The Armenian Crisis in Turkey: The Massacre of 1894, Its Antecedents and Significance, With a Consideration of Some of the Factors Which Enter Into the Solution of This Phase of the Eastern QuestionGreene, Frederick Davis
History
The Armenian Crisis in Turkey: The Massacre of 1894, Its Antecedents and Significance, With a Consideration of Some of the Factors Which Enter Into the Solution of This Phase of the Eastern Question
Greene, Frederick Davis
Armenian massacres, 1894-1896; Armenian question
A graphic account of the cruelties of Timour the Tartar, who devastated
Armenia at the close of the fourteenth century, has been left us by
Thomas of Medzop. The last great calamity which fell upon the mother
country happened in 1605, when Shah Abbas forcibly transplanted twelve
thousand families to Ispahan in Persia.
THE ARMENIAN CHURCH.—It is the oldest of all national churches. Their
legends claim that our Lord corresponded with King Abgarus of Edessa or
Ur, and that the apostles Thaddæus and Bartholomew preached the Gospel
to them. But the historical founder of the Armenian church was St.
Gregory “The Illuminator,”[68] an Arsacid prince, related to King
Tiridates (Dertad), who was consecrated Bishop of Armenia, at Cæsarea,
in 302 A. D. The Armenian church is Episcopal in polity, and closely
resembles the Greek in outward forms.
Misled by imperfect reports of the Council of Chalcedon, 451, which they
were not able to attend on account of Persian persecutions, the Armenian
bishops annulled its decrees in 536, thus gaining the credit of being
Eutychians, which led to their gradual separation from the orthodox
church, much to the satisfaction of the Persian ruler Chosroes. This
estrangement was doubtless political as much as doctrinal, on account of
the attempts at ecclesiastical supremacy by the churches of
Constantinople and Rome. As far as her ecclesiastical writers are
concerned, and her beautiful liturgy, the Armenian church is in general
orthodox. Her heresy, in common with that of the rest of Christendom, is
one of life rather than of doctrine. A schism in the Armenian church was
brought about in the sixteenth century by Jesuit missionaries, who
succeeded in detaching the community of Catholic Armenians from the
mother church, of which the Catholicos at Etchmiadzin is recognized as
the supreme head.
All Armenians—except perhaps the Catholic, whose allegiance has been
transferred of course to Rome—still cherish a passionate attachment for
the venerable church of their ancestors, to which they owe their
identity as a people after the terrible vicissitudes of so many
centuries. It is true that Armenians who have come under European
influence, especially French, have to some extent become sceptical and
indifferent to religion. But even such men still profess at least an
outward loyalty, as a matter of sentiment, and because they believe the
formal preservation of the Armenian church to be the condition of
national union in the future as it has been in the past. It is, indeed,
almost a political necessity, as the Ottoman Empire is now constituted.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account