As I was approaching the end of my recent visit to the USA, Canada and Venezuela, one of our faithful said to me: "Your Holiness, are you going to send us a message from Antelias?" (which I usually do after my pontifical visit to a diocese). My response was: "No, I do not have any message this time, but I believe that the 1700th anniversary of the proclamation of Christianity in Armenia has a clear message to all of us, which, as I discern it, is a call for a renewed Armenian Church for the Third Millennium."

I spent the whole month of October with our people. I met all segments of our church in diverse contexts and in different places. My visitation program, which was organized as part of the 1700th anniversary celebrations, was intended to bring to focus the unique importance and concrete implications of this landmark event in the life of our church. I had frank dialogue with the leadership, grass roots and youth. I came to better know their concerns and challenges, their needs and expectations. I believe that the Armenian Church cannot and should not ignore any more the imperatives of changing times. It must become responsive and relevant to emerging new realities and needs. Therefore, the Armenian Church must embark on a dynamic process of renewal. This is no more a question of choice; it is an urgent necessity.

It is, of course, beyond the purview of this reflection to scrutinize the question of renewal of the Armenian Church, which is a vast and complex area of serious investigation. My intention is to share with our people, and particularly with youth, in an informal way, some thoughts which would help us to look at the future of our church in a right perspective. I wanted to write these few lines in English and in French in order to establish a direct line of communication with our new generation in North America.

1) I want to begin with the unity of the Armenian Church. This issue must be located in its proper context and dealt with realistically, honestly and in an unbiased way.

I want to affirm clearly and emphatically that the Armenian Church is one; it has never been and will never be two. At a certain period of our history, due to special circumstances, two administrative centers (Diocese-Prelacy) have emerged within the same Armenian Church in the USA and Canada. On various occasions I have strongly articulated my view that this abnormal situation must be normalized. The approaches and methodologies employed thus far to remedy the actual situation has proven to be counter-productive. Change of hearts, mutual trust and understanding happen only through close collaboration. A comprehensive and well-organized collaboration touching all aspects of our community life is essential for the unity of the church. The church is the people, and not only the structure, the clergy or the liturgy. Therefore, the unity should emerge in a natural way in the life of the people; it cannot be imposed on the people. Unity is a process that must start now.

2) The second major area of concern is the liturgy of our church. I heard a lot of criticism, particularly from the youth, pertaining mainly to the language of the liturgy.

This is a legitimate concern, indeed. Our liturgy needs basic reformation in its various aspects and manifestations. It must be understood and communicated to every body.

Hence, any step in this respect must be taken in the right direction; otherwise we may jeopardize the integrity and specificity of the Armenian liturgy.

a) First of all, the reformation of the Armenian Church ought to be perceived essentially as a renewal. Such a goal requires a holistic and realistic approach. This means that one has to take into consideration the tradition, the particularities and ethos of our liturgy as it has been developed in the course of history, on the one hand, and the concrete realities of our time and expectations of young generation, on the other hand. On this basis, a clear criterion, methodology and procedure must be established. Such a serious and all-embracing approach will make us avoid arbitrary decisions, provisional arrangements and vagueness, which actually characterize the liturgical practices in the Armenian Church in many places.

b) As for language, in my opinion, the classical Armenian, which is considered by some as a barrier, must continue to remain the basic language of the liturgy. This is the language by which we have communicated with God for centuries; we have created our spiritual and moral values; we have articulated our theological perceptions, and have kept our cultural heritage. We cannot just ignore it; it is an integral and inseparable part of our spiritual heritage. It is necessary, however, that the biblical readings, the sermons and major prayers be performed in modern Armenian, and even in English or in French, according to the context in which our church is called to carry on its Christian witness. In doing so, we should always bear in mind that the goal of liturgy is to create spirituality, which transcends all kinds of language barriers, by which a Christian enters in communion with God.

c) Our liturgy needs to be at certain points shortened and revised. Some of its practices must be refined and even omitted. Simply, the liturgy of our church must become more communicative and participatory. We must encourage special liturgies for youth and children. These and similar issues should be carefully studied with the active participation of the laity.

3) Moral issues and questions related to human sexuality are priority items on the agenda of many churches. The Armenian Church is a global reality; it is living in different environments and, therefore, these concerns are also, in one way or another, affecting its very life and witness. Our youth, in particular, is directly exposed to the new realities and challenges of the present world. They are in search of meaning for their life; they have questions and concerns. The church is called to address these issues seriously and give a clear direction to its youth. If we fail to do so, our youth will leave the Armenian Church and seek the answers to their questions in different churches and movements.

4) There is a growing awareness in our church concerning the crucial importance of Christian education. Christian formation is a long and complex process that starts in the family and continues through the Sunday school and day school. Christian education deserves serious attention if we want to have a strong church.

a) The family is the foundation stone of any society. It is, in a sense, the extension of the church. Hence, family is a sacred institution and is called to play a decisive role in the Christian formation of our children. At a time when the family is invaded by secularist values and materialist and consumerist ways of life, we must promote a renewed role of family. A morally and spiritually healthy family is a guarantee for a morally and spiritually sustainable community.

b) The Sunday school remains yet another efficient means for Christian education. The Armenian Catholicate of Cilicia has a well-organized network of Sunday schools. In each diocese a considerable number of Sunday schools operate with thousands of students. The Christian Education Department of our Catholicate not only organizes and supervises the activities of Sunday schools, it also provides them with many facilities and resource materials. I believe that the present educational structures and methodologies must be reassessed and revised, taking into consideration the new realities and concerns.

c) The day school, generally known as community school, has a particular role to play in our communities in terms of enhancing Christian values. The very co-existence of church and school side by side is not a mere coincidence. Their educational goals must be seen in their interconnectedness. We must strengthen the educational task of the school by reorganizing courses on religion and providing more space to extracurricular activities which contribute to Christian formation and the growth of the students.

5) The last concern I want to deal with pertains the re-evangelization of our people. This seems to be a strange concern for a people, which has been the first nation to accept Christianity as a state religion; for a people which has fought for 1700 years, and often at the expense of shedding its blood for the sake of preserving its Christian faith and identity.

Christian values and traditions are in the process of becoming marginalized in the life of our people all over the world. Our church has the great task and urgent responsibility to take Christian faith beyond its liturgical, theological and institutional confines to the people by making it a living reality in the life of our people.

To achieve such a major goal, the Armenian Church must rely on the following major initiatives:

a) Special attention must be given to the parish. The church is a local reality. The catholicity of the church is expressed through the eucharistic celebration by the local church. Hence, the parish is a basic unit within a diocesan structure. In many of our dioceses, particularly in those with large geographical boundaries, the centrality of the parish has been underestimated. This situation must be reversed. The parish structure and parish life of our church require basic reassessment and revision in its various aspects and dimensions.

b) Our church must organize youth ministries to fully integrate the youth into the total life and witness of the church. The youth should not remain on the periphery of the church. The youth is called to assume an important role in all spheres and at all levels of the Armenian Church, including the decision-making bodies. This is also true with women. Besides the Ladies Auxiliaries, the Armenian woman must be given more visibility and active responsibility in the life of the church.

c) The church of Christ acquires its true meaning and unique vocation through social service (diakonia). Our church has always played a significant role in the area of social action. Living in different socioeconomic contexts, our communities are faced with enormous social problems and concerns. The Armenian Church should develop a responsive diakonia to deal efficiently with the growing needs of its people.

d) Last but not least, the Armenian Church cannot address these issues seriously and respond properly to these concerns and expectations with its present clergy. We must be honest to accept our failures and deficiencies. We must be courageous to identify our problems. We need new clergy for new times. The renewal of our church requires a renewed clergy. If we fail to prepare educated and dedicated clergy, who will be spiritually and intellectually equipped to face the challenges of new societies, our church will soon lose its relevance and credibility.

The 1700th anniversary celebrations will soon fade away. The great achievement of the 1700th anniversary should be a renewed church for the Third Millennium. The Armenian Church is the church of the people. Our people and especially the youth must take an active part in the renewal of the church. Are we ready to take this challenge seriously and responsibly?

November 10, 2000
Antelias, Lebanon