Armenian clerics reject court order to recognize defrocked bishop

Clergymen from the Masyatsotn (Masis) Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church have publicly rejected a court decision they say obliges them to recognize a defrocked former bishop as their diocesan leader, calling the ruling an unlawful interference in church affairs.

In a statement released on Monday, 19 priests of the diocese said they “express their disagreement and serious concern” over an interim decision by the First Instance Court of General Jurisdiction in Armenia’s Armavir Province that effectively requires them to acknowledge former Bishop Gevorg Saroyan as head of the diocese.

The statement highlighted that Saroyan had been defrocked by the church leadership and had reverted to lay status under the name Arman Saroyan.

The priests argued that episcopal authority in the Armenian Apostolic Church is conferred through ordination and exercised only within the framework of canonical order and communion with the church. Once a bishop is defrocked and returned to lay status, he loses the right to exercise episcopal authority, including governance of a diocese.

“That reality cannot be altered by any secular decision,” the statement said, adding that diocesan leadership is a spiritual ministry requiring canonical rank, authorization and recognition by church authorities.

The clergy also framed the issue as one of conscience and religious freedom, stating that no court or secular authority has the right to compel a priest to violate his oath of fidelity to church canons and spiritual obligations.

They said there was a “serious incompatibility” between the court’s interim ruling and their rights to freedom of conscience and belief as guaranteed under Armenian law and the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Armenian legislation recognizes the self-governance of the Armenian Apostolic Church and, the priests said, does not permit state interference in the church’s internal affairs, including decisions to defrock clergy or appoint and remove them from ecclesiastical office.

They warned that recognizing a person without canonical rank as a spiritual leader could place clergy and parishioners at risk of canonical sanctions under church law.

Citing these grounds, the signatories said implementation of the court’s decision was “objectively impossible”, as it would contradict the sacred obligations they undertook at ordination.

“Regardless of the various forms of pressure exerted on us, we cannot accept any anti-church, anti-canonical and unlawful imposition by secular authorities that would lead us onto a non-canonical path,” reads the statement.