ARMENIA
737
ARMEIOA
the "throne of St. Thaddeus". Although logondary,
this tradition witnesses that Christianity at a rather
early date passed from Syria over into Armenia.
The letter of Meriizan to I ionysiiis of Alexandria
(a. d. 248-265) confirms us in the belief that Chris-
tianity had already penetrated into Armenia before
the time of St. (iregory the Illuminator. However,
it is around St. Gregory that the story of Cliristianity's
growth in Armenia centres; for in him Armenia had
its apostle. Born of the royal stock of the Arsacides,
and brought in early infancy to CVsarea of Cappa-
docia becau.se of a Persian persecution of the Ar-
menians, he was there instructed in the Christian
Faith. About 2(51 he returned to Armenia and after
much persecution brought the king and a large num-
ber of the [)eoplc over to Christianity. Consecrated
Metropolitan of .\rmcnia (according to Cardinal llcr-
genrcether) in 302, by Leontius, Archbishop of
Cffsarea, he took up his residence at Aclitichat.
Under his influence the Faith began to spread
throughout the land. Priests from the Greek Empire
aided him in the work of conversion. When Chris-
tianity had gained a good headway in the country,
the metropolitan turned liis attention to the organiza-
tion of the Church. The national language replaced
the Syriac in the liturgy. To win over the converted
pagan priests more fully, he cho.sc from their sons.
after educating them, the occupants of a dozen
episcopal sees created by himself. Thus the higli
dignities were given to the sacerdotal families, which
retained them for some time. The office of cathol-
icos or patriarch was for a considerable period con-
fined to the family of St. Gregory. A beautiful
legend, lacking, however, a historic basis, tells of a
trip by him to Rome. His missionaries went as far
north!us Georgia and Albania.
In nil Maximinus began war on the struggling Church of .\rmenia, but met with many repulses. About this time St. Gregory passed away, having spent the last years of his life in solitude. After his death we find the progress of the infant Church stayed by internal di.ssensions. At the time apostates were numerous, and in their eagerness to subjugate the country the Persians lent everj' encouragement to perversion. Meanwhile, successors filled the office of metropolitan once lield by St. Gregory. His youngest son, Aristaces, took the i>ost of liis father and was present at the Council of Nic^a. In 363 and 372 the Armenian episcopate took an active part in the affairs of the Christian world. St. Hasil of CiBsarea visited a great part of Armenia and cor- rected many at)uscs. Led on by his example, the Catholicos Nerses in the Synod of Aclitichat (c. 36.5), the first authentic Armenian synod, laid the founda- tions of the first hospitals and other charitable in- stitutions for the country. He gave an impetus to monastic life and promulgated numerous laws on marriage and the observance of fasts. These re- forms, showing a Greek influence, arrayed against the catholicos the king and the nobles, and thus we meet the first recorded instance of that spirit of national independence and intolerance of foreign influence which is so important a factor in the history of the .\rinenian Church. An anticatholicos was appointed by the king, and soon Nerses died a vio- lent death. Then a fierce anti-religious reaction set in. State endowments were in part withdrawn, numbers of the clergy fell away, and charitable institutions were allowed to cnimble to ruins. Pagan practices came into use everj-where and the Christianity of but a few years before seemed to have died out. The vacant see of the catholicos was fille<l by the king, and the coveted [xisilion went to lousik, of the family of the Aghbianos. rival to that of St. Gregory. St. Hiusil clamoured for the rights of his Cxsarean see, but, though supported by the older clergy of Armenia, his claims were not allowed, and
the consecration of the Armenian catholicos was thus
lost forever to the Church of Ca;sarea.
The religious autonomy of the Armenian Church was begun thus. .Shortly after this event occurred the death of .Manuel the .Mamikonian, which was the signal for Home and Persia to divide Armenia be- tween them. Of the country, which both had lost and recoiK)uered, and were now parcelling out (387) four-fiftlis went to Persia. .\s a consequence, persecution was immediat<?ly raised against the ('liristian Church, and the Christians were forced to take to the mountains. The man of the hour for the Christian cause was the catholicos, Isaac the (Jreat, the son of Nerses. .\bout him rallied all parties. Even during his exile the people remained attaclicd to him. Honeatli liis care the Armenian Chiinli flourislied in spite of difficulties, ecclesiastical discipline wa.s enforced, and the intellectual standard of the people raised. His death in 439 was a great lo.ss to the cau.se of Christianity in Armenia. The Persian m;usters continued to leave no stone un- turned to stifle Christianity and to replace it by Parseeism. The Armenians, however, remained con- stant in the face of persecution. Another foe at- tacked them, and that was heresy. Gnosticism in the .>;econd century and Paulicianism in the sixth and seventli centuries had adherents among the Ar- menians, but the chief heresies to be mentioned in this connection are Nestorianism and .Monophysitism. The works of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodorus of Tarsus, which were filled with Nestorian ideas, were translated into Armenian, and through them endeavours were made to di.sseminate the teachings of Nestorius. Kabulas of Edessa and Acacius warned the bishops against these writings. A synod was held and two priests were despatclied to Constanti- nople to ask of Proclus what was the right position in the matter. In reply came the famous "Docu- ment for the Armenians" which was held in high honour by the Armenian ecclesiastical authorities, and which exerted a powerful influence on their theology. Henceforth the Armenians were bitter opponents of Nestorianism. But where Nestorian- ism failed, Monopliysitism succeeded. The Council of Clialce<lon, which condemned that error, was held while the Armenians were fighting against the Persians' endeavour to crush out Christianity. As soon as they heard of the council and of the action it had taken, opposition aro.se against it, and the charge of the Monophysites that Chalcedon had but renewed the Nestorian error was readily Ijelieved. Monophysitism was accepted, and the decrees of Chalcedon rejected. The attitude of the Armenians in this entire matter was dictated not so much by a love of orthodo.xy as by the desire of promoting the welfare of their countrj'; for, by recei\nng Mono- physitism, they hoped that Greek favour would be gained and Persian domination more easily thrown olT. Writings were published in Armenia against C'halccdon and appeals were urged for a return to Apostolic doctrine. The Catliolicos Papken in the Synod of Vagharchapat (491) solemnly condemned in the presence of the Armenian, Iberian, and .Al- banian bishops the Council of Chalcedon. Within half a centurj-, this condemnation was reaffirmed by the two Councils of Tvin. the second of which was held in 5.52, and fixed 11 July, 552, as the beginning of the Armenian era. The (Sreeks, having returned to orthodoxy, tried several times to lead back the Armenians also from Monophysitism. In 571 the Catholicos John went with part of his clergy to Constantinople, where he diea, after making an act of fidelity to orthodoxy. This incident had no effect on Armenia. When in 591 the Greek em- peror Maurice, having taken most of Armenia from the Persians, in\nted the Catholicos, Moses I. to convoke at Constantinople the bishops and nobles
