Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s recently published “roadmap for renewing the Armenian Apostolic Church” marks another step of state interference in the internal affairs of the Church.
Pashinyan presents this roadmap as a tool for modernization, openness, and efficiency.
But the very fact that a government leader drafts such a document contradicts the constitutional guarantees of autonomy for religious institutions and the special status of the Armenian Apostolic Church.
The Roadmap for “Renewing” the Church
Pashinyan proposes a four-step roadmap, which outlines the following sequence:
- Election of a Locum Tenens — according to the existing internal mechanisms of the Church.
- Adoption of a new Statute, addressing:
a) moral standards for clergy and mechanisms to ensure them,
b) financial transparency and guarantees,
c) the need for depoliticization and safeguards for it,
d) compliance with Armenia’s Tax Code, including the return of taxes paid by the Church,
e) social guarantees for clergy (pension contributions, income-tax refunds, social credits, healthcare insurance). - Election of a new Catholicos in accordance with the new Statute.
- The Statute is discussed and approved by a competent ecclesiastical body. If needed, the Government provides “consultative support.”
What Does the Term “Հայաստանյաց” Hide? A Shift in Meaning
In the roadmap, Pashinyan avoids the canonical term “Հայ Առաքելական Եկեղեցի” (Armenian Apostolic Church).
Instead, he uses “Հայաստանյաց Առաքելական Եկեղեցի” — “Apostolic Church of Armenia”.
Linguistically, the difference is small.
Canonically — it is a completely different structure.
The Armenian Apostolic Church is a unified, supranational institution, including the diaspora, foreign dioceses, and the historical centers in Jerusalem and Constantinople.
The wording used in the document isolates only the Church operating within the Republic of Armenia.
This means:
- The reform targets the “Armenian nucleus” of the Church — the segment the state can influence.
- A historically global institution becomes a structure limited to the borders of one state.
- Etchmiadzin loses its role as the spiritual center of the entire nation and becomes an administrative body regulating religious life only inside Armenia — under state oversight.
Consequences: Fragmentation and Loss of Unity
In practice, the Church becomes fragmented.
The “Armenian-based Church” becomes subject to state-driven reforms, while churches outside Armenia keep autonomy but lose their organic connection with the Mother See.
This leads to long-term risks:
- Diaspora dioceses will create their own administrative models.
- Formal autonomy will gradually turn into factual independence.
- The diaspora will lose the unified institution that preserved its connection to the homeland for centuries.
Churches in Los Angeles or Buenos Aires, once detached from Etchmiadzin, will shift toward local political and cultural contexts.
Without a central authority, each parish will speak with its own voice.
Where unity disappears, weakening becomes inevitable.
Loss of Identity Becomes Unavoidable
Over time, this may cause a deeper transformation.
A community that loses connection with its roots eventually loses the ability to preserve and transmit its religious, cultural, and national identity.
Generations raised in churches no longer connected to Etchmiadzin will identify themselves through local cultures — French, American, Argentine.
To be continued…
Lilit Avetisyan