Armenia Revisited: Prospects For Reformation?

“What are the prospects for Reformation in Armenia?” asks my friend J.T.

The question is as legitimate as the answer may be complex, I will avoid an easy one, with some highly triumphalistic overtone. The temptation is great for any minister, a fortiori for the broadcast minister, to offer a flamboyant description of his ministry, exempt of any problem and at a safe distance. Such have been the tactics of many I have known around me since my involvement with the broadcast ministry. They almost seem to be “forced” to produce evidences, albeit fictitious, of the efficacy of their ministry, in order to secure a decent budget and be able to run it safely. They will not hesitate, nor do they, to describe some situations with great optimism, even if some of the stories are ultimately of failure. Arithmetical missiology (they now call it missionology), fruit of mathematical theology, seconded by a geometrical ecclesiology, serves only their own inflated statistical figures. However, the eyes of a careful observer will easily detect that which is a bluff and catch the fake nature of such evaluations of some modern missions.

My aim in this article on Armenia is to attempt a more objective evaluation of the “religious” situation of Armenia then draw conclusion for our missionary activities1 in this country.

Several presences are acting on the religious scene of Armenia, the main three being the cults, Evangelicals and the Armenian “Apostolic” Church. Two other groups may also be mentioned in passing, the Roman Catholics and a curious group of Armenian Muslims. This latter is not prominent as the former ones.

Cults and Sects

The variety of cults and sects operating in Armenia is not different from those we see in the West. The recently acquired political independence of the former autonomous, or semi-autonomous, Soviet Republics, and the relative freedom of speech and conscience has offered an unexpected chance for action to the most aggressive, at least of the major branches of them. Among them Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, The Church of Unification (Moonist), adepts of Krishna, and with some lesser virulence, Adventists, and an extreme type of Pentecostalism. No wonder that their activities have become a serious concern for both the church, which looks at herself as the “Mother Church,” and the State, which, indeed curiously, despite its independence from the church, considers her as THE official Church of the newly independent nation.

At the present in the eyes of the Apostolic Church two religious bodies are called Christian, and officially they enjoy freedom: Roman Catholics and evangelicals. Recently, the evangelical churches have been organized into a large federation. Officially they enjoy freedom of worship, provided they do not engage in that which to the eyes of the Mother Church is an illegitimate proselytizing operation. Yet this concept of proselytizing hasn’t been clearly defined yet. This same question is raised in almost all Oriental and Eastern Christian Churches who have acquired the status of an/the official church in the country.

Armenian Evangelicals

It is not my aim to analyze this aspect of the situation thoroughly. Suffice it to offer here some concrete instances, of what I will call a curious, not to say dubious, character of evangelical preaching and teaching. Generally we notice that it has been “an importation” of Western “Armenian Evangelicalism,” especially of Anglo-Saxon origin. The dominant themes of teaching include dispensationalism, with an undue emphasis on the place and role of modern “Israel” (with almost a type of doulia—religious veneration—for the modern Jewish people). Another feature of evangelicalism in Armenia as well as elsewhere is their highly individualistic and subjectivistic interpretation of salvation, with its concomitanta-cosmia and a-nomia. The salvation of the soul and the escaping from hell seem to be themes of predilection. A gospel in three lessons, four spiritual laws, five minutes of consulting, and, at the end of the week, a certificate attesting that from now on you belong to “us” as easily as you order your fast-food in the neighborhood restaurant.

When first I met with the Director of Radio Yerevan, himself a young Christian, member of the Apostolic Church, he earnestly requested I deal seriously with the question of Israel. “Our people is in complete confusion” he said; “Please, help us to see clear in this matter,” he added. My recently translated and published book on Christian eschatology (Hoping Against all Hope) contains a whole chapter devoted to Israel, which I have included in several of my broadcast programs. With the evangelicals, however, occasionally the name of Jesus Christ is mentioned but as an appendix, or an unavoidable secondary detail to be mentioned! Covenant Theology is as alien to them as would be in my preaching Transcendental Meditation! A highly catchy title of an article stresses the fact that God does not have grandchildren, only children; from which you conclude that He has made no promises for the one thousand generations which will spring from my family!

Another surprising, indeed very curious, assertion of some evangelicals who are overzealous to trace back the origins of Armenian Evangelicalism to the earliest centuries of church history, is to pretend that among the “Spiritual fathers” there were the “Bogomils” and the “Paulicians.” “The earth has its limits,” Gustave Flaubert wrote in another context to Guy de Maupassant, during the last century, “human imbecility is limitless.”

The work of the Protestant missions among Armenians dates from the beginning of the nineteenth century, it was especially prosperous from the day on which the Sublime Port (The Ottoman—Turkish—Government of the Sultan) granted independence to the Protestant community (the Millet officially formed in July 1846).Those foreign missions belonged on the one hand to Missionary Societies of England and America, and, on the other hand, to those of Basel. They established several centers in Western Armenia and in Anatolou (Turkey); one of them was Marzovan, where Rev. Rushdoony, father of Rousas John Rushdoony and my father received together their theological training.

The link with foreign missionaries is a fact; even though at great length, Armenian evangelicals trace the origin of Protestantism to an internal spiritual movement of revival in the Apostolic Church. Although that may be partially true, we still have to reckon with the fact that it lacked a serious doctrinal basis. Nevertheless it was thoroughly Reformed in doctrine and presbyterian in church polity. Alas, the influence of most nineteenth- and twentieth-century liberal theologies has almost obliterated those convictions, with some rare exceptions. The majority of Evangelical Armenians are hopelessly Arminians, in both conservative and liberal circles.

Muslim Armenians?

The attachment of the Armenians to Christianity is well known, and when they were abroad their religion stands to them in the place of nationality. In spite of this love of their religion, some Armenians, persecuted by the Muslims, have adopted Islam. Thus a couple of centuries ago, the Armenians of Hamshen, to the east of Trebizond, after some bloody massacres, accepted the law of Islam by the thousands. They have been considered as Turks, but they speak a dialect which betrays their Armenian origin. Some scholars have even ventured the hypothesis that the Kurds are ancient Armenians who have passed under the law of Islam (we keep in mind that Kurds are neither of Semitic descent nor of Asian origin but, like the Armenians, they belong to the Indo-European race). About 1751, a certain Chalabi, who was very fanatical, associated himself with the Persian Muslims, and conceived the plan of massacring the Armenians if they would not be converted to Islam. He tortured them first, cutting off their ears so that they might not hear the singing in church, cutting out their tongues so that they might not speak their mother language, and putting out their eyes to strike fear into other Christians. He inflicted these tortures on the poor, and granted honors and titles to the rich to impose silence on them. By this means thousands of Armenian families became Muslims, especially in the province of Oudi. in this province above all, the Muslims destroyed the churches and Christian sanctuaries, so that the Christians might more quickly forget their original religion. Many names in that region recall Armenian origins. Some had preserved some old Christian customs. For example, when a mother puts her child to sleep, she makes the sign of the cross over it, and murmurs the name of Jesus. When the paste is prepared, a young Armenian Muslim wife makes the cross on it with her forearm before putting it into the oven! in Lasistan, also, several Armenian villages had become converted to Islam, from fear of tortures and massacres. There are among them some traces of Christianity as among their brothers elsewhere.

Armenian Roman Catholics

There have been in almost all times Armenians who recognized more or less the supremacy of Rome. But it was recognized only in a sporadic and casual way until the time of the Crusades, when the Armenians of the kingdom of Cilicia, or Lesser Armenia, were in constant contact with the Crusaders, and consequently with the Roman Curia. Later, in the fourteenth century, Dominican missionaries founded influential communities of disciples in Armenia. These were the class of native missionaries known as “Uniates” (unitores). Subsequently, especially in the seventeenth century, other orders established missions among the Armenians, particularly among Armenians of Persia. Until the middle of the eighteenth century, Roman Catholic Armenians did not form an autonomous community; now they have a hierarchy of their own. Quarrels between Apostolic Armenians and Roman Catholic Armenians have been constant. A few years ago the Armenian Roman Patriarch issued a letter in which he qualified the Apostolic Church as non-orthodox, an accusation which stirred a rather heated debate among the Apostolic circles.

The Apostolic Church

The national legends and traditions of Armenia are rich in information regarding the introduction of Christianity into the country, in particular, it is said to have been preached by apostles or disciples of apostles, such as St. Bartholomew and St. Thaddeaus. Christianity certainly penetrated to Armenia as elsewhere, by means of evangelization. The apostles and their successors had early formed the habit of visiting the churches they founded; and the teaching of the gospel was continued and propagated in the Christian communities long before written documents came into use. But the names of these first preachers have not come down to us with any certainty. Yet, however meager the information furnished by history may be, we are quite entitled to maintain that Christianity reached Armenia through Antioch, before the time of Gregory the Illuminator. The first Christian documents that the Armenians made use of were written in Syriac, and this language was used in the Armenian liturgy until the reform of Gregory the Illuminator. After Antioch we might mention Edessa and Nisibis as centers from which Christianity spread into the different provinces of the kingdom of Armenia.

Gregory the Illuminator (Loussavoritch, in Armenian) belonged to the royal race of Arsacids. When quite young he escaped the massacre of his family (A.D. 238), and took refuge in Roman territory. He studied in Caesarea, and returned to Armenia when the kingdom was reestablished under Tiridates II (261). After being persecuted for his faith, he attained to honor, and baptized the king and a large number of his subjects (A.D. 301). He substituted Armenian for Greek as the language of the liturgy, in order to have easier access to masses of the people, and created episcopal sees, at the head of which he placed, as titulars, converted pagan priests. He instituted ecclesiastical offices, making them hereditary in the sacerdotal families, and he created in his own family the supreme office of Catholicos. At first this title designated only the principal bishop of the country; later it came to mean an independent patriarch.

“Despite the fact that the Armenians have the oldest independent church in Christendom which was an important vehicle for the preservation of national identity over the centuries, religion has not been a driving force in modern [Armenian] nationalism….” writes Peter Rutland. The Armenian Church was not a strong advocate of independent nationhood until quite late. Armenian nationalism since the mid-nineteenth century has issued almost entirely from secular intelligentsia whose relationships to the church have often been strained, if not downright antagonistic. The conservatism of the Armenian church under Ottoman and Soviet domination produced a powerful strain of anticlericalism among Armenian nationalists. Should Armenia survive and succeed as an independent nation-state, it will be a secular society.

In a recent article “Crisis of the Armenian Apostolic Church,” Dr. V. Gurooian, a theologian, and a member of the Apostolic Church (belonging to the independent See of Cilicia) makes some important remarks, which in great part coincide with our own spiritual concern: “Since the late 1980, the Armenian Church has been aggressively claiming for itself the title of champion of Armenian peoplehood and has offered a sacral seal of blessing upon independent nationhood….however it faces a crisis of identity just as real and as deep as of the nation, in the first stages of transition from the former to the present regime, the Church is jockeying to retrieve and influence in the new political order. Craftily, church leaders are drawing upon deep historical memories and powerful cultural symbols to foster the recrudescence of national feelings and claim trusteeship over it. Yet if the Armenian Church persists in its old habit [the author thinks of her submission and collaboration with the former Soviet regime] of rendering obsequious legitimation to the state and persists in being the handmade of nationalism, it might commit the worst errors of national idolatry and render the Faith superfluous, indistinguishable from nationalism, pride of culture and patriotism. A secularized civil religion would replace Biblical faith with the church providing the solemn ceremony of national self-worship.….. As for my own church, (and this well may apply to other national churches), it is in serious jeopardy of missing the point entirely and falling to be a truthful witness to the faith in a land that was once Christianized but which is now a secular nation. Rather than giving itself over to Armenian nationalism the Armenian Church ought to be taking up a higher calling. The finest service that the church can render to the Armenian people in this hour is constantly submit the national vision to an evaluation and critique under the transcendence of the Triune God and through the Gospel story of our crucified and resurrected Lord” (see my article in Contra Mundum No. 13, Fall 1994, 62, 63).

The creed of the Armenian Church is identical with the pseudo-Athanasian Creed which was introduced into Armenia by the Syrians, and in the sixth century took the place of the Nicene Creed, in the fourteenth century another creed was much in use in the Armenian Church, it was a compilation of formulas borrowed from various creeds, and was current until the middle of the nineteenth century. The religious heads of the church formulated several times professions of faith. These were intended to complete, explain, and fix the meaning of the Armenian Creed.

“The following are the chief points of doctrine on which the creed of the Armenian Church differs from that of the other Christian communities (Orthodox: Western or Eastern). As regards the procession of the Holy Spirit, after much hesitation and even much indifference, the Armenian Church professes that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, and rejects the (Western) Filioque. The Armenian Church also rejects the decisions of Chalcedon Council relative to the incarnation; they are so among the Monophysites (along with the Coptic and the Jacobites of Oriental Christianity), admitting only the divine nature of Christ (Apollinarius of Laodicea, c. 390, and Euthyches d. 453).They deny Purgatory but they pray for the dead, consecrating to this devotion the day after Epiphany, Easter, the Transfiguration, the Assumption, the Exaltation of the Cross, and the day of the holy Vartanians” (see Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, ed., James Hastings, vol. 1, article “Armenia”).

Most important for our purpose is to remember the Monophysitism of the Armenian Church. From the very beginning of the Christological debate, and the consequent schism of churches, the Monophysites have been termed as heterodox churches in contrast to the orthodox ones (Latin or Greek). Curiously, in his recent message to the Armenian Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia (in Lebanon), at the occasion of his intronization, the present bishop of Rome, probably motivated by some ecumenical opportunism, addressed himself to the Armenian Church as an orthodox one! The consequences of the adoption of the heterodox (Christology, on the national destiny have been as disastrous as for its spiritual and religious growth. The remarkable pages of R. J. Rushdoony, in Foundations Of Social Order, have, among other significant points, drawn our attention to this negative theological interpretation. If the human nature of the Lord is denied, or even obscured, in favor of his divine nature, both in his state of humiliation and his state of exaltation, unavoidably, and necessarily, the church will have no ground for defense against state tyranny, (I am pleased to inform Chalcedon readers that this volume is currently being translated into Armenian, to be followed by some other major works of Rushdoony.) The history of both the nation and the church is an illustration of the results of a defective Christology; the people could not adequately resist either the Byzantine pressure or the resurging aggressive and conquering forces of Islam, in the absence of a solid Christology, the Armenian Church was supplied with a remarkably deep spirituality, unequalled among Oriental and Eastern Christendom. Among several authors of the highest spiritual, if not mystical brands, mention is due to Gregory of Nareg, whose Book of Prayer is certainly superior in content to Augustin’s Confessions, if not in style, at least in depth.

The missionary concern has been constant since its very beginning. Thus, as soon as Gregory the Illuminator completed his initial work of conversion and organization of Christianity in Armenia, he undertook the evangelization of two neighboring countries, Georgia and the Allans, or Aghouans, probably a related people of the modern Albanians.

At the end of the fourth century, after Mesrop Mashdotz, the priest who invented the Armenian alphabet in order to translate the Bible into the Armenian language, he undertook to give to the Georgians their own alphabet for the same purpose, as well as to the other neighboring people mentioned above.

A significant contribution of the Armenian Church to the mission has been totally ignored. Thus the endeavors deployed among the Asian hordes of Mongols and Tatars, after the invasion of the territory, and despite the indescribable atrocities to which they have been subjected during the late Middle Ages, Armenians undertook to convert those tribes, at least their Khans, or princes. These latter had manifested a genuine interest towards the Christian Faith. There had been real conversions, until the moment when the two mainstream Christian churches, with their hereditary and vicious conflicts entered into the scene, thus destroying all possibilities of missionary outreach among the Asian tribes. The latter eventually embraced Islam to the doom of later generations and to our own social, political, and cultural, to say nothing religious modern, predicament. Indeed, Western Christianity has many sins to confess, also, despite its “orthodoxy.” Naturally, in addition to this missionary disaster one has to count also the national and political doom which fell upon Armenia, which lost its political independence at the end of the fourteenth century.

Reformation In Armenia?

The above-mentioned few features may help us clarify our Reformed position. What are the prospects of Reformation in Armenia?

I will venture a plausible hypothesis. The obstacles will lie neither in sects or cults, nor in the Apostolic Church. The latter is eager to benefit from any and every positive, orthodox and Biblical contribution we may offer. Seventy years of Soviet regime has considerably weakened her position. Thus, I am happy to inform my readers of the rather positive reception of my broadcast by Bishops of the church. This is rejoicing not just for the sake “of my ministry” but for the cause of the Gospel as such. Yet I need also, more than anywhere else, wisdom and pastoral care in order not uselessly to trouble the “status quo.” it is not time to jeopardize God-given opportunities.

Problems will arise from the presence of “evangelicals,” the least receptive of “Reformed Faith and Ethics.”

The Reformed Broadcast ministry reaches far-off villages and trains people. The official state radio station where currently we have one weekly 15-minute program is requesting a second one. The cost will not exceed an annual 10,000 U.S. dollars! Almost nothing compared to so many congregational budgets and money wasted in our wealthy churches. (Take for instance the congregation where I attend worship; a couple of years ago it spent $650,000 to expand its building facilities, in the meantime, while I was still in the French Broadcast ministry I would receive something such as $3,000 a year as a regular support! What a sad missioscopy [that of a self-centered church!])

In addition to the broadcast ministry, I am involved in the production of Reformed literature. The translation of Calvin’s Institutes remains a priority in my mind. Distribution of cassettes, TV programs (we are offered free time on state TV stations), training of people with correspondence courses, training future ministers in Reformed seminaries, are among my plans.

The Pressing Need

Needless to say that such a ministry cannot be run just by an isolated individual. Teamwork seems more and more indispensable. How to start such a solid team, is a matter of both prayer and thinking. Just recently the University of Yerevan, the capital, inaugurated its first School of Theology. My joy turned to utter disappointment in learning that some “French “radical liberal theologians will be invited to teach Biblical subjects! Already Rudolf Bultmann has been translated into Armenian! What a dim prospect for reform with such theologies! The prospect for Reformation is not merely a matter of concern, it is also a matter of mobilizing the energies of all those who would like to see very serious and solid work implemented there. Reformed people need to double and triple their efforts to show both the superiority and the Biblical seriousness of their faith, life and doctrine, I will pray that while the Lord gives me the strength and the means I will witness to His works and proclaim the Kingdom according to our Reformed understanding, I also hope that I will not lack the necessary resources.

One of the strong motivations of my Armenian outreach is the fact that a Christian Armenia, reformed by the Spirit and the Word, will once again become a bulwark against an aggressive Islam, like it has been in the past. Only this time better equipped for such a task and mission! In a Reformed Christian Armenia what tremendous benefits could result on all levels for the people of Armenia, for Armenian believers, for social and political and international improvements, to say nothing of the whole region! I am thankful to all those earnest Reformed people who have responded to our appeal, and faithfully support our ministry. They share our burden as well also our joy. Warmest greeting to all of them, deepest Christian gratitude for taking such an important part in the ministry of reforming individuals, churches, a nation, for the glory of the Triune God and the up-building of His genuinely Apostolic and Holy Church.

The Reformed believer may rejoice at the fact that in a sense a modern State can act as the defender of Faith, were it not for the nature of its relation with the “official” church, a relation which sadly, reminds us of the CONCORDATS which were signed between the Roman Catholic Church and the Fascist regime in Italy or the Franco government in Spain, although that “relation” has not yet, officially, been stated in Armenia. Our aim here is merely to indicate that both church and state have been busy in using legitimate or non-legitimate means to restrict, or fight openly against the above mentioned “religious” groups. Undeniably, in the long run, a sectarian activity will prove itself to be detrimental to the social order, in the same manner as in the past. It will deeply affect the state of affairs of nation and government, as dangerously as it will corrupt the true Faith. In Armenia, evangelicals have been sometimes assimilated to the most sectarian and heretical groups. Just recently, in an overzealous endeavor by uncontrolled police forces, evangelical churches and organizations were the victims of serious harassments. Officially the government and the church expressed their regrets for those events.1