What is the difference between Orthodoxy and Armenian Christianity? Religion of Armenians Is the Armenian Church Orthodox?

How does the Armenian Gregorian Church differ from the Orthodox Church? I have read a lot, but there is no clear answer anywhere. I am an Armenian, baptized in the Armenian Church. I live in Moscow, but very often I go to an Orthodox church. I believe in God and I believe that first of all God should be in the soul of each of us.

Dear Anna, the Armenian Apostolic Church belongs to communities that are not too far away from us, but are not in complete unity either. Due to certain historical circumstances, but, by the way, not without some human sin, after the IV Ecumenical Council of 451, she was among those communities that are called Monophysite, who did not accept the truth of the Church that in a single hypostasis, in a single person, incarnated The Son of God combines two natures: Divine and true human nature, inseparable and inseparable. It so happened that the Armenian-Gregorian Church, once a part of the one Ecumenical Church, did not accept this teaching, but shared the teaching of the Monophysites, who recognize only one nature of the incarnate God-Word - Divine. And although it can be said that now the sharpness of those disputes of the 5th-6th centuries has largely receded into the past and that the modern theology of the Armenian Church is far from the extremes of Monophysitism, nevertheless, there is still no complete unity in faith between us.

For example, the holy fathers of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, the Council of Chalcedon, which condemned the heresy of Monophysitism, are for us the holy fathers and teachers of the Church, and for the representatives of the Armenian Church and other "ancient Eastern churches" - persons either anathematized (most often), or at least not by doctrinal authority. using. For us, Dioscorus is an anathematized heretic, but for them - "like a saintly father." At least from this it is already clear which traditions the family of local Orthodox churches inherits, and which ones are those that are called ancient Eastern. There are quite noticeable differences between the ancient Eastern churches themselves, and the measure of Monophysite influence is very different: for example, it is noticeably stronger in the Coptic churches (with all due respect to Egyptian monasticism, one cannot fail to see among the Copts, especially among Coptic modern theologians, a completely distinct Monophysite influence), and its traces are almost imperceptible in the Armenian-Gregorian Church. But it remains a historical, canonical and doctrinal fact that for a thousand and a half years there has been no Eucharistic communion between us. And if we believe in the Church as the Pillar and ground of the truth, if we believe that the promise of Christ the Savior that the gates of hell will not prevail against her has not a relative, but an absolute meaning, then we must conclude that either the Church alone is true, and the other not quite, or vice versa - and think about the consequences of this conclusion. The only thing that cannot be done is to sit on two chairs and say that the teachings are not identical, but in fact they coincide, and that the one and a half thousand-year divisions stem solely from inertia, political ambitions and unwillingness to unite.

It follows from this that it is still impossible to take communion in turn in the Armenian, then in the Orthodox Church, and one should decide, and for this, study the doctrinal positions of one and the other Church.

Of course, it is impossible to formulate the theological doctrine of the Armenian Gregorian Apostolic Church in a short answer, and you could hardly expect it. If you are seriously concerned about this problem, then I send you: from among the more serious theologians of today, to Priest Oleg Davydenkov and Protodeacon Andrei Kuraev on this topic.

Many people from school know about the split of Christianity into Catholicism and Orthodoxy, as this is included in the course of history. From it we know about some of the differences between these churches, the prerequisites that led to the division, and the consequences of this division. But few people know what are the features of many other types of Christianity, which, for various reasons, separated from the two main currents. One of the churches that are close in spirit to the Orthodox, but at the same time, are completely separate, is the Armenian Apostolic Church.

The Orthodox Church is the second largest branch of Christianity after Catholicism. Despite the frequent misconception, the split of Christianity into Catholicism and Orthodoxy, although it has been brewing since the 5th century A.D. e., occurred only in 1054.


The unofficial division of spheres of influence led to the emergence of two large regions of Europe, which, due to religious differences, took different paths of development. The Balkans and Eastern Europe, including Russia, fell into the sphere of influence of the Orthodox Church.

The Armenian Apostolic Church arose much earlier than the Orthodox. So, already in the year 41, it acquired some autonomy (an autocephalous Armenian church), and officially separated in 372 due to the rejection of the Chalcedon Ecumenical Council. Notably, this schism was the first major division in Christianity.

As a result of the Chalcedon Cathedral, four more churches stood out along with the Armenian one. Five of these churches are geographically located in Asia and northeast Africa. Subsequently, during the spread of Islam, these churches were isolated from the rest of the Christian world, which led to even greater differences between them and the Chalcedonian churches (Orthodoxy and Catholicism).


An interesting fact is that the Armenian Apostolic Church became the state religion as early as 301, that is, it is the first official state religion in the world.

Common features

Despite such an early separation from the united Christian movement, there has always been a cultural exchange between the Armenian and Orthodox churches. This is due to the fact that the partial isolation of Armenia during the spread of Islam separated it from a significant part of the Christian world. The only "window to Europe" remained through Georgia, which by that time had already become an Orthodox state.

Thanks to this, one can find some common features in the vestments of clergymen, the arrangement of temples, and in some cases architecture.

Difference

Nevertheless, it makes no sense to talk about the relationship between the Orthodox and Armenian churches. It is worth at least remembering the fact that the Orthodox Church in our time is very heterogeneous in its internal structure. So very authoritative, practically independent of the Ecumenical Patriarch (the formal head of the Orthodox Church), is the Russian Orthodox, Jerusalem, Antioch, Ukrainian churches.

The Armenian Apostolic Church is one, even despite the presence of the autocephalous Armenian Church, because it recognizes the patronage of the head of the Apostolic Church.

From here you can immediately go to the question of the leadership of these two churches. So the head of the Orthodox Church is the Patriarch of Constantinople, and the head of the Armenian Apostolic Church is the Supreme Patriarch and the Catholicos of all Armenians.

The presence of completely different titles for the heads of the church indicates that these are completely different institutions.

It is impossible not to note the difference in the traditional architecture of these two churches. Thus, Armenian cathedrals imagine the continuation and further development of the traditional oriental school of construction. This was largely influenced not only by cultural background, but also by climate and basic building materials. Armenian churches, which were built in the Middle Ages, as a rule, are squat and have thick walls (the reason for this was that they were often fortifications).

Although Orthodox churches are not an example of European culture, they look completely different from Armenian ones. They usually stretch upwards, their domes are traditionally gilded.

Ceremonies differ radically, as well as the time of holidays and fasts at these churches. So, the Armenian rite has a national language, sacred books. It accepts a different number of people than in the Orthodox. Remarkably, the latter still does not have such a connection with the people, which is primarily due to the language of worship.

Finally, the most important difference, which was the reason for the Chalcedonian schism. The Armenian Apostolic Church is of the opinion that Jesus Christ is one person, that is, he has a single nature. In the Orthodox tradition, it has a dual nature - it combines both God and man.

These differences are so significant that these churches considered each other as heretical teachings, and mutual anathemas were imposed. Positive changes were achieved only in 1993, when representatives of both churches signed an agreement.

Thus, the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Orthodox Church have the same origins, and also differ to a lesser extent from each other than the Armenian from the Catholic or the Catholic from the Orthodox, in fact, they are different and completely independent spiritual institutions.

The notion that in reality there is no big difference and, in the end, all the Churches speak about the same thing, to put it mildly, is far from the truth. In fact, the Armenian Apostolic Church has serious grounds to assert that it has retained a special fidelity to the apostolic tradition. Each Church has taken a special name for itself, the Armenian one calls itself Apostolic. In fact, the name of each of the Churches is much longer than just Catholic, Orthodox, Apostolic. Our Church is called the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Holy Church (Orthodox in the sense of the truth of faith). Look at how many definitions there are, but we most often use one, the closest and dearest to us and the most characteristic.

For centuries our Church had to defend the purity of the dogmas of faith. In 451, not only the Armenian Church, but also other Eastern Orthodox Churches - Coptic, Syrian, Ethiopian - did not accept the decision of the Council of Chalcedon, having significant dogmatic reasons for this. There were serious grounds for fear that Chalcedon was restoring what had been condemned at the Third Ecumenical Council of Ephesus - primarily the heresy of Nestorius.

The main reason for the disagreement is that the Armenians preferred to remain faithful to the theological tradition of the Alexandrian school, founded by the great feat, first of all, Sts. Athanasius the Great and Cyril of Alexandria. Only after the death of the latter was it possible to put into practice the decisions taken by the Council of Chalcedon. The cathedral was not led by the clergy, but by the emperor Marcian himself and the empress Pulcheria. It must be admitted that Chalcedon only confirmed the already existing theological contradictions between the Alexandrian and Antiochian schools. These discrepancies had roots in different spiritual and cultural layers, they arose as a result of a collision of a holistic religious contemplation of the East and differential Hellenistic thinking, unity and dualism of the confession of the Savior, a concrete and generalized perception of the human reality of Christ.

The Armenians remained faithful to the decrees of the three Ecumenical Councils, which, without distortion, determined the faith coming from the apostolic period. We did not have an empire, we did not even have time for a respite, forced to constantly fight for existence. We have not tried to adapt Christology to imperial ambitions, to the service of the empire. Christianity was the main thing for us, for the sake of it we were ready to give what we had - such property was mainly life. As for the churches, with which, unfortunately, we do not have Eucharistic communion, we must take all the best from them. There is much good there, especially in Russian spiritual literature, in amazing testimonies of spiritual life. We have a special spiritual affinity with the Russian people. We constantly pray for the restoration of the Eucharistic unity of the Church of Christ. But until this happens, everyone should be in their own spiritual reality. This does not mean that we forbid our believers from going to Russian Orthodox churches. Thank God, we do not have such fanaticism. You can enter, light a candle, pray. But during the Sunday Liturgy, one must be in one's own Church.

Sometimes a dispute arises when the Armenians themselves can prove that they are not Orthodox. This creates an absurd situation - the person actually claims that his faith is not true. Orthodox in Russia do not consider Armenians to be Orthodox. The same is reflected in our theological tradition - we recognize the Orthodoxy of only five Eastern churches - ours, Coptic, Ethiopian, Syrian, Indian-Malabar. The Churches of Chalcedon, from the point of view of the doctrine of the AAC, are not considered Orthodox. In our theological literature they are simply called the Greek Church, the Roman Church, the Russian Church, etc. True, we can also briefly call our Church Armenian.

Of course, the Churches have their own official name, and in official relations we call them as they call themselves. But, recognizing all the differences between us and the Orthodox Chalcedonites, one cannot shy away from the assertions that we have the Orthodox, in other words, the correct, true faith.

Father Mesrop (Aramyan).

From an interview with Aniv magazine

At present, according to the canonical structure of the unified Armenian Apostolic Church, there are two catholicosates - the Catholicosate of All Armenians, with the center in Etchmiadzin (arm. Մայր Աթոռ Սուրբ Էջմիածին / Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin) and Cilicia (arm. Մեծի Տանն Կիլիկիոյ Կաթողիկոսություն / Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia), centered (since 1930) in Antilias, Lebanon. Under the administrative independence of the Catholicos of Cilicia, the primacy of honor belongs to the Catholicos of All Armenians, who has the title of Supreme Patriarch of the Armenian Apostolic Church.

The jurisdiction of the Catholicos of All Armenians includes all the dioceses within Armenia, as well as most of the foreign dioceses around the world, in particular in Russia, Ukraine and other countries of the former USSR. The Catholicos of Cilicia governs the dioceses of Lebanon, Syria and Cyprus.

There are also two autonomous patriarchates of the Armenian Apostolic Church - Constantinople and Jerusalem, canonically subordinate to the Catholicos of All Armenians. The patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constantinople hold the spiritual degree of archbishops. The Jerusalem Patriarchate is in charge of the Armenian churches of Israel and Jordan, and the Patriarchate of Constantinople is in charge of the Armenian churches of Turkey and the island of Crete (Greece).

Church organization in Russia

• Novo-Nakhichevan and Russian Diocese of Rostov Vicariate of the AAC Western Vicariate of the AAC

• Diocese of the South of Russia AAC North Caucasian Vicariate of the AAC

Spiritual degrees at the AAC

Unlike the Greek tripartite (bishop, priest, deacon) system of spiritual degrees of hierarchy, there are five spiritual degrees in the Armenian Church.

1. Catholicos/The bishop/ (has absolute authority to perform the Sacraments, including the Consecration of all spiritual degrees of the hierarchy, including bishops and catholicoses. The ordination and chrismation of bishops is performed in the concelebration of two bishops. The chrismation of the Catholicos is performed in the co-service of twelve bishops).
2. Bishop, Archbishop (differs from the Catholicos in some limited powers. A bishop can ordain and chrismate priests, but usually he cannot ordain bishops on his own, but only serve as a Catholicos in episcopal consecration. When a new Catholicos is elected, twelve bishops anoint him, elevating him to a spiritual degree).
3. Priest, Archimandrite(performs all the Sacraments except for the Consecration).
4. Deacon(serves in the Sacraments).
5. Dpir(the lowest spiritual degree obtained in episcopal ordination. Unlike a deacon, he does not read the Gospel at the liturgy and does not offer the liturgical cup).

Dogmatics

Christology

The Armenian Apostolic Church belongs to the group of Ancient Eastern churches. She did not participate in the IV Ecumenical Council for objective reasons and did not accept its decisions, like all the Ancient Eastern Churches. In its dogma, it is based on the decrees of the first three Ecumenical Councils and adheres to the pre-Chalcedonian Christology of St. Cyril of Alexandria, who professed the One of the two natures of God the Word incarnate (miaphysitism). Theological critics of the Armenian Apostolic Church argue that its Christology should be interpreted as Monophysite, which the Armenian Church rejects, anathematizing both Monophysitism and Dyophysitism.

icon veneration

Among the critics of the Armenian Church, there is an opinion that iconoclasm was characteristic of it in the early period. Such an opinion could arise due to the fact that in general there are few icons in Armenian churches and there is no iconostasis, however, this is only a consequence of the local ancient tradition, historical conditions and the general asceticism of decoration (that is, from the point of view of the Byzantine tradition of icon veneration, when everything is covered with icons walls of the temple, this can be perceived as the "absence" of icons or even "iconoclasm"). On the other hand, such an opinion could have arisen due to the fact that believing Armenians usually do not keep icons at home. In home prayer, the Cross was used more often. This is due to the fact that the icon in the AAC must certainly be consecrated by the hand of the bishop with holy myrrh, and therefore it is more of a temple shrine than an indispensable attribute of home prayer.

According to critics of "Armenian iconoclasm", the main reasons for its appearance are considered to be the dominion in Armenia in the VIII-IX centuries of Muslims, whose religion forbids images of people, "monophysitism", which does not imply a human essence in Christ, and therefore, the subject of the image, as well as the identification of icon veneration with the Byzantine Church, with which the Armenian Apostolic Church had significant disagreements since the time of the Council of Chalcedon. Well, since the presence of icons in Armenian churches testifies against the assertion of iconoclasm in the AAC, the opinion began to be put forward that, starting from the 11th century, the Armenian Church converges with the Byzantine tradition in matters of icon veneration (although Armenia was under the rule of Muslims in subsequent centuries, and many The dioceses of the Armenian Apostolic Church are still in Muslim territories today, despite the fact that there have never been changes in Christology and the attitude towards the Byzantine tradition is the same as in the first millennium).

The Armenian Apostolic Church itself declares its negative attitude towards iconoclasm and condemns it, since it has its own history of combating this heresy. Even at the end of the 6th - beginning of the 7th centuries (that is, more than a century before the emergence of iconoclasm in Byzantium, VIII-IX centuries), preachers of iconoclasm appeared in Armenia. Dvina priest Khesu with several other clerics proceeded to the regions of Sodk and Gardmank, where they preached the rejection and destruction of icons. The Armenian Church ideologically opposed them, represented by Catholicos Movses, theologians Vrtanes Kertokh and Hovhan Mairagometsi. But the struggle against the iconoclasts was not limited to theology. The iconoclasts were persecuted and, captured by the prince of Gardman, went to the court of the Church in Dvin. Thus, intra-church iconoclasm was quickly suppressed, but found ground in the sectarian popular movements of the middle of the 7th century. and the beginning of the 8th century, with which the Armenian and Alvanian churches fought.

Calendar and ritual features

Staff of vardapet (archimandrite), Armenia, 1st quarter of the 19th century

matah

One of the ceremonial features of the Armenian Apostolic Church is matah (literally “bring salt”) or a charitable meal, mistakenly perceived by some as an animal sacrifice. The main meaning of the matah is not in sacrifice, but in bringing a gift to God in the form of showing mercy to the poor. That is, if it can be called a sacrifice, it is only in the sense of a donation. This is a mercy offering, not a blood sacrifice like the Old Testament or pagan ones.

The matah tradition is traced back to the words of the Lord:

Matah in the Armenian Apostolic Church is performed on various occasions, more often as gratitude to God for mercy or with a request for help. Most often, matah is performed as a vow for a successful outcome of something, for example, the return of a son from the army or recovery from a serious illness of a family member, and is also done as a petition for the repose. However, it is customary to make matah in the form of a public meal for members of the parish during major church holidays or in connection with the consecration of the church.

Participation in the rite of the clergyman is limited solely to the consecration of the salt with which matah is prepared. It is forbidden to bring an animal to church, and therefore it is cut by the donor at home. For a matah, a bull, a ram or a poultry are slaughtered (which is perceived as a sacrifice). The meat is boiled in water with the addition of consecrated salt. It is distributed to the poor or they arrange a meal at home, and the meat should not be left the next day. So the meat of a bull is distributed to 40 houses, a ram - to 7 houses, a rooster - to 3 houses. Traditional and symbolic matah, when a dove is used - it is released into the wild.

forward post

The advanced fast, currently unique to the Armenian Church, begins 3 weeks before Lent. The origin of fasting is associated with the fast of St. Gregory the Illuminator, after which he healed the sick king Trdat the Great.

Trisagion

In the Armenian Church, as well as in other Old Eastern Orthodox churches, unlike the Orthodox churches of the Greek tradition, the Trisagion Hymn is sung not to the Divine Trinity, but to one of the Hypostases of the Triune God. More often it is perceived as a Christological formula. Therefore, after the words “Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal”, depending on the event celebrated at the Liturgy, an addition is made indicating this or that biblical event.

So in the Sunday Liturgy and at Pascha it is added: "... that you have risen from the dead, have mercy on us."

In the non-Sunday Liturgy and on the feasts of the Holy Cross: "... that he was crucified for us, ...".

In the Annunciation or Epiphany (Nativity and Baptism of the Lord): "... who appeared for us, ...".

In the Ascension of Christ: "... that he ascended in glory to the Father, ...".

On Pentecost (Descent of the Holy Spirit): "... that he came and rested on the apostles, ...".

And others…

communion

Bread in the Armenian Apostolic Church, when celebrating the Eucharist, according to tradition, unleavened is used. The choice of Eucharistic bread (unleavened or leavened) is not given dogmatic significance.

Wine when celebrating the sacrament of the Eucharist, whole, not diluted with water, is used.

The consecrated Eucharistic bread (Body) is immersed by the priest into the Chalice with consecrated wine (Blood) and, broken into pieces by the fingers, is served to the communicants.

sign of the cross

In the Armenian Apostolic Church, the sign of the cross is three-fingered (similar to Greek) and performed from left to right (like the Latins). Other variants of the Sign of the Cross practiced in other churches are not considered “wrong” by the AAC, but are perceived as a natural local tradition.

calendar features

The Armenian Apostolic Church as a whole lives according to the Gregorian calendar, but communities in the diaspora, on the territory of churches using the Julian calendar, with the blessing of the bishop, can also live according to the Julian calendar. That is, the calendar is not given a "dogmatic" status. The Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem, according to the status quo accepted between Christian churches that have rights to the Holy Sepulcher, lives according to the Julian calendar, like the Greek Patriarchate.

An important prerequisite for the spread of Christianity was the existence of Jewish colonies in Armenia. As you know, the first preachers of Christianity usually began their activities in those places where there were Jewish communities. Jewish communities existed in the main cities of Armenia: Tigranakert, Artashat, Vagharshapat, Zareavan and others. Tertullian in the book “Against the Jews”, written in 197, tells about the peoples who adopted Christianity: Parthians, Lydians, Phrygians, Cappadocians, - mentions about Armenians. This testimony is also confirmed by Blessed Augustine in his work Against the Manichaeans.

At the end of the 2nd - beginning of the 3rd centuries, Christians in Armenia were persecuted by the kings Vagharsh II (186-196), Khosrov I (196-216) and their successors. These persecutions were described by the Bishop of Cappadocia Caesarea Firmilian (230-268) in his book The History of the Persecution of the Church. Eusebius of Caesarea mentions the letter of Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, “On repentance to the brothers in Armenia, where Meruzhan was bishop” (VI, 46. 2). The letter dates from 251-255. It proves that in the middle of the III century in Armenia there was a Christian community organized and recognized by the Ecumenical Church.

Adoption of Christianity by Armenia

The traditional historical date for the proclamation of Christianity as "the state and only religion of Armenia" is 301. According to S. Ter-Nersesyan, this happened not earlier than 314, between 314 and 325, however, this does not negate the fact that Armenia was the first to adopt Christianity at the state level. St. Gregory the Illuminator, who became the first hierarch of the state Armenian Church (-), and the king of Greater Armenia, Saint Trdat III the Great (-), who before his conversion was the most severe persecutor of Christianity.

According to the writings of Armenian historians of the 5th century, in 287 Trdat arrived in Armenia, accompanied by Roman legions, to return his father's throne. In the estate of Yeriza, Gavar Ekegeats, when the king performs the ritual of sacrifice in the temple of the pagan goddess Anahit, Gregory, one of the king's associates, as a Christian, refuses to sacrifice to the idol. Then it is revealed that Gregory is the son of Anak, the murderer of the father of Trdat, King Khosrov II. For these "crimes" Gregory is imprisoned in the Artashat dungeon, intended for suicide bombers. In the same year, the king issued two decrees: the first of them ordered the arrest of all Christians within Armenia with the confiscation of their property, and the second - to put to death the hiding Christians. These decrees show how dangerous Christianity was considered for the state.

Church of Saint Gayane. Vagharshapat

Church of Saint Hripsime. Vagharshapat

The adoption of Christianity by Armenia is most closely associated with the martyrdom of the holy virgins of the Hripsimeans. According to legend, a group of Christian girls originally from Rome, hiding from the persecution of Emperor Diocletian, fled to the East and found refuge near the capital of Armenia, Vagharshapat. King Trdat, fascinated by the beauty of the virgin Hripsime, wished to take her as his wife, but met with desperate resistance, for which he ordered all the girls to be martyred. Hripsime and 32 friends died in the north-eastern part of Vagharshapat, the teacher of the virgins Gayane, together with two virgins, in the southern part of the city, and one sick virgin was tortured right in the winepress. Only one of the virgins - Nune - managed to escape to Georgia, where she continued to preach Christianity and was subsequently glorified under the name of St. Nino Equal-to-the-Apostles.

The execution of the Hripsimian virgins caused the king a strong mental shock, which led to a severe nervous illness. In the 5th century, the people called this disease "pig", which is why the sculptors depicted Trdat with a pig's head. The king's sister Khosrovadukht repeatedly had a dream in which she was informed that only Gregory, imprisoned in prison, could heal Trdat. Gregory, who miraculously survived after spending 13 years in the stone pit of Khor Virap, was released from prison and solemnly received in Vagharshapat. After 66 days of prayer and preaching of the teachings of Christ, Gregory healed the king, who, having thus come to faith, declared Christianity the religion of the state.

The previous persecutions of Trdat led to the actual destruction of the sacred hierarchy in Armenia. For consecration to the rank of bishop, Gregory the Illuminator solemnly went to Caesarea, where he was ordained by the Cappadocian bishops, headed by Leontius of Caesarea. Bishop Peter of Sebastia performed the ceremony of enthroning Gregory in Armenia to the episcopal throne. The ceremony took place not in the capital Vagharshapat, but in distant Ashtishat, where the main episcopal see of Armenia founded by the apostles has long been located.

Tsar Trdat, together with the whole court and princes, was baptized by Gregory the Illuminator and made every effort to revive and spread Christianity in the country, and so that paganism could never return. In contrast to Osroene, where King Abgar (who, according to Armenian tradition, is considered an Armenian) was the first of the monarchs to adopt Christianity, making it only the sovereign's religion, in Armenia Christianity became the state religion. And that is why Armenia is considered the first Christian state in the world.

To strengthen the position of Christianity in Armenia and finally move away from paganism, Gregory the Illuminator, together with the king, destroyed pagan sanctuaries and, in order to avoid their restoration, built Christian churches in their place. This began with the construction of the Etchmiadzin Cathedral. According to legend, Saint Gregory had a vision: the sky opened up, a ray of light descended from it, preceded by a host of angels, and in the ray of light Christ descended from heaven and struck the Sandarametk underground temple with a hammer, indicating its destruction and the construction of a Christian church on this site. The temple was destroyed and covered up, in its place a temple dedicated to the Most Holy Theotokos was erected. Thus was founded the spiritual center of the Armenian Apostolic Church - Holy Etchmiadzin, which in Armenian means "the Only Begotten descended."

The newly converted Armenian state was forced to defend its religion from the Roman Empire. Eusebius of Caesarea testifies that Emperor Maximin II Daza (-) declared war on the Armenians, “long since the former friends and allies of Rome, moreover, this theomachist tried to force zealous Christians to sacrifice to idols and demons and this made them enemies instead of friends and enemies instead of allies ... He himself, together with his troops, suffered setbacks in the war with the Armenians” (IX. 8,2,4). Maximin attacked Armenia in the last days of his life, in 312/313. For 10 years, Christianity in Armenia has taken such deep roots that for their new faith, the Armenians took up arms against the strong Roman Empire.

During the time of St. Gregory of Christ, the Albanian and Georgian kings accepted the faith, respectively making Christianity the state religion in Georgia and Caucasian Albania. The local churches, whose hierarchy originates from the Armenian Church, maintaining doctrinal and ritual unity with it, had their own catholicoses, who recognized the canonical authority of the Armenian primate. The mission of the Armenian Church was also sent to other regions of the Caucasus. Thus, the eldest son of Catholicos Vrtanes Grigoris set out to preach the Gospel to the country of the Mazkuts, where he later suffered martyrdom on the orders of King Sanesan Arshakuni in 337.

After a long hard work (according to legend, by Divine revelation), Saint Mesrop in 405 created the Armenian alphabet. The first sentence translated into Armenian was “Know wisdom and instruction, understand the sayings of the understanding” (Proverbs 1:1). With the assistance of the Catholicos and the king, Mashtots opened schools in various places in Armenia. Translated and original literature originates and develops in Armenia. The translation activity was headed by Catholicos Sahak, who first of all translated the Bible from Syriac and Greek into Armenian. At the same time, he sent his best students to the famous cultural centers of that time: Edessa, Amid, Alexandria, Athens, Constantinople and other cities to improve in Syriac and Greek and translate the works of the Church Fathers.

In parallel with the translation activity, the creation of original literature of various genres took place: theological, moral, exegetical, apologetic, historical, etc. The contribution of the translators and creators of Armenian literature of the 5th century to the national culture is so great that the Armenian Church canonized them as saints and every year solemnly celebrates the memory of the Cathedral of Holy Translators.

Defense of Christianity from persecution of the Zoroastrian clergy of Iran

Since ancient times, Armenia has been alternately under the political influence of either Byzantium or Persia. Starting from the 4th century, when Christianity became the state religion first of Armenia, and then of Byzantium, the sympathies of the Armenians turned to the west, to the Christian neighbor. Well aware of this, the Persian kings from time to time made attempts to destroy Christianity in Armenia and forcibly implant Zoroastrianism. Some nakharars, especially the owners of the southern regions bordering Persia, shared the interests of the Persians. Two political currents were formed in Armenia: Byzantophile and Persophile.

After the Third Ecumenical Council, the supporters of Nestorius, persecuted in the Byzantine Empire, found refuge in Persia and began to translate and distribute the writings of Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, which were not condemned at the Council of Ephesus. Bishop Akakios of Melitina and Patriarch Proclus of Constantinople in messages warned Catholicos Sahak about the spread of Nestorianism.

In response letters, the Catholicos wrote that the preachers of this heresy had not yet appeared in Armenia. In this correspondence, the foundation of Armenian Christology was laid on the basis of the teachings of the Alexandrian school. The letter of St. Sahak, addressed to Patriarch Proclus, as a model of Orthodoxy, was read out in 553 at the Byzantine "Fifth Ecumenical" Council of Constantinople.

The author of the life of Mesrop Mashtots Koryun testifies that “in Armenia there were false books brought, empty legends of a certain Roman named Theodoros.” Upon learning of this, Saints Sahak and Mesrop immediately took steps to condemn the champions of this heretical teaching and destroy their writings. Of course, we were talking about the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia.

Armenian-Byzantine Church Relations in the Second Half of the 12th Century

Over the centuries, the Armenian and Byzantine churches have repeatedly made attempts to reconcile. For the first time in 654 in Dvin under Catholicos Nerses III (641-661) and Emperor Constas II of Byzantium (-), then in the VIII century under the Patriarch of Constantinople German (-) and the Catholicos of Armenia David I (-), in the IX century under the Patriarch of Constantinople Photius (-, -) and Catholicose Zechariah I (-). But the most serious attempt to unite the churches took place in the XII century.

In the history of Armenia, the 11th century was marked by the migration of the Armenian people to the territories of the eastern provinces of Byzantium. In 1080, the ruler of Mountainous Cilicia, Ruben, a relative of the last king of Armenia, Gagik II, annexed the plain part of Cilicia to his possessions and founded the Cilician Armenian principality on the northeastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. In 1198 this principality became a kingdom and existed until 1375. Along with the royal throne, the patriarchal throne of Armenia (-) also moved to Cilicia.

The Pope of Rome wrote a letter to the Armenian Catholicos, in which he recognized the Orthodoxy of the Armenian Church and, for the perfect unity of the two Churches, invited the Armenians to mix water into the holy Chalice and celebrate the Nativity of Christ on December 25th. Innocent II also sent a bishop's baton as a gift to the Armenian Catholicos. Since that time, the Latin baton appeared in the everyday life of the Armenian Church, which began to be used by the bishops, and the eastern Greek-Cappadocian baton became the property of the archimandrites. In 1145, Catholicos Gregory III turned to Pope Eugene III (-) with a request for political assistance, and Gregory IV - to Pope Lucius III (-). Instead of helping, however, the popes again offered the AAC to mix water into the holy Chalice, to celebrate the feast of the Nativity of Christ on December 25, etc.

King Hethum sent a message from the pope to the Catholicos Constantine and asked him to answer it. The Catholicos, although he was full of respect for the Roman throne, could not accept the conditions that the pope proposed. Therefore, he sent a message to King Hethum, consisting of 15 points, in which he rejected the dogma of the Catholic Church and asked the king not to trust the West. The See of Rome, having received such an answer, limited its proposals and, in a letter written in 1250, offered to accept only the doctrine of the filioque. To answer this proposal, Catholicos Constantine in 1251 convened the III Council of Sis. Without coming to a final decision, the council turned to the opinion of the church leaders of Eastern Armenia. The problem was new for the Armenian Church, and it is natural that different opinions could exist in the initial period. However, no decision was ever made.

The period of the most active confrontation between these powers for a dominant position in the Middle East, including power over the territory of Armenia, falls on the 16th-17th centuries. Therefore, from that time on, the dioceses and communities of the Armenian Apostolic Church were divided for several centuries on a territorial basis into Turkish and Persian. Since the 16th century, both of these parts of a single church have developed under different conditions, had different legal status, which affected the structure of the hierarchy of the AAC and the relationship of various communities within it.

After the fall of the Byzantine Empire in 1461, the AAC Patriarchate of Constantinople was formed. The first Armenian Patriarch in Istanbul was the Archbishop of Bursa Hovagim, who headed the Armenian communities in Asia Minor. The patriarch was endowed with broad religious and administrative powers and was the head (bashi) of a special "Armenian" millet (ermeni milleti). In addition to the Armenians themselves, the Turks included in this millet all Christian communities that were not included in the "Byzantine" millet that united Greek Orthodox Christians in the territory of the Ottoman Empire. In addition to the believers of other non-Chalcedonian Old Eastern Orthodox churches, the Maronites, Bogomils and Catholics of the Balkan Peninsula were included in the Armenian millet. Their hierarchy was administratively subordinate to the Armenian Patriarch in Istanbul.

Other historical thrones of the Armenian Apostolic Church - the Akhtamar and Cilician Catholicosates and the Jerusalem Patriarchate - also appeared on the territory of the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century. Despite the fact that the Catholicoses of Cilicia and Akhtamar were higher in spiritual rank than the Patriarch of Constantinople, who was only an archbishop, they were administratively subordinate to him as an Armenian ethnarch in Turkey.

The throne of the Catholicoses of all Armenians in Etchmiadzin ended up on the territory of Persia, and the throne of the Catholicos of Albania, subordinate to the AAC, was also located there. The Armenians in the territories subordinated to Persia almost completely lost their rights to autonomy, and the Armenian Apostolic Church remained the only public institution here that could represent the nation and influence public life. Catholicos Movses III (-) managed to achieve a certain unity of governance in Etchmiadzin. He strengthened the position of the church in the Persian state, getting the government to stop bureaucratic abuses and abolish taxes for the AAC. His successor Pilipos I sought to strengthen the ties between the ecclesiastical dioceses of Persia, subordinate to Etchmiadzin, and the dioceses in the Ottoman Empire. In 1651, he convened a local council of the AAC in Jerusalem, at which all the contradictions between the autonomous thrones of the AAC, caused by political division, were eliminated.

However, in the second half of the 17th century, a confrontation arose between Etchmiadzin and the growing strength of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Patriarch Egiazar of Constantinople, with the support of the High Porte, was proclaimed the Supreme Catholicos of the Armenian Apostolic Church in opposition to the legitimate Catholicos of All Armenians with the throne in Etchmiadzin. In 1664 and 1679, Catholicos Hakob VI visited Istanbul and negotiated with Egiazar on unity and delimitation of powers. In order to eliminate the conflict and not destroy the unity of the church, according to their agreement, after the death of Hakob (1680), the throne of Etchmiadzin was occupied by Egiazar. Thus, a single hierarchy and a single supreme throne of the AAC were preserved.

The confrontation between the Turkic tribal unions Ak-Koyunlu and Kara-Koyunlu, which took place mainly on the territory of Armenia, and then the wars between the Ottoman Empire and Iran led to huge destruction in the country. The Catholicosate in Etchmiadzin made efforts to preserve the idea of ​​national unity and national culture, improving the church-hierarchical system, but the difficult situation in the country forced many Armenians to seek salvation in a foreign land. By this time, Armenian colonies with a corresponding church structure already existed in Iran, Syria, Egypt, as well as in the Crimea and Western Ukraine. In the 18th century, the positions of the AAC were strengthened in Russia - Moscow, St. Petersburg, New Nakhichevan (Nakhichevan-on-Don), Armavir.

Catholic proselytism among Armenians

Simultaneously with the strengthening of the economic ties of the Ottoman Empire with Europe in the XVII-XVIII centuries, there was an increase in the propaganda activity of the Roman Catholic Church. The Armenian Apostolic Church as a whole took a sharply negative position in relation to the missionary activity of Rome among the Armenians. Nevertheless, in the middle of the 17th century, the most significant Armenian colony in Europe (in Western Ukraine), under powerful political and ideological pressure, was forced to accept Catholicism. At the beginning of the 18th century, the Armenian bishops of Aleppo and Mardin spoke openly in favor of converting to Catholicism.

In Constantinople, where the political interests of East and West intersected, European embassies and Catholic missionaries from the Dominican, Franciscan and Jesuit orders launched an active proselytizing activity among the Armenian community. As a result of the influence of Catholics, a split occurred among the Armenian clergy in the Ottoman Empire: several bishops converted to Catholicism and, through the mediation of the French government and the papacy, separated from the AAC. In 1740, with the support of Pope Benedict XIV, they formed the Armenian Catholic Church, which became subordinate to the See of Rome.

At the same time, the ties of the Armenian Apostolic Church with the Catholics played a significant role in the revival of the national culture of Armenians and the spread of European ideas of the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Since 1512, books in Armenian began to be printed in Amsterdam (the printing house of the Hagopa Megaparta monastery), and then in Venice, Marseille and other cities of Western Europe. The first Armenian printed edition of the Holy Scriptures was made in 1666 in Amsterdam. In Armenia itself, cultural activity was greatly hindered (the first printing house opened here only in 1771), which forced many representatives of the clergy to leave the Middle East and create monastic, scientific and educational associations in Europe.

Mkhitar Sebastatsi, who was carried away by the activities of Catholic missionaries in Constantinople, founded a monastery in 1712 on the island of San Lazzaro in Venice. Having adapted to local political conditions, the brethren of the monastery (Mkhitarists) recognized the primacy of the Pope; nevertheless, this community and its offshoot in Vienna tried to stay away from the propaganda activities of Catholics, being engaged exclusively in scientific and educational work, the fruits of which deserved national recognition.

In the 18th century, the Catholic monastic order of Antonites acquired great influence among the Armenians who collaborated with the Catholics. The Antonite communities in the Middle East were formed from representatives of the Ancient Eastern churches who converted to Catholicism, including from the AAC. The Order of Armenian Antonites was founded in 1715 and its status was approved by Pope Clement XIII. By the end of the 18th century, most of the episcopate of the Armenian Catholic Church belonged to this order.

Simultaneously with the development of the pro-Catholic movement on the territory of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenian Apostolic Church created Armenian cultural and educational centers of national orientation. The most famous of them was the school of the monastery of John the Baptist, founded by the clergyman and scholar Vardan Bagishetsi. Armashi Monastery gained great fame in the Ottoman Empire. Graduates of this school enjoyed great prestige in church circles. By the time of the patriarchate in Constantinople, Zakariya II at the end of the 18th century, the most important area of ​​the Church's activity was the training of the Armenian clergy and the training of the necessary personnel for the management of dioceses and monasteries.

AAC after the annexation of Eastern Armenia to Russia

Simeon I (1763-1780) was the first Armenian Catholicos to establish official relations with Russia. By the end of the 18th century, the Armenian communities of the Northern Black Sea region became part of the Russian Empire as a result of the advance of its borders in the North Caucasus. The dioceses located on Persian territory, primarily the Albanian Catholicosate with its center in Gandzasar, launched an active activity aimed at joining Armenia to Russia. The Armenian clergy of the Erivan, Nakhichevan and Karabakh khanates sought to get rid of the power of Persia and linked the salvation of their people with the support of Christian Russia.

With the beginning of the Russian-Persian war, the Bishop of Tiflis Nerses Ashtaraketsi contributed to the creation of Armenian volunteer detachments, which made a significant contribution to the victories of the Russian troops in Transcaucasia. In 1828, according to the Turkmanchay Treaty, Eastern Armenia became part of the Russian Empire.

The activities of the Armenian Church under the rule of the Russian Empire proceeded in accordance with the special “Regulations” (“Code of Laws of the Armenian Church”), approved by Emperor Nicholas I in 1836. According to this document, in particular, the Albanian Catholicosate was abolished, the dioceses of which became directly part of the AAC. Compared to other Christian communities in the Russian Empire, the Armenian Church, due to its confessional isolation, occupied a special position, which could not be significantly affected by some restrictions - in particular, the Armenian Catholicos had to be ordained only with the consent of the emperor.

The confessional distinctions of the Armenian Apostolic Church in the empire, where Byzantine Orthodoxy dominated, were reflected in the name “Armenian-Gregorian Church” coined by Russian church officials. This was done in order not to call the Armenian Orthodox Church. At the same time, the “non-Orthodoxy” of the AAC saved it from the fate that befell the Georgian Church, which, being of the same faith with the Russian Orthodox Church, was practically liquidated, becoming part of the Russian Church. Despite the stable position of the Armenian Church in Russia, there were serious harassment of the AAC by the authorities. In 1885-1886. Armenian parochial schools were temporarily closed, and since 1897 they were transferred to the department of the Ministry of Education. In 1903, a decree was issued on the nationalization of Armenian church property, which was canceled in 1905 after mass indignations of the Armenian people.

In the Ottoman Empire, the Armenian church organization also acquired a new status in the 19th century. After the Russian-Turkish war of 1828-1829, thanks to the mediation of the European powers, Catholic and Protestant communities were created in Constantinople, and a significant number of Armenians became part of them. Nevertheless, the Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople continued to be regarded by the High Porte as the official representative of the entire Armenian population of the empire. The election of the patriarch was approved by the sultan's letter, and the Turkish authorities tried in every possible way to put him under their control, using political and social levers. The slightest violation of the limits of competence and disobedience could lead to deposition from the throne.

Increasingly wider sections of society were involved in the sphere of activity of the Patriarchate of Constantinople of the AAC, and the patriarch gradually gained significant influence in the Armenian Church of the Ottoman Empire. Without his intervention, the internal church, cultural or political issues of the Armenian community were not resolved. The Patriarch of Constantinople acted as an intermediary during Turkey's contacts with Etchmiadzin. According to the "National Constitution", developed in 1860-1863 (in the 1880s, its operation was suspended by Sultan Abdul-Hamid II), the spiritual and civil administration of the entire Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire was under the jurisdiction of two councils: the spiritual (of 14 bishops chaired by the patriarch) and secular (out of 20 members elected by a meeting of 400 representatives of the Armenian communities).

In 301, Armenia became the first country to adopt Christianity as a state religion. For many centuries there has been no church unity between us, but this does not interfere with the existence of good neighborly relations. At the meeting held on March 12 with the Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia to Russia O.E. Yesayan, His Holiness Patriarch Kirill noted: “Our relations go back centuries... The closeness of our spiritual ideals, a single moral and spiritual system of values ​​in which our peoples live, are a fundamental component of our relations.”

Readers of our portal often ask the question: “What is the difference between Orthodoxy and Armenian Christianity”?

Archpriest Oleg Davydenkov, Doctor of Theology, Head of the Department of Eastern Christian Philology and Eastern Churches of the Orthodox St. Tikhon Theological University, answers the questions of the Orthodoxy and World portal about pre-Chalcedonian churches, one of which is the Armenian Church.

What is the difference between Orthodoxy and Armenian Christianity

— Father Oleg, before talking about the Armenian direction of Monophysitism, tell us about what Monophysitism is and how it arose?

Monophysitism is a Christological teaching, the essence of which is that in the Lord Jesus Christ there is only one nature, and not two, as the Orthodox Church teaches. Historically, it appeared as an extreme reaction to the heresy of Nestorianism and had not only dogmatic but also political reasons.

The Orthodox Church confesses in Christ one person (hypostasis) and two natures - divine and human. Nestorianism teaches about two persons, two hypostases and two natures. The Monophysites, however, fell into the opposite extreme: in Christ they recognize one person, one hypostasis, and one nature. From a canonical point of view, the difference between the Orthodox Church and the Monophysite churches lies in the fact that the latter do not recognize the Ecumenical Councils, starting with the 4th Chalcedon, which adopted the definition (oros) of the two natures in Christ, which converge into one person and into one hypostasis .

Armenian Church. Monophysites

The name "Monophysites" was given by Orthodox Christians to the opponents of Chalcedon (they call themselves Orthodox). Systematically, the Monophysite Christological doctrine was formed in the 6th century, thanks primarily to the work of Severus of Antioch (+ 538).

Modern non-Chalcedonites are trying to modify their teaching, they argue that their fathers are accused of Monophysitism unfairly, since they anathematized Eutychus 1, but this is a change in style that does not affect the essence of the Monophysite dogma. The works of their contemporary theologians testify that there are no fundamental changes in their doctrine, significant differences between the Monophysite Christology of the 6th century. and no modern. Back in the VI century. the doctrine of the “single complex nature of Christ” appears, which was composed of deity and humanity and possesses the properties of both natures. However, this does not imply the recognition in Christ of two perfect natures - the nature of the divine and the nature of man. In addition, Monophysitism is almost always accompanied by a Monophilite and Monoenergetic position, i.e. the teaching that in Christ there is only one will and one action, one source of activity, which is the deity, and humanity turns out to be its passive instrument.

– Does the Armenian direction of Monophysitism differ from its other types?

— Yes, it is different. There are currently six non-Chalcedonian churches (or seven, if the Armenian Etchmiadzin and Cilician Catholicosates are considered as two, de facto autocephalous churches). The ancient Eastern churches can be divided into three groups:

1) Syro-Jacobites, Copts and Malabars (Malankara Church of India). This is the monophysitism of the Severian tradition, which is based on the theology of Severus of Antioch.

2) Armenians (Etchmiadzin and Cilicia Catholicasates).

3) Ethiopians (Ethiopian and Eritrean churches).

The Armenian Church in the past differed from other non-Chalcedonian churches, even Sever of Antioch was anathematized by the Armenians in the 6th century. at one of the Dvina cathedrals as an insufficiently consistent Monophysite. The theology of the Armenian Church was significantly influenced by Aphthartodoketism (the doctrine of the incorruptibility of the body of Jesus Christ from the moment of the Incarnation). The appearance of this radical Monophysite doctrine is associated with the name of Julian of Halicarnassus, one of the main opponents of Severus within the Monophysite camp.

At present, all the Monophysites, as the theological dialogue shows, act from more or less the same dogmatic positions: this is a Christology close to the Christology of Severus.

Speaking about the Armenians, it should be noted that the consciousness of the modern Armenian Church is characterized by pronounced adogmatism. If other non-Chalcedonites of the church show considerable interest in their theological heritage and are open to Christological discussion, the Armenians, on the contrary, are little interested in their own Christological tradition. At present, interest in the history of Armenian Christological thought is rather shown by some Armenians who consciously converted from the Armenian-Gregorian Church to Orthodoxy, both in Armenia itself and in Russia.

Armenian Church. Dialog

— Is there a theological dialogue with the pre-Chalcedonian churches now?

- Conducted with varying degrees of success. The result of such a dialogue between Orthodox Christians and the Ancient Eastern (Pre-Chalcedonian) churches was the so-called Chambesian agreements. One of the main documents is the Chambesian Agreement of 1993, which contains an agreed text of the Christological teaching, and also contains a mechanism for restoring communion between the "two families" of Churches through the ratification of agreements by the synods of these Churches.

The Christological teaching of these agreements aims to find a compromise between the Orthodox and Ancient Eastern churches on the basis of a theological position that could be characterized as "moderate Monophysitism". They contain ambiguous theological formulas that allow for a Monophysite interpretation. Therefore, the reaction in the Orthodox world to them is not unambiguous: four Orthodox Churches accepted them, some accepted with reservations, and some are fundamentally against these agreements.

The Russian Orthodox Church has also recognized that these agreements are not sufficient to restore Eucharistic communion, since they contain ambiguities in Christological teaching. Further work is required to eliminate ambiguous interpretations. For example, the teaching of the Covenants about wills and actions in Christ can be understood both diphysite (Orthodox) and monophysite. It all depends on how the reader understands the relationship between will and hypostasis. Is will considered as an attribute of nature, as in Orthodox theology, or is it assimilated into a hypostasis, which is characteristic of Monophysitism. The Second Agreed Statement of 1990, which forms the basis of the 1993 Chambesia Accords, does not provide an answer to this question.

A dogmatic dialogue with the Armenians today is hardly possible at all, due to their lack of interest in problems of a dogmatic nature. After the mid 90s. it became clear that the dialogue with the non-Chalcedonites had reached a dead end, the Russian Orthodox Church began bilateral dialogues - not with all the non-Chalcedonian Churches together, but with each one separately. As a result, three directions for bilateral dialogues were determined: 1) with the Syrian-Jacobites, Copts and the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia, who agreed to conduct a dialogue only in such a composition; 2) Etchmiadzin Catholicosate and 3) with the Ethiopian Church (this direction has not been developed). The dialogue with the Catholicosate of Etchmiadzin did not touch upon dogmatic issues. The Armenian side is ready to discuss issues of social service, pastoral practice, various problems of social and church life, but shows no interest in discussing dogmatic issues.

How are Monophysites accepted into the Orthodox Church today?

— Through repentance. Priests are received in their existing rank. This is an ancient practice, and this is how non-Chalcedonites were received in the era of the Ecumenical Councils.

Alexander Filippov spoke with Archpriest Oleg Davydenkov.