Cross) for the church itself would suggest this to be a Turkish monument. At the same time only sparing use was made of the word "Armenian" in official statements, With Turkey's Armenian community not granted their request to hold services in the church - and a large Turkish flag mounted at the site, it was argued by some that this project really announced the "Turkification" of this monument, the initiative being no more than a media stunt. Religious life The church is now classed as a secular museum. During the ceremony held to mark the restoration there were images of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk displayed prominently. Armenian religious leaders invited to the opening ceremony refused to attend because the church was being reopened as a secular museum. It has the allowance to hold one religious service per year from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. The Turkish government stated that it would permit a liturgy to be delivered on 19 September 2010, and the service took place as planned. Some controversy surrounded the issue of whether the cross atop the dome until 1915 should be replaced. Some Armenians said that the renovation was unfinished until the cross was replaced, and that prayer should be allowed inside at least once a year. A cross had been prepared nearly a year before the opening, and Mesrob II petitioned the Prime Minister and Minister of Culture to place the cross on the dome of the cathedral. Turkish officials said that the base was not appropriate for the cross the Patriarchate brought as it was made to support the original cross. Later, the issue was solved. Since October 2, 2010, the cross sits at the top of the church. On 8 September 2013, the rite of baptism was carried out for a group of Armenian boys within the cathedral. This was the first time since the Armenian genocide that a baptism was performed in Van. Controversies Naming issue Hürriyet columnist Cengiz Çandar characterized the way the Turkish government handled the opening as an extension of an ongoing "cultural genocide" of the Armenians. He characterizes the renaming of the church from Armenian to Turkish as part of a broader program to rename Armenian historical sites in Turkey, and attributes the refusal to place a cross atop the church as symptomatic of religious intolerance in Turkish society. Çandar notes that the Agos issue published on the day