Armenian Gregorian "Apostolic Church" ( Further AGAC) - one of the communities that calls itself Christian, but whether it is such will be considered further. We often hear that the Armenians were the first to accept the faith at the state level, but let us ask from whom did they accept the faith? From the Jerusalem and Byzantine Churches and, however, they failed to keep it intact! In addition, at the same time, edicts were issued in the Roman Empire that completely legalized Christianity, so there is no reason for the pride of the AGAC. For many centuries there has been no church unity between us, this does not exclude good neighborly relations, however, the schism and heresies of the AGAC run counter to the principle of preserving Unity of Faith handed down to us by the apostles and pointed out by the Word of God: « One God, one faith, united baptism"(Ephesians 4:5). From the 4th century, the AGAC separated from the fullness of the most ancient Orthodox local Churches (Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, etc.), accepting first by mistake, and then consciously, the Monophysite and Monothelite and Miaphysite heresies and went into schism from all the others. Until now, we have this unhealed wound in such a way that we can't pray and take communion together until it is restored true doctrine about God in the AGAC. The hostages of this misfortune of heresy and schism are ordinary Armenians, unfortunately, often far from the subtleties of theology. You should know that it is impossible to be both Orthodox and included in the Armenian “church” at the same time, just as it is impossible to be simultaneously saved and lost, truthful and a liar. You have to choose between true and false. Before talking about the Armenian direction of Monophysitism, let's talk about what Monophysitism is and how it arose.
Monophysitism - this is an incorrect doctrine about Christ, the essence of which lies in the fact that in the Lord Jesus Christ only one nature, and not two (Divine and human), as taught by the Word of God and the Orthodox Church.
Orthodox Church confesses in Christ one person(hypostasis) and two natures – divine And human abiding unmerged, inseparable, inseparable, unchanging. Monophysites same (including AGAC) in Christ they acknowledge one face, one hypostasis and one nature. As a result, the Monophysites do not recognize Ecumenical Councils starting with the 4th (and there are seven in total).
Most of the saints, therefore, they insult, condemn and do not accept. Monophysitism is not only a complete denial of the real human flesh of Jesus Christ the Son of God, but any slightest transfer, shift or distortion from human nature Christ towards His divinity. The AGAC, after many hesitation, remained a confessor of the heresy of Monophysitism, which for them consists not in the denial of the Incarnation, but in stubborn insistence on the absorption by the deity of Christ of His human nature - which is a lie against Christ and a heretical teaching. It's all about this particular arrangement of accents in the Christology of the God-Man Jesus Christ. After that, neither the symbol of the Armenian faith, in which the Orthodox confession of the Incarnation of Christ, nor the statements of individual fathers about the presence of the flesh of Christ have any meaning. The Armenian Church is twice Monophysite: by its own confession of heresy and by communion with the Monophysite churches (for according to the teaching of the Church, whoever communicates with a heretic is himself a heretic). In AGAC there is no k.-l. officially approved summary foundations of doctrine. Three Creeds are used in the AGAC: 1) a short Creed used in the rite of proclamation. 2) "medium" in rank Divine Liturgy AGATs, 3) a lengthy Symbol read by a priest at the beginning of the morning service. Phrase from the third voluminous Symbol "one face, one appearance, and united in one nature" completely heretical, and all lies and heresy are from the devil, which is unacceptable, especially with regard to God. This heresy leads to a lie about the God-man Christ, to the idea of the impossibility of imitating Christ "because He is more God, and humanity is swallowed up in Him." That. humanity is humiliated in Christ and motivations for imitation of Christ are torn and grace is not given.
One delusion led to others. So only in the 12th century. icon veneration is finally recognized, during the sacred service, the AGAC consumes unleavened bread according to the Jewish custom and perform animal sacrifice (matah), they allow cheese and milk food on Saturday and Sunday during fasting. And from 965, the AGAC began to re-baptize Armenians who converted to it from Orthodoxy.
Main disagreements with Orthodoxy:
– in the AGAC they recognize the body of Christ not as consubstantial with us, but “incorruptible and passionless, and ethereal, and n created, and heavenly, who did everything that is characteristic of the body, not in reality, but in the imagination”;
– The AGAC believes that in the act of the Incarnation, the body of Christ “transformed into the Divine and became consubstantial with it, disappearing in the Divine like a drop of honey in the sea, so that after that two natures no longer remain in Christ, but one, wholly Divine,” they confess in Christ two natures before the union, and after the union they profess a single complex, merging both - the Divine and the human, and as a result they call it a single nature.
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. This is also a terrible lie against the God-man Jesus Christ.
Does the Armenian direction of Monophysitism differ from its other types?
— Yes, it is different. There are currently only three:
1) Siroyakovites, Copts and Malabarians of the Severian tradition. 2) Armenian Gregorian AGAC (Etchmiadzin and Cilicia Catholicasates). 3) Ethiopian (Ethiopian and Eritrean "churches").
The AGAC in the past differed from the rest of the non-Chalcedonian Monophysites, even Sevir of Antioch was anathematized by the Armenians in the 4th century. at one of the Dvina cathedrals as an insufficiently consistent Monophysite. The theology of the AGAC was significantly influenced by Aphthartodocetism (the heretical doctrine of the incorruptibility of the body of Jesus Christ from the moment of the Incarnation).
At present, interest in the history of Armenian Christological thought is shown rather by some Armenians, deliberately transferred from the AGAC to Orthodoxy , moreover, both in Armenia itself and in Russia.
A dogmatic dialogue with the AGAC today is hardly possible at all, they are ready to discuss issues of social service, pastoral practice, various problems of social and church life, but he shows no interest in discussing dogmatic questions. Unfortunately, the representatives of the AGAC placed themselves outside the Church of Christ; as a result, it turned into a self-isolated and separated from Universal Church a one-national church that has communion in faith only with Monophysite heretical churches.
How those baptized in the AGAC (and other Monophysites) are today accepted into Orthodox Church?
— Through repentance and a special rank. This is an ancient practice, and this is how non-Chalcedonites were received in the era of the Ecumenical Councils.
In 354, the first Council of the Armenian Church was held, condemning Arianism and reaffirming the adherence to Orthodoxy. IN 366 year the Church of Armenia, which was before in canonical depending on See of Caesarea Byzantium, received autocephaly (independence).
In 387, Greater Armenia was divided, and soon its eastern part was annexed to Persia in 428, while the western part became a province of Byzantium. In 406, Mesrop Mashtots created the Armenian alphabet, which made it possible to translate the liturgy, Holy Scripture, and the works of the Church Fathers into the national language.
Representatives of the Armenian Church were present at the I and II Ecumenical Councils; decisions were also made III. But now the IV Ecumenical Council, held in 451 in the city of Chalcedon, passed without the participation of the Armenian bishops, and for this reason they were not aware of the exact resolutions of this Council. Meanwhile, the Monophysites arrived in Armenia and spread their delusions. True, the decisions of the Council soon appeared in Armenian Church, but, due to ignorance of the exact meaning of the Greek theological terms, the Armenian teachers fell at first unintentionally into error. However, the Armenian council in Dovin in 527 decided to recognize in Christ one nature and, thus, unequivocally put the AGAC among the Monophysites. The Orthodox faith was officially rejected and condemned. So the Armenian Church fell away from Orthodoxy. However, a significant part of Armenians remained in communion with the Ecumenical Church, passing into the subordination of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.
In 591, Armenia was divided due to the attack of the Persians. Most of the country became part of the Byzantine Empire, and in the city of Avan (located northeast of Yerevan, now part of the city) was formed Orthodox catholicosate. He was opposed monophysite catholicosate, located in the city of Dvin, on Persian territory, and the Persians artificially supported it so that there was no unity with the Byzantine Orthodox Armenians, however, there were also many Orthodox Armenians on Persian territory. During the Byzantine-Persian War of 602-609. the Orthodox Catholicosate was abolished by the Persian invaders. The Monophysite Catholicos Abraham initiated the persecution of the Orthodox, forcing all clerics to either anathematize the Council of Chalcedon or leave the country.
Repression not eradicated Orthodox faith among Armenians. In 630, the Council of Karin was held, at which the Armenian Church officially returned to Orthodoxy. After Arab conquests in 726 the AGAC again fell away from the Universal Church into Monophysitism. Orthodox Armenians again began to move to the territory of Byzantium, under the omophorion of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Those that remained in the regions of Armenia bordering on Georgia ended up under the jurisdiction Georgian Church. In the ninth century Orthodox were the population and princes of the Taron region and the majority of the population of the regions of Tao and Klarjeti.
Through the efforts of St. Photius of Constantinople, as well as Bishop Theodore Abu Qurra of Harran, under Prince Ashot I in 862 at the Shirakavan Cathedral The Church of Armenia returned to Orthodoxy, however, thirty years later, by the decision of the new Catholicos Hovhannes V, again veered towards monophysitism.
In the 11th century in Armenia, the number of departments consisting of in communion with Constantinople, in this period Orthodoxy began to prevail among the Armenians. After the invasion of the Seljuk Turks in the second half of the 11th century Orthodox Armenians came under jurisdiction Georgian Patriarch, and after a century and a half their bishops are already referred to and perceived as "Georgian".
The last attempt to return the Armenian Church to Orthodoxy was made in 1178. Her hierarchs at the Council convened by Emperor Manuel Komnenos recognize the Orthodox confession of faith. The death of Emperor Manuel prevented the reunion. In 1198, an alliance between the crusaders and the Armenian king of Cilicia led to the conclusion of a union between the heretical Roman Catholic and Armenian churches. This union, which was not accepted by the Armenians outside Cilicia, ended in a split in the Armenian Church, as a result of which the Armenian Catholic Church arose in 1198. Today, the majority of Armenians living in Armenia belong to the AGAC.
Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov, who was at the Caucasian cathedra, knew perfectly well the state of affairs in the Armenian Church and the opinions of many Armenians, gravitating towards Orthodox faith. He said with great regret and sorrow that the AGAC is very close to the Orthodox faith in many ways, but does not want to abandon the heresy of Monophysitism that divides us. There is only one reason for this - pride, which from many centuries of wrong confession and from single nationality The Armenian Church (which brought a sense of national exclusivity and contradicts the Gospel) only got stronger, grew and increased pride Armenian religion. About falsity proud the path of national exclusiveness, God says in Scripture: “There is neither Greek nor Jew, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free, but all and in all Christ.” (Col. 3:11). As you know, God proud resists and does not give them His saving grace (1 Pet. 5:5). That is why we do not see in the AGAC such saints as Seraphim of Sarov, the Matrona of Moscow, and many other great saints who are born by the Orthodox Church.
St. John Chrysostom, a saint recognized by all, says: “to make divisions in the Church is no less evil than to fall into heresy… sin split Not washed away even by martyr's blood. Therefore, with sorrow and pain, we are waiting for our Armenian brothers from sin heresy and schism fearing the eternal death of those souls who are not attentive to the personality and teachings of Christ's Unity of Faith (see Eph. 4:5).
“I beseech you, brethren, beware of those who produce divisions and temptations, contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and turn away from them; because such people serve not to our Lord Jesus Christ, but to your belly, And kindness and eloquence deceive the hearts of the simple." (Rom. 16:17)
So, the AGAC refers 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 AGAC, 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 AGAC 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 representatives of the AGAC and other "ancient Eastern churches" - persons either anathematized (most often), or at least not using doctrinal authority . 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 degree 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 in the AGAC are almost imperceptible. 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 completely, 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 AGAC, then in the Orthodox Church, and one should decide, and for this, study the doctrinal positions of the AGAC and the Orthodox Church.
Of course, it is impossible to formulate the theological doctrine of the AGAC in a short answer, and you could hardly expect it.
(By mother.arch. Oleg Davydenkov and Orthodox. Encycl.)
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 what 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
For a year, the Armenian representatives did not take part in the IV Ecumenical Council, and the decisions of the Council were distorted by the translation. The rejection of the conciliar decisions marked a gap between the Orthodox and anti-Chalcedonites among the Armenians, which shook the life of Christians in Armenia for more than two hundred years. The councils and catholikoses of this period either reconciled or broke again with the Orthodox Church until the Manazkert Council in the year, as a result of which the rejection of Orthodoxy prevailed among the Christians of Armenia for centuries. Since then, the Armenian Apostolic Church has existed as an anti-Chalcedonite community, at various times consisting of a number of administratively independent canonical destinies recognizing the spiritual primacy of the Catholicos of "All Armenians" with a pulpit in the Etchmiadzin Monastery. In his dogma, he adheres to the Christological terminology of St. Cyril of Alexandria (the so-called Miaphysitism); recognizes seven sacraments; honors the Mother of God, icons. It is distributed in the places where Armenians live, being the largest religious community in Armenia and having a network of dioceses concentrated in the Middle East, the former USSR, Europe and America.
Historical outline
Information relating to the most ancient period in the history of the Armenian Church is scarce. The main reason for this is that the Armenian alphabet was created only at the beginning of the century. The history of the first centuries of the existence of the Armenian Church was passed down orally from generation to generation, and only in the 5th century was it recorded in writing in historiographic and hagiographic literature.
A number of historical testimonies (in Armenian, Syriac, Greek and Latin) confirm the fact that Christianity was preached in Armenia by the holy apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew, who were thus the founders of the Church in Armenia.
According to Sacred Tradition Armenian Church, after the Ascension of the Savior, one of His disciples, Thaddeus, having arrived in Edessa, healed the king of Osroene Avgar from leprosy, ordained Addea to the bishops and went to Great Armenia with the sermon of the Word of God. Among the many converted by him to Christ was the daughter of the Armenian king Sanatruk Sandukht. For the confession of Christianity, the apostle, along with the princess and other converts, accepted by order of the king martyrdom in Shavarshan, in Artaz Gavar.
A few years later, in the 29th year of the reign of Sanatruk, the Apostle Bartholomew, after preaching in Persia, arrived in Armenia. He converted the sister of King Vogui and many nobles to Christ, after which, by order of Sanatruk, he was martyred in the city of Arebanos, which is located between lakes Van and Urmia.
A fragment of a historical work has come down to us, which tells about the martyrdom of Sts. Voskeanov and Sukiaseanov in Armenia at the end - beginning of centuries. The author refers to the "Word" of Tatian (II century), who was well acquainted with the history of the apostles and the first Christian preachers. According to this scripture, the disciples of the Apostle Thaddeus, headed by Chryusius (Greek "gold", Armenian "waxes"), who were Roman ambassadors to the Armenian king, after the martyrdom of the apostle, settled at the source of the Euphrates River, in the gorges of Tsaghkeats. After the accession of Artashes, they, having come to the palace, began to preach the Gospel.
Being busy with the war in the east, Artashes asked the preachers to come back to him after his return and continue talking about Christ. In the absence of the king, the Voskeans converted to Christianity some of the courtiers who arrived from the country of the Alans to Queen Satenik, for which they were martyred by the royal sons. The Alanian princes converted to Christianity left the palace and settled on the slopes of Mount Jrabashkh, where, having lived for 44 years, they were martyred led by their leader Sukias by order of the Alanian king.
Dogmatic features of the Armenian Church
The dogmatic theology of the Armenian Church is based on the terminology of the great fathers of the Church - centuries: Saints Athanasius of Alexandria, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria and others, as well as on the dogmas adopted at the first three Ecumenical Councils: Nicaea, Constantinople and Ephesus.
As a result, it was concluded that the Armenian Church does not accept the decision of the Council of Chalcedon because the Council accepted the confession of the Pope of St. Leo the Great. The rejection of the Armenian Church in this confession is caused by the following words:
"For although in the Lord Jesus there is one person - God and man, yet another (human nature) is where the common humiliation of both comes from, and another that (Divine nature) from where their common glorification comes.".
The Armenian Church uses the wording of St. Cyril, but not to calculate the natures, but to indicate the inexpressible and inseparable unity of natures in Christ. Also used is the saying of St. Gregory the Theologian about the "two natures" in Christ, because of the incorruptibility and immutability of the Divine and human natures. According to the confession of Nerses Shnorhali set out in the "Conciliar Message of St. Nerses Shnorhali to the Armenian People and Correspondence with Emperor Manuel Komnenos":
"Is one nature accepted for the sake of an inseparable and inseparable union, and not for the sake of confusion - or two natures are relied on only for the sake of showing an unmixed and unchanging being, and not for separation; both expressions remain within Orthodoxy" .
Chair in Vagharshapt
- St. Gregory I the Illuminator (302 - 325)
- Aristakes I Parthian (325 - 333)
- Vrtanes the Parthian (333 - 341)
- Hesychius (Iusik) Parthian (341 - 347)
- Daniel (347) chorep. Taronsky, elected archbishop.
- Paren (Parnerseh) Ashtishat (348 - 352)
- Nerses I the Great (353 - July 25, 373)
- Chunak(? - no later than 369) was appointed catholicos during the exile of Nerses the Great
- Isaac-Hesychius (Shaak-Iusik) of Manazkert (373 - 377)
- Zaven of Manazkert (377 - 381)
- Aspurakes of Manazkert (381 - 386)
- Isaac I the Great (387 - 425)
- Surmak (425 - 426)
- Barquisho the Syrian (426 - 429)
- Samuel (429 - 434)
- 434 - 444 - widowhood of the throne
Most historians believe that officially the Armenians became Christians in 314, and this is the latest date of the alleged. Numerous followers of the new faith appeared here long before the proclamation of the Armenian Church as a state institution.
The faith of the Armenian people is considered to be the first apostolic, that is, received directly from the disciples of Christ. Despite dogmatic differences, the Russian and Armenian churches support friendly relations especially in the study of the history of Christianity.
Before the adoption of Christianity, paganism reigned in the ancient state on the banks of Sevan, leaving meager monuments in the form of stone sculptures and echoes in folk customs. According to legend, the apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew initiated the destruction of pagan temples and settling in their places Christian churches. In the history of the Armenian Church, one can single out the following milestones:
- I century: the sermon of the apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew, which determined the name of the future Church - Apostolic.
- Mid-2nd century: Tertullian's mention of "a large number of Christians" in Armenia.
- 314 (according to some sources - 301) - the martyrdom of the holy virgins Hripsime, Gaiania and others who suffered on Armenian soil. The adoption of Christianity by the king of Armenia Trdat III under the influence of his servant Gregory, the future saint Illuminator of Armenia. The construction of the first temple of Etchmiadzin and the establishment of the patriarchal throne in it.
- 405: Creation of the Armenian alphabet for translation purposes Holy Scripture and liturgical books.
- 451: Battle of Avarayr (war with Persia against the imposition of Zoroastrianism); Council of Chalcedon in Byzantium against the heresy of the Monophysites.
- 484 - removal of the patriarchal throne from Etchmiadzin.
- 518 - division with Byzantium in matters of religion.
- XII century: attempts to reunite with Byzantine Orthodoxy.
- XII - XIV centuries - attempts to accept the union - to unite with the Catholic Church.
- 1361 removal of all Latin innovations.
- 1441 - return of the patriarchal throne to Etchmiadzin.
- 1740 - detachment of the Syrian community of Armenians, whose religion became Catholicism. Armenian Catholic Church spread in Western Europe, there are parishes in Russia.
- 1828 - the entry of Eastern Armenia into the Russian Empire, the new name is the "Armenian-Gregorian Church", a branch of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which remained on the territory of the Ottoman Empire.
- 1915 - extermination of Armenians in Turkey.
- 1922 - beginning of repressions and anti-religious movement in Soviet Armenia.
- 1945 - the election of a new Catholicos and the gradual revival of church life.
At present, despite the friendly relations between the Orthodox and Armenian churches, there is no Eucharistic communion. This means that their priests and bishops cannot serve the liturgy together, and the laity cannot be baptized and receive communion. The reason for this is differences in creed or dogma.
Ordinary believers who are not students of theology may not be aware of these barriers or may not consider them important. For them, ritual differences are more important, the cause of which is history and national customs.
In the III-IV centuries, disputes about faith were as popular as political battles are now. To resolve dogmatic issues, Ecumenical Councils were convened, the provisions of which formed the modern Orthodox dogma.
One of the main topics of discussion was the nature of Jesus Christ, who He was, God or man? Why does the Bible describe His suffering, which should not be part of the divine nature? For Armenians and Byzantines, the authority of the Holy Fathers of the Church (Gregory the Theologian, Athanasius the Great, etc.) was indisputable, but the understanding of their teachings turned out to be different.
The Armenians, among other Monophysites, believed that Christ is God, and the flesh in which He dwelt on earth was not human, but divine. Therefore, Christ could not experience human feelings and did not even feel pain. His sufferings under torture and on the cross were symbolic, apparent.
The teaching of the Monophysites was analyzed and condemned at the I.V. Ecumenical Council, where the doctrine of the two natures of Christ - divine and human - was adopted. This meant that Christ, while remaining God, took on a real human body at birth and experienced not only hunger, thirst, suffering, but also the mental anguish inherent in man.
When the Ecumenical Council was held in Chalcedon (Byzantium), the Armenian bishops could not take part in the discussions. Armenia was in a bloody war with Persia and on the verge of destroying statehood. As a result, the decisions of the Chalcedon and all subsequent Councils were not accepted by the Armenians, and their centuries-old separation from Orthodoxy began.
The dogma about the nature of Christ is the main difference between the Armenian Church and the Orthodox. Currently, theological dialogues are being held between the ROC and the AAC (Armenian Apostolic Church). Representatives of the learned clergy and church historians are discussing what contradictions arose due to a misunderstanding and can be overcome. Perhaps this will lead to the restoration of full communion between confessions.
Both Churches also differ in their external, ceremonial side, which is not a significant obstacle to the communion of believers. The most notable features are:
There are other features in worship, the vestments of clergy and church life.
Renegation of Armenians
Armenians who wish to convert to Orthodoxy will not have to be baptized again. The rite of accession is performed over them, where a public renunciation of the teachings of the Monophysite heretics is supposed. Only after this, a Christian from the AAC can proceed to the Orthodox Sacraments.
There are no strict regulations in the Armenian Church regarding the admission of the Orthodox to the Sacraments; Armenians are also allowed to take communion in any of the Christian churches.
Hierarchical arrangement
The head of the Armenian Church is the Catholicos. The name of this title comes from the Greek word καθολικός - "universal". The Catholicos is in charge local churches standing above their patriarchs. High altar located in Etchmiadzin (Armenia). Currently, the Catholicos is Karekin II, the 132nd head of the church after St. Gregory the Illuminator. Below the Catholicos are the following sacred degrees:
The Armenian diaspora in the world has about 7 million people. All these people are bonded folk traditions associated with religion. In places of permanent residence, Armenians try to erect a temple or a chapel, where they gather for prayer and holidays. In Russia, churches with characteristic ancient architecture can be found on the Black Sea coast, in Krasnodar, Rostov-on-Don, Moscow and others. major cities. Many of them are named in honor of the Great Martyr George - the beloved saint of the entire Christian Caucasus.
The Armenian Church in Moscow is represented by two beautiful churches: the Resurrection and the Transfiguration. Transfiguration Cathedral- cathedral, i.e. the bishop constantly serves in it. Nearby is his residence. Here is the center of the Novo-Nakhichevan diocese, which includes all the former republics of the USSR except for the Caucasian ones. The Church of the Resurrection is located at the national cemetery.
In each of the temples you can see khachkars - stone arrows made of red tuff, decorated with fine carvings. This expensive work is performed by special masters in memory of someone. The stone is delivered from Armenia as a symbol of the historical homeland, reminding every Armenian in the Diaspora of his sacred roots.
The oldest diocese of the AAC is located in Jerusalem. Here it is headed by the patriarch, who has a residence at the church of St. James. According to legend, the temple was built on the site of the execution of the Apostle James, nearby was the house of the Jewish high priest Anna, in front of whom Christ was tortured.
In addition to these shrines, the Armenians also keep the main treasure - the third part of Golgotha granted by Constantine the Great (in the Church of the Resurrection of Christ). This property entitles the Armenian representative along with the Jerusalem Patriarch to participate in the ceremony of the Holy Light (Holy Fire). In Jerusalem, a daily service is performed over the Tomb. Mother of God belonging in equal shares to Armenians and Greeks.
The events of church life are covered by the Shagakat TV channel in Armenia, as well as the English and Armenian-language Armenian Church YouTube channel. Patriarch Kirill with the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church regularly take part in the celebrations of the AAC, connected with the centuries-old friendship of the Russian and Armenian peoples.
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 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 Catholicosates of Etchmiadzin and Cilicia 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 emergence 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. Dialogue
—
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 Orthodox world on 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 the 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.
