Father Ararat Poghosyan Poghosyan.
"Recently, some politicians have ahead of two unoccupied allegations that the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church has been established by Trdat by the Great in 301, by a state decision and 301-372. He was under the influence of the General Church, independent only during the reign of the King of the Pope, again by the state decision.
These views do not correspond to historiography at all, they distort the information provided by the sources and lacks a logical basis. First of all, the information provided by the sources and the studies on the basis testify and prove that the process of spreading Christianity in Armenia was gradual. According to sources, St. Thaddeus and St. Christian communities and episcopal seats have been established in Armenia in the 1st century, and in 301 By the King's command, Christianity was simply considered obligatory. Therefore, it is unacceptable to talk about the "establishment of a church by a state decision". The Church is theological based on Jesus Christ, and the role of King could only be to recognize and support the existing church and religion. In other words, according to the logic of the claimants, it turns out that if the King of Trdat was proclaimed any other religion as state, what was the founding of the Armenian Church to be postponed? It's funny. Please explain if the Armenian Church has created King Trdat, then how do you explain that he or she has published two strict proclamation to persecute Christians before proclaiming the Christianity? How could he fight against something if he had not yet created it? It's funny.
Second, the claim that the Armenian Church was under the subordination of the general Church and then "independent of the state decision", not only distorts the facts, but also contradicts medieval sources. In fact, three of the 4th century Catholicos were ordained in Caesarea, which was natural at the time of church rules and does not mean political or church dependence. At the time, if the ordination was made in another episcopal seat, it did not imply subordination. Otherwise, we must assume that the kings raised in foreign king also lost their independence, which is absurd. And during the reign of the king of the Pope, the Church received "Independence", but the opposite, there were serious contradictions between the King and the Church, which proves that the idea of independence with the state decision has no reason.
Finally, church independence is approved by the decisions of the cosmic and local congregations, not by the order of any King. This is unanimous both Armenian and foreign medieval historians, modern Armenian and foreign scientists.
Therefore, the claims that the Armenian Apostolic Church has been created or independent by the state decision, not only irresponsible historical distortions, but also contradict the Christian teaching about the essence of the Church. The founder of the Church is Jesus Christ, and his own course is conditioned by religious, not secular decisions.
PS: Those who claim that the King of Catholicos has not yet been the King of Pope, we must disappoint.
The word Catholicos meets 5 times near Agatangeghos. For example, "... St. Catholicos Gigoriya gave off ..." And 10 times, near Pavstos Buzand, when talking about the great Catholicos Nerses, "Catholicos Armenians Zorses".
PS: No Roman or the Byzantine Emperor created the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Church, did not create a Russian Orthodox Church, no English King did not create a Georgian Orthodox Church, and no Armenian kings created the Armenian Apostolic Church.
