Aram I: “The Armenian Church”, a Book Review

Reviewed by Vahe H. Apelian

In a superb narration Aram I presents to his readers, in his book titled “The Armenian Church”,  “The Christianization of Armenia and the Armenianization of the Christianity” because “The Armenian Church is the birthplace of Armenian culture and since the beginning of the 5^thCentury it has been its epicenter, not only creating the wonder of the Armenian Alphabet, but also playing a pivotal part in promoting, enriching, and protecting all manifestations of Armenian culture.’

Aram I, early on in the book, presents the different names by which the Armenian Church is known: Church of Armenia, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic, Orthodox Armenian Church; Armenian Gregorian Church, Armenian Apostolic Church, Armenian Church or Church of Armenia. He then explains why he chose “Armenian Church” as the title of his book, when it was known as Church of Armenia during its early founding years. The one time church confined in Armenia now extends its jurisdiction from America to Australia and in all continents of the world in between where Armenians have now scattered.

Along with the customary Preface and Introduction of a book, Aram I presents the Armenian Church in 10 chapters in each of which he presents the essence of the inferred topic in a clear, easily understood, and captivating manner even though it may entail theological discussion as to why the Armenian Church rejected the Council of Chalcedon while it upheld the teachings of the first three ecumenical councils and explains the Armenian Church’s understanding of the Trinity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

To give a breath and the scope of this superbly narrated book that encompasses all aspects of the church for the interested lay reader, I will have to enumerate the chapters and the topics under each chapter Aram I presents in a simplified manner. Only those who have full command and grasp, resort to such simplified and pleasant narration to transmit their knowledge in a simple manner to the interested not to bore them but retain their attention and help them understand the working of the Armenian Church.

The chapters and their subtitles are as follows:

LONG HISTORY IN BRIEF(pages 21-53), comprises:

The major periods of the history of the Armenian church,  The Origin of the Armenian Church, Christianity as the state religion,  The Golden Age,  The Rejection of the Council of Chalcedon, The Arabs in Armenia,  The Formation of Armenian Cilicia,  A Period of uncertainty and stagnation,  The Armenian Genocide,  Soviet Armenia and the Armenian Diaspora,  New hopes and promises.

HIERARCHY AND DECISION-MAKING (pages 54-76), comprises:

Hierarchy,  Catholicos,  Patriarch, Archbishop,  Bishop,  Vartabed and Supreme Vartabed,  Celibate Priest,  Married Priest,  Deacon,  Decision-Making Structures,  Hierarchical Sees, Two Catholicosates within One Church.

ESSENTIALS OF FAITH (pages 76-95) comprises:

The Bible, Ecumenical Councils, Local Councils, Liturgy, Exegetical Literature, Hagiographic Writings, Treatises and Homilies, Encyclical, pastoral letters, exchange of letters, and Confessions of Faith; Historiography.

RICH SPIRITUALITY (pages 96-140) comprises:

Liturgy, Daily Services,  Feasts,  Liturgical Books,  Sacraments,  Baptism, Confirmation,  Repentance,  Holy Lucharist,  Holy Orders,  Marriage,  Anointing of the Sick,  The Holy Muron,  Images,  Cross-Stone, Music, Liturgical Vestments, Liturgical Vessels,  Relics of Saints, Architecture, Armenian Calendar.

CULTURAL ACTIVITY (pages 141-156) comprises:

The Translation of the Bible and Church Fathers,  Major Figures of Armenian Original Literature, Contribution to painting, printing and music.

SOCIAL ACTION (pages 157-167) comprises:

Characteristic features of the Church’s diakonia, Armenian Diaspora: the focus of the Church’s diakonia,  Social action: a continuing concern.

EDUCATIONAL ROLE (pages168-174) comprises:

The first Armenian school, Monasteries: centers of education, Community schools, Authors in Christian education.

ECUMENICAL ENGAGEMENT (pages 175-196) comprises:

Relations with the Oriental Orthodox churches, Relations with Eastern Orthodox churches,  Relations with Catholic churches,  Relations with the Anglican Communion,  Relations with Protestant churches,  Participation in ecumenical councils and bilateral theological dialogues,  Collaboration with the Armenian Catholic and Armenian Evangelical churches.

PEOPLE’S CHURCH (pages 197-205) comprises

Indigenization of Christianity,  The Church as a unifying factor,  The leadership role of the Church, Church-state relations.

CHALLENGES AND PRIORITIES (pages 206-217) comprises:

A dynamic pastoral engagement, An active spiritual ministry, Redefining of the national identity of the Church, Renewal of the Armenian Church and urgent imperative.

The rest of the book comprises Notes, Appendices, and a listing for Further Reading.

At the end Aram I lists his prodigal output in Armenian, English and in French, totaling 28 titles!

Those who have followed Aram I have come to know that the basic tenets of his ministry can be summed up paraphrasing President Abraham Lincoln’s famous quote from his Gettysburg Address, “Of the People, by the People, and for the People”. Catholicos Aram I writes that “The Armenian Church should not become a museum of spiritual heritage; nor should it remain imprisoned in a petrified institutionalism. It is called to respond, in faithfulness to the core value of the Gospel, to the expectations of its people and to the challenges of the present-day world”.

It is not hard to envision that Aram I is burdened with the administrative responsibilities of the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia whose jurisdiction extends globally. He also is a revered spiritual leader and an ecumenical figure. He has served as two terms moderator of the World Council of Churches and as two terms president of the Middle East Council of Churches. God has bestowed upon Catholicos Aram I a powerful intellect and a tireless stamina, which he has put in service towards to the Armenian People through the Armenian Church.

The book was first published in 2016 by the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia in Antelias, Lebanon. The book I read was its second edition in 2017. The book measures  5 inches x 7.5 inches making it handy to carry for reading in leisure. Each chapter is an entity in itself and thus can be prioritized per the reader’s interest. Reading the book in its entirety will give a reader a vital knowledge for his or her better appreciation of and understanding the Armenian Church that has withstood the test of time but continues to face new challenges.

  

July 1, 1846, and Beyond

Vahe H. Apelian

The First Church Council of the Armenian Evangelical Church,
 Pera, Istanbul, Turkey

I may have more of a reason to remember that date because it is my official birthday, a hundred years later. In fact, I was born on June 22, in Lebanon. Apparently, it was not unreasonable that it would take more than a week to have my birthday registered and the certificate issued by the authorities.

Rev. William Goodell, who was a missionary on behalf of the most influential American missionary association called American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Mission (ABCFM), recalled July 1, 1846 and noted the following in his memoir: “Forty persons, of whom three were women, voluntarily entered onto covenant with God and with each other, and we, in the name of all the evangelical churches of Christendom, rose and formally recognized and acknowledged them as a true church of Christ.” The assembly on that day became the foundation of The Evangelical Church of Armenia--"Hayasdaniatz Avedaranagan Yegeghetsi" – «Հայաստանեաց Աւերտարանական Եկեղեցի».  

Why A Separate Armenian Church?

I quote Rev. Dr. Vahan Tootikian: “The causes of ”separation" were not random, shallow and capricious. Rather, these causes were a direct outcome of the Armenian Renaissance in the 19th century. It was part of the great upsurge of Armenian intellectual spirit. There was a revival of thinking in the social, economic, and religious realms. Some reform-minded Armenians in the Patriarchal Academy of the Armenian Apostolic Patriarchate of Istanbul insisted that the Armenian Apostolic Church should be revitalized. In 1836 these reformists established a secret society named Barepashtoutian Miabanoutune (The Society of Piety) in order to reform the church. They met the strong resistance and the opposition of the Armenian ruling magnates and the patriarch. Failure to reform the Church became the basic source of conflict. The reformists continued to push their demands, which provoked strong retaliation from the Armenian Patriarch Mateos Chookhajian. Persecution and suffering did not alienate the Armenian Evangelicals from the Mother Church. It was the act of excommunications of the Patriarch that forced them to organize themselves into a separate religious community, the Protestant Millet. It was this separation which resulted in the formation of the Armenian Evangelical Church on July 1, 1846.”

Indeed, there was a reform movement within the Armenian Apostolic Church. But the reform was not only in ecclesiastical matters but in temporal matters as well because the Patriarchate was in fact an Armenian government of sort in the Ottoman Empire. Sixteen years later, in 1863, the Armenian Millet would have its national constitution after centuries having the Patriarchate run the affairs of the Armenian nation (Millet) in the Ottoman Empire without a national constitution.

Why Did Excommunication Matter?

The Patriarch’s excommunication was not a mere rebuke or a moral reprimand. It had serious implications for the ostracized reformists. The Millet system constituted the core of the Ottoman Empire governance of its minorities. Rev. William Goodell found that system of governance as an “anomalous form of government, the Sublime Porte, as the Sultan’s government is called, being supreme, while each separate nation has its own head.” In the case of the Armenians, it was the Patriarch of Constantinople who was also the secular head of the Armenian Millet (confessional community) in the Ottoman Empire.

Consequently, excommunication meant that those reformists were banished from the Armenian Millet and were left without recourse. It was akin to  depriving forty natural born Americans of citizenship leaving them stateless. The Patriarchate of Constantinople, the present-day Istanbul, had the authority to marry, divorce, settle disputes, and even run its prison for the Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Sultan and the Armenians conducted their affairs with the Ottoman authorities through the Armenian Patriarchate. By banishing the reformists, the Patriarchate disowned them and ceased to represent them. Consequently, the reformists were left on their own without recourse for any issue they might face. 

But the reformists treaded on. A year and a few months after the July 1, 1846, assembly,  on November 15, 1847, Rev. William Goodell noted  that “the grand vizier issued a firman, declaring that the Christian subjects of the Ottoman government professing Protestantism should constitutes a separate community...This firman was so worded that converts form among the Greeks and Jews who joined the Protestants might enjoy the same immunities”. The reformists now had their own “nation”. On Nov. 27, 1850, Sultan Abdul Mejid ratified the edict that became the “Magna Carta” of the Protestant community that stands, to this day, in the Middle East. The Armenian Evangelicals are part and parcel of the Protestant community from the get-go. In fact, they were instrumental in the founding of the Protestant Millet.

Was the Excommunication the Cause for the Separation?

The excommunication could very well have been a cause that acted as a catalyst for the inevitable separation of the reformists’ church. I do not have sufficient knowledge on  the Armenian church doctrinal matters to expand on the issue here. But any lay person who has attended both Armenian Apostolic and Armenian Evangelical churches surely realizes that these two churches have fundamentally different worship services and consequently also differ in some doctrinal and in administrative hierarchical matters.

We should also take into consideration the influence the American missionaries might have exercised for having facilitated the formations of a separate church, or a millet, but not necessarily advocating a separate church or a millet. 

After excommunicating the leadership of the movement, the separation of the Armenian Evangelical Church from the Armenian Apostolic church became inevitable.

A Different Church as Well?

Rev. William Goodell arrived in Constantinople on June 9, 1831. His arrival had coincided with a reformation movement within the Armenian Church. Fifteen years later, and after much agony and ecstasy, on July 1, 1846, the Armenian Evangelical Church came about and in 1863, the Armenian National Constitution. 

Was the separate Armenian Evangelical Church a different church as well? No doubt during the initial phase of its founding and accreditation as a separate Millet, the adherents of the Armenian Apostolic Church, who constituted the overwhelming majority of the Armenians, regarded the Armenian Evangelical Church faithful as members of a different church and even as different Armenians as well. Anointing the newborns with Holy Muron during baptism had made a person a Christian Armenian. The Armenian Evangelical Church did not require its adherents to be anointed in Holy Muron and on Sundays they worshiped in an altogether different service in their sanctuaries.

Rev. William Goodell’s parting letter hints to the schism that had come about between the two churches.  Rev. Goodell left Constantinople on June 27, 1865, some 40 years after leaving his homeland. Through those over four decades, he had visited his country, the United States of America, only once. Before taking leave for good, he addressed his brethren in the Evangelical Churches in the Ottoman Empire and alluded to the recent schism in the Armenian nation that led to the formation of the Armenian Evangelical Church. Rev. Goodell wrote in his last letter: “When we first came among you, you were not a distinct people, nor did we expect you ever would be; for we had not sectarian object in view, it being no part of our plan to meddle with ecclesiastical affairs. Our sole desire was to preach Christ and Him crucified.” By then the Armenian Evangelical Church was firmly entrenched among the Armenians as a distinct denomination separate from the Apostolic Church.

Driven with a Christian missionary zeal for service, the adherents of the Armenian Evangelical Church rendered much service to the Armenian nation, enriching it way more than one would have expected from the meager demographic constituency of its faithful. I quote Rev. Vahan Tootikiian: “Within a decade after its birth, the Armenian Evangelical Church had grown by leaps and bounds. To administer these churches effectively, the following four church Unions were organized: Bithynia, Eastern, Cilician and Central Unions. These Unions lasted until 1915, prior to the Armenian Genocide.

The Genocide changed the whole dynamics. More than 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives. Most of the Armenian Evangelical churches, schools and institutions were destroyed. Prior to the Armenian Genocide, the Armenian Evangelical community in Tur key numbered 51,000. It had 137 organized churches with 82 ordained ministers and 97 preachers and evangelists. In the aftermath of the Genocide, the Armenian Evangelicals counted 14,000 members, 31 churches, with 25 ordained ministers and 13 preachers.” 

Thus, in time the Armenian Evangelical Church came to be the evangelical front of the Armenian Church. A separate but not a different Armenian church. I used the adjective evangelical for brevity for the purpose of this blog and did not mean to imply that the Armenia Apostolic Church is not. 

The Indispensable Heritage.

Whenever I think of the Armenian Evangelical Church, Rev. Barkev N. Darakjian’s book “The Indispensable Heritage” (Անփոխարինելի Ժառանգութիւնը) comes to my mind. The book is an in-depth presentation of the Armenian Evangelical Church in an impeccable Western Armenian. Rev. Barkev N. Darakjian cites three pillars on which the Armenian Evangelical rested when it came about. The three pillars he cites are the following: that the church is Evangelical (Աւետարանական), that it is rooted in the Armenian Christian experience (Հայաստանեաց), and that it is a movement (Շարժում).

One hundred and seventy-five years (175) years have passed since that fateful day on July 1, 1946. Has the Armenian Evangelical Church remained true to the three pillars on which it stood?  I invite interested readers to contemplate and draw their own conclusions.

Sources:

1.      “Armenian Evangelical Church – A Brief History” by Rev. Dr. Vahan H. Tootikian, in the AMAA NEWS, April.May.June 2021.

2.    “Forty Years in the Turkish Empire or Memoirs of Rev. William Goodell D.D, Late Missionary of A.B.C.F.M at Constantinople”, edited by his son-in-law, E. D. G. Prime, published by Robert Carter and Brothers (New York). Its fifth edition, posted online by Google, is dated 1878.

3.    Վեր. Պարգես Ն. Տարագճեան, «ԱՆՓՈԽԱՐԻՆԵԼԻ ԺԱՌԱՆԳՈՒԹԻՒՆԸ», Հայ Աւետարանչական Ընկերակցութիւն, Փըրամսշ Նիւ Ճըրզի, Ամերիկայի Միացեալ Նահաններ, 2004. (Rev. Barkev N. Darakjian, “The Indispensable Heritage”, published by Armenian Missionary Association of American, Inc., Paramus, NJ, U.S.A., 2004)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Arshakunis: Church and State Conflict, Etchmiadzin city-state - 7/7 -

Vahe H Apelian

 

Whenever Armenian Church and the Armenian State conflict was mentioned, a few historical happenings came to my mind. But recent developments in Armenia have made me look back when it all began.

After the Arshakunis founded the Armenian Church, the Arshakuni kingdom became marred with conflict between the church and the state that founded the church. After the death of King Trtad III (Tiridates) in 331, and for the ensuing approximately one-century - between 331 to 428, when the Arskakuni kingdom came to its end – the period was marked with, I quote: “an uncommon instability and indetermination, affecting both political and social life in Armenia. Continuous plots, intrigues, murders between antagonists (local and foreign), and the struggle about the newly adopted Christian faith marked tragically the situation throughout the main homeland.”

The relation between these two power institutions, the church and the state, was so intense that king Diran II (338-350) ordered the killing of Catholicos St. Husik I, the grandson of St. Gregory the Illuminator.  To bolster the foundation of the state, King Arshak II, who languished in prison in Persia, had founded a capital city for his kingdom and named it Arshakavan. The city so enraged Catholicos Nerses the Great, a descendent of St. Gregory, whom king Arshak II had presented for the throne in Etchmiadzin, that the Catholicos condemned the city so much so that the name Arshakavan for Armenians became and remained synonymous with the biblical twin cities Sodom and Gomorrah. The church and the state conflict became full blown with king Arshak’s son king Bab, who inherited the throne after his father’s death and changed the church as an institution. 

The following historical anecdote also comes to my mind. After moving to the monastery Varak in Van, Khrimian Hayrig had the remains of King Senekerim exhumed and banished somewhere. Khrimian Hayrig did not see that king Senekerim merited remaining buried on the grounds of the famed monastery in Van, because, I quote “ in 1021, fearing the Seljuks, Senekerim, the old king of Vaspurakan, bestowed Vaspurakan to Byzantium and moved to Sebastia.”

In recent times, the fate of Catholicos of All Armenians Khoren I Muradbekian (Armenian: Խորեն Ա Մուրադբեկյան; December 8, 1873 – April 5/6, 1938) represents the most troubling aspect of the Armenian church and the Armenian state conflict. It is generally accepted that Catholicos Khoren I Muradbekian was killed by the commissars of the Soviet Republic of Armenia. 

The Armenian church and the Armenian state conflict appears to be reignited. On June 13, 2024, the PM Nikol Pashinyan, before presenting to the National Assembly the annual budget, alluded to the confrontation that happened the day before, on June 12, between the police and the demonstrators led by Archbishop Pagrad. The PM named two persons who, he claimed, stood behind the protesters, the former president Robert Kocharian and the Catholicos of All Armenian Karekin II. The PM also invoked Arshakuni king Bab. It is beyond the scope of this blog to speculate on the possible reasons for the PM invoking king  Bab. 

But I would like to note that there is a major disconnect and imbalance between the two power houses that make up the structure of the Armenian nation. One of which is seated in Etchmiadzin and the other is seated in Yerevan. The power house seating in Yerevan, represents the Armenian state and is elected by the citizens of Armenia. But the power house seating in Etchmiadzin, represents the Armenian church and is elected by  Armenian representatives from all over the world. 

The head of the Armenian church need not be a citizen of Armenia, as was the case with His Holiness of blessed memory, Karekin I. Nor his electors need to be citizens of Armenia. But the head of the Armenian state has to be a citizen of Armenia and be elected by the citizens of Armenia.  In fairness and most likely in matters of the constitutionality and legality, the two different electoral systems present a huge and untenable imbalance and is a focal point for simmering conflict as the church can meddle in politics or in the affairs of the state, and does so. 

It probably is time for Armenia to designate Etchmiadzin what Vatican is, a state-city. Naturally, in case of the Armenian Etchmiadzin will be the city-state that oversees the Armenian Apostolic Church spread throughout the globe. And, much like any state, Etchmiadzin city-state will have a state level relationship with the state of Armenia as it does with other countries, much like Vatican in Rome does with State of Italy and other countries. 

Without such an arrangement, the Armenian Church and the Armenian State relations will be a sour point not only for the republic of Armenia, but also for the global Armenian nation, and the spiritual mission of the Apostolic Church will continue to be mired and viewed tinted with politics eroding its Christian mission and outreach to the detriment of the Republic of Armenia and to the global Armenian nation.

Notes:

1.   This ends my take on the Arshakuni Armenian dynastic kingdom that impacted in the shaping of the Armenian nation. After all the members of the Arshakuni dynastic family transitioned the Armenian nation from worshipping the old gods to embracing Christianity. It has a legendary king, Arshak II, after whom a legend has come down and an opera is named. The young Arshakuni King Bab, shaped the newly established church and state relation and is reverberated to this day. If those were not enough, a young monk by the name of Mesrob Mashdots invented the Armenian alphabet during the last king of their dynastic kingdom, king Vramshabouh. It is no wonder that this dynastic family stirs the nation's imagination to this day. A Facebook account has been named after them.. Who were the Arshakunis? In seven installments I attempted to present them as a blogge,r not as a historian I am not.  N.B. I used Arshak as the root word when addressing the family and its members. Vahe H. Apelian  

2.   I would like to note that the schisms in the Armenian church started in the 18^th century. The Armenian Catholic Church came about on November 26, 1742, and the Armenian Evangelical Church came about on July 1, 1846. Before those dates all Armenians without exception belonged to the church Arshakuni King Drtad III and St. Gregory the Illuminator founded, which came to be known as the Armenian Church.  The designation Armenian Apostolic Church in distinction to the Armenian Catholic and the Armenian Evangelical Churches is relatively recent. It is within this context that I used the term Armenian Church.

The Arshakunis: Founded the Armenian Church - 6/7 -

Vahe H Apelian

Courtesy Արշակունիններ Facebook account

The Arshakuni King Drtad III, not only had the Armenian nation adopt Christianity in 301 as its state religion but also established the Armenian Church. However it also planted the seeds of the Armenian State and the Armenian Church conflict. 

I would like to note that the schisms in Armenian church started in the 18th century. The Armenian Catholic Church came about on November 26, 1742, and the Armenian Evangelical Church came about on July 1, 1846. Before those dates all Armenians, without exception, belonged to the Armenian Apostolic Church which was known as the Armenian Church. The designation as Armenian Apostolic Church, in distinction to the Armenian Catholic and Evangelical Armenian churches, is relatively recent. It is within that context that I have titled my blog as the conflict between the Armenian State and the Armenian Church.

 Thirty and a few more years into the third (second?) republic, Armenia is brewing with state and church conflict. A few days ago, on June 13, 2024, before embarking on his final presentation in the National Assembly about the 2023 annual state budget implementation, the PM addressed the confrontation that happened the day before, on June 12, between the police and the demonstrators who were pressing to enter, if not storm, the government building where the government was in session. In his address he named two persons who, he claimed, stood behind the protesters, the former president Robert Kocharian and the Catholicos of All Armenian Karekin II. I wonder if such an outright naming an Armenian bishop leading the conflict with the Armenian state had happened before.

But the Armenian State and the Armenian Church conflict is not something new. Save through the centuries when there was no Armenian state and the Armenian church was de facto acting as the state, there was no reason or room for church and state conflict, which started almost right after the Arshakuni king Drtad III, had Armenians convert to Christianity. In my previous blog, I had highlighted on the matter of the national conversion to Christianity and noted that, there appeared to be more to the conversion than just embracing the new faith for the new faith’s sake. Those interested may read the blog I linked below.

It is interesting to note that it is claimed that the coat-of-Arms of the Arshakunis was the eagle and that after converting to Christianity, the dynasty still kept the eagle as their coat-of-arms, but had the eagle depicted with two heads (see the picture above). It is not far-fetched to imagine that not all embraced the conversion and that many, among the nobility and the laity, may have very well fiercely reject it.  We should bear in mind that some of the Arshakunis themselves and some among nobles of the court, were also Zoroastrian priests, including King Drtad I who had the Roman temple built at Garni that stands to this day and is one of the must-see touristic sites. It is said that some of the rituals of the Armenian Church service and the pageantry of the mass may have their roots in Zoroastrian worship services. 

It can be argued that the Arshakounis adopted the eagle with two heads to placate the old believers who may have converted to Christianity but had not given up on zoroastratism altogether. 

We should bear in mind that with the establishment of the Armenian Church in 301, there came about a hereditary ecclesiastical dynasty. The firs person who occupied the spiritual throne, Gregory the Illuminator was a true princely blue blood himself.  

Who was Gregory the Illuminator?

I post the following from Wikipedia:

““Gregory the Illuminator[a] (Classical Armenian: Գրիգոր Լուսաւորիչ, reformed spelling: Գրիգոր Լուսավորիչ, Grigor Lusavorich;[b] c. 257 – c. 328) is said to have been the son of a Parthian nobleman, Anak who assassinated the Arsacid king of Armenia Khosrov II (Note: The father of Drtad III). The young Gregory was saved from the extermination of Anak's family and was raised as a Christian in Caesarea of Cappadocia. Gregory returned to Armenia as an adult and entered the service of King Tiridates III, who had Gregory tortured after he refused to make a sacrifice to a pagan goddess. After discovering Gregory's true identity, Tiridates had him thrown into a deep pit well called Khor Virap for 14 years. Gregory was miraculously saved from death and released after many years with the help of Tiridates' sister Khosrovidukht. Gregory then converted the King to Christianity, and Armenia then became the first country to adopt Christianity as a state religion in 301 AD. Gregory, the Illuminator, then healed King Tiridates, who the hagiographical sources say had been transformed into a boar for his sins, and preached Christianity in Armenia. He was consecrated bishop of Armenia at Caesarea, baptized King Tiridates and the Armenian people, and traveled throughout Armenia, destroying pagan temples and building churches in their place.”

In a master stroke, King Drtad III may have taken the power of the Zoroasterian order, but in its place, he established a Christian spiritual ecclesiastical dynasty, a power base nonetheless. The throne of the Catholicos in Etchmiadzin remained the property of the descendants of Gregory the Illuminator until the year 438, when the Artshakuni dynasty came to its end as well. St.Gregory’s last descendant to occupy the throne was Catholicos Sahag Bartev, who with the young monk Mesrob Mashdots is credited to come with the Armenian alphabet. Catholicos Sahak Bartev, passed away on September 7, 439. With his death the line of St. Gregory the Illuminator occupying the throne at Etchmiadzin came to an end. Catholicos St. Sahag Bartev had a daughter named Sahaganush and three grandsons, her sons. One whom became the most famous general in the Armenian history, Vartan Mamikonian.

The occupants of the ecclesiastical throne in Etchmiadzin, Gregory the Illuminator and his descendants, did not have the military resources of the state. But they commanded no less an effective resource, their spiritual reach and gave legitimacy to the Armenian king by baptizing him. 

 The Arshakunis thus not only founded the Armenian Church but also planted the seeds of a possible conflict between the Armenian secular state and the Armenian Christian church, which was bound to erupt and it did. 

***

The Armenian Church: Apostolic, Catholic, Evangelical

The Armenian Church: Apostolic, Catholic, Evangelical 

Vahe H Apelian

I have no recollection of the Armenian Apostolic Church take such a decisive stand against the Armenian state in recent Armenian history. If there has been instances the Armenian Apostolic Church has assumed such role against the Armenian state, it would be interesting and educational to learn. 

We all know that Armenia is the first state to adopt Christianity as its state religion in 301 AD. We all know that that came about by the initiative of the state itself, King Drtad. Thus, the State and the Church relationship in Armenia is intimate, although it has gone through difficult times as each has attempted to carve its role.  The earliest historical event of each asserting its role in the Armenian nation appears to be relationship of the Armenian young king Bab and Catholicos Nerses the Great, who was a blue blood no less as the great-grandson of the St. Gregory the Illuminator. Let us be mindful that the immediate post St. Gregory Catholicosate seat was hereditary

 But it appeared that at crucial moments in the tortuous Armenian history both, the church and the state, had worked side by side to assure the rights of the Armenian people. In making that statement I have the Battle of Avarayr in mind in 451 and the Battle of Sardarabad in May, 1918. 

But mindsets appear to have changed. Obviously, I am referring to the Archbishop Pakrad leading the “Tavush for Homeland” movement against the state. The movement has the backing of the Apostolic Church. The argument that the Apostolic Church is backing the Archbishop Pakrad led movement for the sake of the nation is a false narrative simply because the government of Armenia is no less the choice of the citizens of Armenia, hallmark of any democracy. Nowhere else I know, the essence that relationship is better expressed than in the beautifully  wording in the 1776  United States Declaration of Independence  written by a Founding Father Thomas Jefferson,  stating that  “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...”. 

The State and the Church relationship is a very complex matter and is not a subject that can be adequately dwelt in a blog, such as the one I am blogging now. But I want to state the following before going over the state and church relationship in the third Armenian republic that came about on September 21, 1991. Archbishop Pakrad wearing a while garment claiming that the tricolor won over the  “black and white” Armenians who ostensibly are tearing the nation apart, in fact re-enforced that very notion. I want to state here that in Armenia “black and. While “Armenians designation is not racial but is a  covert designation  for “good” and “bad” citizenship..

Archbishop Pagrat claiming that the tricolor defeated the “black and while” while wearing a while garment, in fact reinformed that very division because he chose to wear while garment instead of the accepted black garment for the Armenian Apostolic clergy. . It will hard for me, from now looking at black garmented clergy of the Armenian Apostolic Church and not make a mental connection to what Archbishop Parkrad symbolized in this movement, that there are clergy who wear a “white” while others wear “black” garment. 

But I do not think Armenians are inclined to have a theocracy in Armenia. That is to say a government that is accountable to God. Surely, the state and the church relationship in Armenia is driven by its Constitution, Armenia first adopted in 1995 and amended it in 2005 and then in 2015. 

Article 8.1 of the first Constitution defines the Armenian state and Armenian church relationship as follows and pretty much words it the same in the next two amendments. It reads:

“The Church is separate from the State in the Republic of Armenia.

The Republic of Armenia recognizes the exclusive mission of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church, as a national church, in the spiritual life of the Armenian people, in the development of their national culture and preservation of their national identity.

Freedom of activity of all religious organizations functioning as prescribed by law shall be guaranteed in the Republic of Armenia.

The relations of the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church may be regulated by law.”

As I stated, the wording is pretty much is kept the same in the 2005 and in the 2015 amended Constitutions, recognizing the special status of the Armenian Apostolic Church. That recognition is not only moral but it has earthly implications. Much like in the U.S., education in Armenia, at least up to high school is state subsedized. Naturally I imagine that there are private pay high schools that need to meet the state mandated education requirement where the Armenian Apostolic Church is granted a special status in charting church related education

In his May 7, 2024 press conference the PM Nikol Pachinyan recognized the special national values of the citizens of the ROA. For the very first time I heard from the occupant of the highest office in Armenia, recognize he Armenian Catholic Church and the. Armenian Evangelical Church among the national values of the people of Republic of Armenia.

It is time to amend the Constitution of Armenia. I believe that the Constitution should spell that the state recognizes the special status of the Christian Faith in Armenia and along with the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church, make reference to the Armenian Catholic and to the Armenian Evangelical churches.

 

Wooster is Haleb

Vahe H. Apelian

 

In a commentary about a segment of Antranig Zarougian’s book “ Yerazayin Haleb - Dreamy Allepo” I had translated and posted in Keghart.com, Viken L. Attarian from Canada noted the following: “Haleb is undoubtedly a milestone in the evolution of our Armenian Diasporan identity of the post-Genocide period.  I believe that it is there that the future community of Beirut was forged.  And from then on to the different realities of our existence in the West.  In the great migration of our people, Haleb was the first place of a Great Gathering after the initial murderous big bang of the Great Dispersion. The above applies to all aspects of community life, whether they be historical, cultural, political, artistic, literary, and so on.  This is not to minimize the roles of other places.  Far from it. But, if there are temporal and geographic points of reference around which our existence coalesced after 1915, Haleb was surely the first.”

By the same token, if there is a temporal and a geographical point of refence about which the Armenian American existence coalesces in the New World, that undoubtedly would be Worcester, MA, made famous by Dr. Hagop Martin Deranian’s book titled “Worcester is America". The book's title is an actual recorded quote. In fact, it was the author Deranian who told me that.  When an immigration officer on the Ellis Island welcomed an Armenian immigrant to America, the person’s response was, «No, no, Worcester is America». His remark came to define Worcester, MA as the epicenter of the Armenian immigration to the United States dating well before the genocide. 

St. Savior Armenian Apostolic Church

The oldest Armenian church in the Western Hemishpher is credited to be the Saint Savior (Sourp Prgitch) Armenian Apostolic Church in Worcester, MA. It was erected in 1891. In 1952 the church was moved to its present location on Salisbury Street. In 1898, Catholicos of Khrimian Hayrig established the Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church in America, which remained stationed in Worcester, MA for the next two decades or so, until it was moved to New York City.

The Armenian Church of the Martyrs

But the first Armenian church, as a body of believers, is credited to the Armenian Evangelical community in Worcester, MA. A plaque in the church noting the milestones of the church notes that “in 1881 – commenced with a prayer meeting at the Home of Mr. and Mrs. Hovhanes Yaziijian”. In 1892 the believers organized and established themselves as a Congregational Church. On December 1, 1901, they dedicated the sanctuary they built as The Armenian Church of the Martyrs in memory of the martyrs of the Hamidian massacre. In this very church the Armenian Evangelical Union of North America (AEUNA) was established in 1902, and the Armenian Missionary Association of America (AMAA) was established in 1918. The church on Osmond Street, is the oldest Armenian church in the Western Hemisphere that is still in use.

Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church

The Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church affiliated with the Catholicosate of Cilicia was established in 1947 at its present location on Grove Street. 

The three churches are within a few miles to each other.

The following three books paint a captivating picture of the Worcester Armenian community. The first written is “Sacrifice and Redemption” by Marion Der Kazarian. The book is a personal memoir that was published in 1995. The author, nee Der Harootunian, was born on April 5, 1909 in Ashodavan, Armenia and came to America with her mother, brothers  and sisters in 1921 and “settled in Worcester, Massachusetts, the New World’s mecca for Armenian immigrants." 

“Worcester is America” by Dr. Hagop Martin Deranian was published in 1998. The commentaries of the book note that “it is richly detailed illustrated study of the early Armenian community in Worcester” and “a dramatic tale of ferocious conflicts and fierce loyalties, told with remarkable gentleness and candor.” 

“Armenians of Worcester” by Pamela E. Apkarian-Russel was published in 2000. It is about the Armenians who found refuge in Worcester, MA and became an integral part of Worcester culture and history.

The Worcester Armenian community is distinct and a unique community, where up to third generation Armenian Americans continue to perpetuate the legacy their forefathers entrusted to them and sustain the institutions of the community.

The other day, on the way to my dental appointment, a seven miles long stretch of a few interconnecting roads; it dawned on me that there are two farms with distinct Armenian names. They are the Davidian's Farm and the Berberia's Farm. They captured my attention, and I became reflective of the Worcester Armenian community. On that spur of the moment, the two farms made the history of the Armenian community in Worcester MA, more palpable to me. 

I thought of capturing a glimpse of the community in this blog.