop, be rejected and later glorified; someone who ultimately effectuates change. The story of Vartanantz, likewise, epitomizes renewal and rebirth, despite the odds and adversaries (of the David and Goliath genre). As for the origin of divine beings, is there any example more pronounced than the creation of the Armenian alphabet? What began as a simple means of conveying the Gospel to the people, has, throughout the centuries, assumed a personality of its own and today the alphabet is deified in poetry and prose. A myth will perpetuate only if it has a useful function. In this respect, these three Armenian myths work. But what about those myths which are held so near and dear to the heart of the people that they--these myths--defy and even contradict each other? The Armenian Church herself falls into such a category. The people perceive the Church, Her functionaries and Her "mission" in a mythic context. Poet Vahan Tekeyan expresses this sentiment quite pleasantly by claiming that, "The Armenian Church is the birthplace of [his] soul... ." While enumerating the virtues of the Armenian Church, Tekeyan deifies her to a point beyond contemplation and criticism. Testing the Myth A few years ago, a collection of stories written by Vahe Oshagan, in Armenian, entitled Tagartin Shoorch (Around the trap, New York: Vosgedar Publications, 1988), caused controversy in the Armenian media. The story in question was called Odzoom (Consecration). In this piece, Oshagan tests the power of the Armenian myth, vis-a-vis the Church and attempts to underline the fact that many times, the self- created and recreated myth of the Armenian leads him to isolation from universal human values. For Oshagan, the power of the Armenian myth is in its universal dimension. Unlike the common perception, the Armenian myth should not be a device for separation and rejection, but rather a means to elevate the person to a higher level of understanding. The Odzoom (pp. 39-142) takes place in Philadelphia, in a St. Sarkis Armenian Church. The time is winter and there is snow on the ground. The story begins with a scenario very familiar to clergy serving in America and could have come from any parish priest's diary. The opening scene begins with Fr. Avedis, the parish priest, going to church at 7:00 AM. Almost like a ritual, he first opens the Agoomp (club), makes the coffee and then proceeds to open the Hokapartzoutyan Ofis (parish council office). Subsequently, Oshagan describes in detail the characters who come to church. They come to church for every conceivable reason, except religion. Indirectly, each personality reveals the various characteristics of the false myth: the chairman of the parish council and his "attitude;" two women sitting in the church and talking about what they did during the week; a Hagop Arakelian, whose wife had just died in Cairo, comes to church with his Buick ("he went to the bathroom, urinated, held his p.... and stood for a long time... [than he] combed his hair, came into the church and made the sign of the cross..."); the hyphenated Armenians and their idiosyncrasies-Iranian-Armenians, Beruit- Armenians, American Armenians... . A total of 16 people come to church on that Sunday: ten of them in the church and six in the parish council ofis. During the Divine Liturgy, the priest looks tired, because of back pain experienced the night before. He is sleepy and thinks that the choir is singing wrong again. The deacons must remind the priest of his line. The priest surmises, "My god [sic], we are going to say the same thing again...we've said it a thousand times. I wish there was a bed here...." A young Armenian, named Bruce, who is a former member of ASALA, enters the scene with two other characters, Jacques and Sona. They speak about starting a revolution in the Church. They believe that, "if Armenians really love and believe in their church, they will rise against [them]..." They stipulate that everyone in the church "should comply... if not," Bruce says, "we will burn the church... I am hayrenaser (patriot) and that is why I will do this." Bruce, Jacque and Sona, dressed in black, enter the church. Nobody knows who they are. Sitting in the church, while the Liturgy is being conducted, they turn on a transistor radio and jazz music interrupts the service. They cover their faces with masks. They begin discussing national concerns, the Tashnags, the Church, America, life, etc. Jacques says, "We should destroy the myth... That is why I want you [Sona] to kiss in the church standing on the pews." "While we do this," he contends, "the people should not know that we are Armenians... because we are then a part of the myth; if we are identified with it, we cannot destroy it... we are the non-Armenian, we are the Anti-Armenian.... Church, religion, God are not worth anything for the Armenian." Bruce lights a cigarette in the church. Jacque and Sona get up on the pew and start kissing. The people start to panic and try to stop them, yet they are hesitant to approach them. "...as the myth was momentarily broken, the couple jump down from the pew... Fr. Avedis resumes the Liturgy saying, 'Blessed is God the Holy Spirit.'" The conversation continues among the three young characters. "...my opponent is not the church people. It is the priest, if I can bring him to the ground, everybody will be finished... you should provoke the people and they will go crazy." The three young characters create havoc in the church. People are fighting, using profane language, screaming, etc. One of the young men gets up on the altar and strips the vestments of the priest off his back. When the people see the priest naked, they start laughing in amusement. However, the priest continues to read the prayers of the Liturgy, undisturbed with all the commotion. Suddenly, Fr. Avedis realizes his embarrassing position. He was being put to shame nakedly before "the altar of Armenians, in the palm of the Church and before the god [sic] of Armenians..." After a momentary outburst and rebellion against God, the priest continues the Liturgy. A fight breaks out and one of the instigators of the chaos is wounded with a knife. He lays on the altar covered with blood. As he lays on the floor, the priest with tears in his eyes, comes and gives him communion, saying "Holy Blood for remission of your sins." The priest then kisses the forehead of the wounded young man with a forgiving smile. The wounded man lifts his head with great difficulty, and with a soft voice, whispers, "Der Hayr, (Reverend Father) you are stronger than us." Following this incident, through the thoughts and voices of the characters, Oshagan begins to analyze the event, its taboos and myths. Here are some of the thoughts of the characters: "...We should have gone all the way, there wasn't a big shock. . . that's why I fought with you [in the church]... the people should have suffered, they should have seen their priest like that. I wanted to break the taboos of sex, to show them that the p.... is an ordinary, natural organ, it is an instrument of pleasure and not of shame, sin and transgression... I should have broken the myth. With the myth, the imposition of the centuries, the fear of the Turk, and the fear of the massacres would have gone..." "... still myth has power, at least for certain people." "...revolution should be heartless, heartless, heartless." "...there were no youth in the church, if there were, many things would have been changed that day..." "...we started with the church, perhaps we should have started with the [Armenian] political parties. They also live with myths, at least the Tashnags and the Hunchags..." "... [The priest] was a brave man." As might be expected, following the publication of Odzoom, Oshagan was severely criticized by both clergy and laity for his "rude" and "foul" language and concepts. One priest branded him as the Salman Rushdie of the Armenians. Yet, Oshagan plays the ultimate trick. At first, he challenges the "myth" by breaking the taboo in writing; and secondly, he creates a community wide shock response to his fiction, thus challenging the conventions of the myth within the Armenian community. How would Armenians react to the defamation of their church and priest? For sure, Oshagan found that the reactions in real life Armenian community were no different than those he presented in his tale. Interestingly enough, the critics of Odzoom make no mention of the "myth," they rather arbitrarily use out-of-context sound bites from the story to sensationalize their own criticism and treatise. To reduced Odzoom to a mere expression of offensive and crude thoughts is to miss its point. In essence, the story deals with the core of Armenian problems, i.e., the people's fascination with their own myth. Oshagan's use of graphic and strong language literally hits the issue in the chops. At the conclusion of the story, Oshagan, through the characters, explains the reason for ripping the priest apart. "To be naked was more for him (priest) than the others (congregation). The priest is a functionary, he has a status and a duty, he is a symbol, a paraphernalia, clothing, beard. When the symbol is lost, the function is lost also. I thought that the priest could still believe in what he is doing, even without his cloths, by virtue of his simple, strong, Armenian orientation." By stripping the priest, it was thought that his function and personality would be stripped also--that he would be deprived of his ministry. The story ends with the persuasion that the priest had a stronger character than the myth. Still, the myth is very much alive among Armenians. The myth, that Oshagan writes of, is deeply rooted in the Armenian collective conscience and therefore not easily evident. As such, its false perception and interpretation may be devastating to the true mission of the Church. It is this myth which allows association without proclamation of faith (even the instigators in Oshagan's chaos considered themselves as part of the myth). This myth keeps the church doors open despite the absence of a congregation-- to be apostolic without the presence of the apostles. It gives the Church an opportunity to use the rhetoric of martyrdom to call for action, when in fact, the necessary discipline and commitment has not been cultivated among the communicants of the church. And the list of inconsistencies as a result of the myth, goes on. The Ultimate Myth Myth is powerful. Once understood, that power can be channelled in a desired direction. This is what makes myth effectual, but at the same time dangerous. Therefore, the Church is obligated to use the power of the myth responsibility (on the assumption that the myth(s) can be identified). The challenge before the Armenian Church today is two fold. At first the Armenian Church must demythify the explanation that She has a national mission only. Jesus Christ, as the founder of the Church, did not sanction Her to preserve any ethnic or national aspiration. Second, once demythified, the Armenian Church must perpetuate the only message it can with any degree of integrity: the Christian Gospel. The Christian Gospel has the elements of birth, rebirth, suffering, victory, resurrection, creation and re- creation. The Gospel is not confined to the historical Jesus, but to the time-transcended God who reveals Himself from the time of Creation to the Second Coming. As such, the Church is the temporal upholder of this Truth. Hence, the story of St. Gregory the Illuminator becomes one of a lone apostle in his struggle to bring the Truth to a heathen people. St. Mesrob and St. Sahag are seen as true evangelists, who's dedication to the Gospel was so strong that they created an alphabet to speak to their people. St. Vartan's importance as a warrior for freedom of conscience is validated. Furthermore, the scores of other saints of the Church begin to gain their value within the newly-pronounced gospel. The Divine Liturgy, as the main ritual of the Armenian Church, presents and represents the Christian message. This message is heralded and the life of Christ reactualized. The ultimate victory of resurrection is offered to all who participate. The Divine Liturgy is instructional. It allows for the intercession of the Saints providing a vital link with the past. The Holy Communion nourishes. Hence, the Christian Gospel has an opportunity to be revealed, to penetrate and to become part of the collective consciousness of the people. The manner in which the Divine Liturgy is presented and offered to the faithful is crucial to the proper transmission of this message. Here, the need for reform of this vital ritual becomes evident. The Divine Liturgy has no intrinsic value in and of itself. It is yet another means, albeit a vital one, which bring Christ to the center of community life. *** Excerpts from Odzoom... --Look, I'm going to the altar by myself, my purpose is to destroy the priest in his ridiculous vestments, [his] useless garments, [I'm going] to tear them apart one by one and throw them away, until he is left with his underwear -- those sh-ty underwear. --At first, I had decided to bring to the altar a black common woman, to undress him there, to f--k him. -- Our job is to dismantle that magic, it is to open the prison of our sexual energies, in a most ferocious way... in the church. -- And to give a strong blow to the testicles of Armenians, we will kill the tongue by not speaking it, we will destroy the priest, and screw the moral from its vital principles. --The Armenian language is not a language to give a speech, teach, write an encyclical, speak with God, pray... it does not bring husband and wife together, it is not a language of intimacy. -- The young man jumped to the altar, tore apart the vestments of the priest with a dagger and dropped his robe (shoochar), he violently tore his vagas, his white and neat shirt and undershirt. Within five seconds, Fr. Avedis's delicate and heavy garments were compiled under his feet. Suddenly, a naked body appeared there, in front of the altar, a crown on his head and below that an underwear, with a big line of dirt, sh-t behind it. --A rag, give me a rag, screamed Fr. Avedis, to cover my d- ck. --...the only rag he could find was the cover of the chalice.... *** =================================================== _ _ _ _ _ |_| ___ _| | ___ _ _ _ | | | | | | _ / _ \ / _ | / _ \ | | | | | | | |_| |_| || |_ | | | || |_| || |_| || |_| |_| | \_________/\___||_| |_| \___/ \___/ \_________/ View Of The Armenian Church ===================================================