Gramsci in Armenia: State-Church Relations in the Post-Soviet Armenia

Antonio Gramsci: A theory of hegemony

The Armenian Apostolic Church has dominant position in the Republic of Armenia and Christianity is considered as a generally-accepted religion. Christianity is one of the important components of Armenian national narrative, and it has played an essential role in the maintenance of Armenian identity during different historical ages. The Armenian Church is connected with the society in a way that means that the church has the potential to be transformed into organizer of various societal mobilizations. In this context, the creation of the cooperative relationships with the church is an official strategy for the republic. The apparatus uses every possible tool to provide the reproduction of the state’s ideologies. Indeed, the church has enormous potential to influence society. The relationships between the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian Apostolic Church are based on educational, cultural and social ties of collaboration. The above-mentioned phenomena are one of the various reasons, which allow the Apostolic Church to play an essential socializing role. In this context, the position of the Republic of Armenia is quite difficult. The dilemma is that the state, on the one hand, should act so carefully in order not to harm the activities of the Apostolic Church, and on the other hand, not to refuse from its international commitments towards the establishment of religious freedom in the society. According the law of the Republic of Armenia on the Freedom of Conscience and on Religious Organizations (National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia, 1995), ‘the Republic of Armenia recognizes the exclusive historical mission of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church as a national church, in the spiritual life, development of the national culture and preservation of the national identity of the people of Armenia’, and simultaneously guarantees the freedom of activities for all religious organizations. In spite of the fact that during the previous two decades, different alternative religious organizations were founded in Armenia, the Republic of Armenia provides official state support to the Armenian Apostolic Church. State–Church relationships are defined by the Armenian state as cooperation towards the maintenance of national identity and security.

In order to gain in-depth understanding about the phenomenon, we will employ some key concepts of Antonio Gramsci. According to Gramscian analyses, the church has two crucial functions: it can support the hegemony of existing ruling classes, or it can establish new hegemony (Sawchuk, 1997: 40). For the state, religion is a unique source of social power, which plays a central role in establishing cooperative relationships among citizens and in gathering individuals around collective actions. In the Gramscian sense, this phenomenon is a process of hegemony formation. In this context, the dominant religion and church become political tools in the hands of the state to solve societal confrontations and conflicts. This phenomenon Gramsci calls the ‘historic bloc’ (Roger, 1999: 96) according to which dominant ideologies of a state combine subordinated and allied classes tending to establish common identity. The spreading of ideologies takes place through the help of intellectuals. Intellectuals play a decisive role in the creation of a historic bloc, and because of their connection with social classes, Gramsci called them ‘organic intellectuals’ who act as the conceptual and organizational force for their social classes (Gramsci, 1971: 3). Organic intellectuals perform a set of cultural, social and organizational processes aimed at creating harmony between the interests of superordinate and subordinate classes, and to unify class and historic bloc members into a common identity (Stephen, 1993: 57–58). In this context, the clergymen are represented as organic intellectuals, who are created to deliver generally accepted ideas, beliefs and aspirations of a particular social class.

Freedom of Religion: The Relationships Between the State and the Church

The freedom of people’s consciences is recognized and guaranteed by various international conventions. The freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, and according to UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article two:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. (United Nations, 1948)

Accordingly, the 18th article guarantees that:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. (United Nations, 1948)

On 25 January 2001, the Republic of Armenia became a full member of the Council of Europe and took necessary steps towards the implementation of commitments undertaken upon its accession to the Council of Europe (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia, n.d.) which included principles of 1952 convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights, 2012). It is essential to say that law of the Republic of Armenia on the Freedom of Conscience and on Religious Organizations (National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia, 1991) guarantees religious freedom in the Republic of Armenia.

Some characteristics of the law were criticizes by different international organizations, human rights NGOs etc. For instance, the U.S. Department of State (2012) prepared the International Religious Freedom Report for 2011, and in the part of Armenia, it mentions that although the constitution establishes separation of church and state, the law grants certain privileges to the Armenian Apostolic Church that are not available to other religious groups. The example of this can be the existence of permanent church representatives in schools, orphanages, hospitals, prisons, army, etc. In 2009, a multidimensional research was conducted by Collaboration for Democracy Centre, which investigates all characteristics of the Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations (Danielyan et al., 2009).

The concepts of freedom and equality being the inseparable components of democracy emphasize not only the importance of societal freedom but also religious freedom. The religious freedom is quite important for respect of human rights. In order to establish stability in a society, it is necessary to achieve societal consensus, in which the idea of tolerance plays a central role, so the religious tolerance is one of the important preconditions of societal stability. Under the condition of post-Soviet democratization processes, the Armenian Apostolic Church as a social, cultural, educational and national institution, could not restrict the operation of alternative religious organizations. Any possible demonstration of religious intolerance of the Apostolic Church can be perceived as a violation of human rights. John Rawls goes on to say that in order to guarantee equal status of citizens and secure their sense of self respect, it is necessary to have generally accepted religion or shared system of beliefs (Freeman, 2003: 23) which must not restrict the freedom of religion, of association, of speech, use of private property, etc., because they form the core of the protected liberties (Freeman, 2003: 64). Thus, democracy requires the establishment of religious tolerance in the society in order to highlight the existence of equality, liberty and freedom. The Armenian official support to Armenian Apostolic Church under the existence of alternative religious organizations questions the principles of toleration, which is central to the concept of democracy. So, in this context, how does the Republic of Armenia accept its legitimacy? The answer of the question can be found in the work of J Rawls’ (2000) The Law of Peoples, in which he investigates the dichotomy of liberal and non-liberal societies in terms of toleration and cooperation. The concept of human decency as a condition of basic human rights and justice can approve the privileges of Armenian Apostolic Church in contrast to other religious organizations given by the constitutional law. Rawls defines ‘decent hierarchical society’ as one that is peaceful and ‘has a “just consultation hierarchy,” which represents each major segment of society and which is seen as legitimate in the eyes of its people’ (quoted in Freeman, 2003: 45) which in turn may not affirm the equality of its members if there is a single comprehensive doctrine in the society. In the Rawlsian sense, the Christian religion of Armenians can be defined as a type of single comprehensive doctrine, which has influence on the government and its social policy (Rawls, 2000: 64). In this context, the decent society can reject the separation of state and church as long as it provides a degree of freedom to practice dissenting religions (Freeman, 2003: 46). In order to achieve legitimate democratic decisions in the society, it is necessary to provide reasonable agreement between all citizens. The idea of civil society and intellectuals is assumed to be crucial in containing any conflictual phenomenon and establishing organized consensus in the society. The cooperation of clergy (church) and leading classes (bureaucracy and oligarchy) in Armenia is needed to win allies in establishing close relationships between leading and subordinated classes. Thus, it could be argued that the ruling elite need the clergy, and yet, the converse is also true. That is to say, it would be wrong to assume that the church policy is ultimately inferior to the state policy and that church, to put it bluntly, is a mere tool in the hands of state. As a case in point, the role of Armenian Apostolic Church, in political processes of Armenia, does not restrict only by its ritualistic activity, such as when the president during the oath of office was blessed by Catholicos Garegin II, but it also has a decisive role in providing internal legitimacy for parliamentarian and presidential elections. Therefore, the government of Armenia, in its turn as a proof of close cooperation between the State and the Church, undertook to grant various tax exemptions for Armenian Apostolic Church. The political discourse on strengthening the linkage between church and state became stronger than ever under the presidency of Serzh Sargsyan. ⁵ Several months after the 2013 presidential election, the chief of ruling Republican Party, President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan delivered this welcoming address at the opening of the Bishops’ Synod of the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church:

It’s been twenty-two years since we have restored our independent Armenian statehood; however in the Armenian national life the national preservation role of our Church continues to be important just as much. Today, more than ever we have to strengthen spiritual values which link us together and make us one united Armenian nation. Through the power enshrined in our Constitution, the Republic of Armenia recognizes the exceptional mission of the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church in the spiritual life of the Armenian nation, development of our national culture and preservation of the national identity. It is with great pleasure that I state close cooperation between the State and the Church and our ability to complement each other in the resolution of our national issues. (Statements and the messages of President of Republic of Armenia, 2013)

Indeed, such kinds of manifestations towards the establishment of mutual relationships with the Apostolic Church are strategically significant for the Armenian ruling authority. It shall also be argued that the state and the church have mutual interests that effectively shape their joint policy.

Armenian Apostolic Church and Schools

According to Gramsci, church and schools are the most essential cultural organizations of every country, which have the potential to establish new hegemony (Torres, 1998: 13–14). The educational system is the most influential space for socialization and cultural reproduction. The Republic of Armenia emphasizes the necessity of deepening the relations with the Armenian Apostolic Church. On 22 September 2002, Armenia’s Catholicos Patriarch Garegin II and the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, Andranik Margaryan, signed an agreement, according to which a new subject, called Armenian Church History, would be added to the educational curriculum of public schools (Etchmiadzin Monthly, 2002: 37).

The former Prime Minister, Andranik Margaryan, thinking about the agreement, stated that the book of Armenian Church History is essential for the protection of Armenian children’s spirit from denominators, because the Armenian Church historically played a decisive role in the maintenance of the Armenian nation and culture, and that the book will provide children with a national education, which in turn will contribute to the further development of the state (Etchmiadzin Monthly, 2002: 37). Thus, since 2003, a new subject called Armenian Church History is being taught in schools (Danielyan et al., 2009: 22), and church representatives are allowed to regularly hold meetings with teachers and pupils. During the meetings, church representatives hold discussions about some characteristics of Bible and Armenian Church History. The teaching of Armenian Church history was criticized by various peoples, NGOs etc. For instance, the research conducted in 2009 states that this violates the principles of the ‘Law on Education’, which states that education in the Republic of Armenia must be of a secular nature (Danielyan et al., 2009: 23). Thus, the educational cooperation with schools provides the Apostolic Church with the space for the spreading and reproduction of its ideologies. The History of Armenian Church book propagates not only Christian ideologies of the Apostolic Church, but also it supports state ideologies. There are various sentences concerning the state ideologies in 10th-grade textbook of Armenian Church History: ‘The highest level of nationhood is the nation-state. The latter is the embodiment of national sovereignty and self-determination in their homeland, the implementation of the right of existence of independent state’ (Parsamyan et al., 2004: 61). The book states that in order to have national sovereignty, it is necessary to have certain national values and norms, and among those, the values of the Armenian Apostolic Church play a primary role. To some extent, the materials of the book create religious intolerance among Armenian children. The historical examples tend to influence the consciences of pupils. For example, we can read the following sentience in the 6th-grade Armenian Church History textbook: ‘The Arabs not only didn’t persecute Paulician movement ⁶ , but also supported it because it deconstructed the foundations of the church and the unity of nation’ (Kosyan et al., 2013: 105). Through this historical example, the authors instigate the pupils to not follow any other religious ideologies, because the latter was directed by the enemies of Armenia against the unity of the Armenian nation. The 9th-grade textbook of Armenian Church history tries to make Armenian Apostolic Church as an inseparable component of Armenian political life from the 19th century to the present day. It highlights the ‘heroic and diplomatic’ role of clergies in Armenian national liberation struggles during the Armenian Genocide and Artsakh (or Nagorno Karabakh) liberation war in 1988–1994, and world military operations during the Russo-Persian War of 1826–1828, the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878, World War I and World War II (Ghukasyan et al., 2013).

The book gives the Armenian Apostolic Church a unique opportunity to enter into the primary socialization sphere ⁷ rather than the secondary socialization sphere. The socialization provides a unique mechanism of reproduction that plays a central role in establishing hegemony in the society. Hegemony is a kind of ideology in which the language plays a conceptual and organizational role. One of the best indicators of thinking is the language. If the ruling classes influence or take control over people’s thinking, then they can predict how they can speak and how they can think. In the Foucauldian sense, the interdependence of power, knowledge and language shapes power and politics of a certain hegemon. According to Foucault, in order to exclude the warlike and coercive relationships from the power relations of governance, it is necessary to structure a set of actions upon actions of others (Foucault, 1982: 221). So, the dominant language of society shapes the knowledge, which in its turn depends on the power of ruling classes. The relations set up unique system of surveillance, which functions through the discipline.

Discipline as a mechanism of power ‘makes’ individuals by regulating the behavior of individuals (Foucault, 1984: 188). Schools are among the most influential spaces, through which power can be exercised. The presence of church in schools can be defined as a discipline in which the state’s power is exercised. Schools are fields of cultural production, in which the role of church representatives is crucial. Throughout the disciplinary production, the moral judgments of children, in terms of good and bad, truth and falsity, is intermediated by the influence of Christian ideologies. The mediating role of church representatives in various educational spheres is to socialize society. It can be considered a policy towards the establishment of control over societal thinking, in which the Christian moral ideologies are defined (represented) as a ‘language’. The delivery of such ideologies among Armenian schoolchildren is supposed to transform future generation into the subjects. Foucault goes on to say that all types of subjection are derived phenomena which are result of economic and social processes: forces of production, class struggle and ideological structures that determine the form of subjectivity (Foucault, 1982: 213). By the involvement of clergy in Armenian schools, the Armenian Apostolic Church take part in the citizen-making processes that cannot be studied outside of ideological structures and class struggle. For the ruling classes (state), it is necessary to educate future generations in accordance with their ideologies in order to provide reproduction and the continuity of the hegemonic regime principles.

Chaplain Service in Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia

The idea of military chaplain service is not a contemporary phenomenon and it emerges from the times of early Christianity. During the reforms of Roman Emperor Constantine (306–337), Christianity became the dominant religion of the Roman Empire, which transformed social, cultural and political structures of the Roman Empire (Humphries, 2006: 209). Christians ruled various administrative institutions and the clergy were even involved in the juridical systems. Christianity enters also into the Roman Army, which was one of the key institutions of the Roman Empire, and for the first time, military chaplain service was appeared in the Roman Army (Jones, 1953: 239–240).

The spiritual service in the post-Soviet Armenian Army was established by the deceased Defense Minister Vazgen Sargsyan and former Catholicos Garegin I in 1997 (Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Armenia, n.d.). The veteran of the Azeri-Karabakh conflict, Father Vrtanes Abrahamyan, was appointed as the first chaplain of the Armenian Army (The Armenian Church, Mother See of Holy Echmiadzin, n.d.). In 2000, a charter was signed between the Armenian Apostolic Church and the armed forces of the Republic of Armenia, according to which church representatives were allowed to regularly hold meetings with soldiers in order to provide Christian and national-patriotic education (Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Armenia, n.d.). The Armenian Apostolic Church created the Head of Army Eparchy (Banaki temi arajnord), which regulates relations with the Army. This is an important phenomenon because the Armenian Apostolic Church participates in national security formation processes. This means that church will work in accordance with the state’s ideologies, because national security is the essential requirement to maintain the survival of the state. They encourage soldiers to fight against the enemy in order to protect not only their nation and families, but also statehood, because the state supports the Armenian Apostolic Church which in turn guarantees the unity of the Armenian nation. Thus in this way clergymen become the agents of state ideologies, through which state hegemony not only maintains its continuity but also achieves its legitimacy.

The Armenian Apostolic Church establishes its existence in the army by referring to the past archetypes. The defensive role of Armenian Apostolic Church stretches back to archetypical text of Eghishe (Eliše), the History of Vardan and the Armenian War (see Thomson, 1982). His history refers to religious war (rebellion) of Christian Armenia against Sasanian Iran in 450–451 A. D. The war, led by Vardan Mamikonyan and clergy (Catholicos Hovsep, Priest Ghevont [Leontius], etc.), was against those who attempted to destroy the Christianity and Armenian Christian identity (Bishop Kaloustian, 1969: 24). So the Armenian Apostolic Church was functioning not only as a religious institution, but also as an institution acting against the elimination of the essence of Armenianess. Through the national leadership of Armenian Church, Christianity became the modus vivendi for Armenians for many centuries. The essential concept that lies in the historical text of priest Eghishe (Eliše) is the idea of collective identity or covenant (ukht), accepted by the army, church and society, and which involves both political and religious loyalty (Thomson, 1988/1989: 42). In this context, the covenant was an affirmation to each member of the society to stay just to the teaching the Christian ideologies. Thus, the Armenian Apostolic Church represented itself as a supporter of Christian faith and the guardian of national integrity (Thomson, 1988/1989: 42). The archetypes of St. Vardan and church leaders as war pioneers became a symbolic power for national security and identity. The themes of Eghishe (Eliše) have maintained their relevance even in the 21st century. The historical archetypes of the Armenian Church became the legitimating source for the contemporary Armenian Apostolic Church to provide its presence in national security formation processes. In this context, we want to emphasize the phenomenon of military parade. First and foremost, the military parade has great influence on the strengthening of the spirit of a nation and the maintenance of national security. On 21 September 2011, clergy of Armenian Apostolic Church marched in a military parade held in honor of the 20-year anniversary of the independence of the Republic of Armenia (Armenia Parades Military Might on Independence Day, 2011). Thus, the military parade, as a manifestation of national unity, functions as a ritual or symbolic power of identification between the Armenian army, state and nation. Of course, the symbolic power has a tremendous influence on the people’s consciousness. Symbolic powers usually function as a legitimizing forces towards certain visions of ideas. According to Bourdieu, symbolic power is a power of ‘world making’, which, being a unique driving force for the creation of social space, tends to create ‘distinctions’ in any society in terms of union and separation, association and dissociation (Bourdieu 1989: 14–25). Under the light of state–church relations, the Holy Echmiadzin uses the symbolism as a way to influence social consciousness. Thus, the surroundings of the Mother Cathedral of Holy Echmiadzin, with their architectural symbolic power, serve as an ideological space to reinforce not only Christian and national, but also state and security, relational ideologies. The example of the said can be the monument dedicated to the ‘Armenian Victorious Army’ in front of the gates of the Cathedral. The embodiment of Christian cross, sword of protection and national ornaments, are represented as an architectural mix of Christian national-state archetypes.

The Presence of Armenian Apostolic Church in Prisons

According to Gramscian idea, the cooperation between the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Prisons of the Republic of Armenia can be defined as a process aimed at the formation of the historic bloc between the superordinate and subordinate ‘classes’. The Armenian Apostolic Church is the only religious institution that has chapels in various detention facilities (Consecration of Vardashen Detention Facility Chapel, 2013). There is an agreement according to which church representatives can regularly offer religious services and hold meetings with prisoners. In this way, church representatives tends to establish consensus between the oppressors and the oppressed. This cooperation gives the church an opportunity to be engaged in processes of re-socialization. According to Foucault, sociology prisons are re-socialization tools (Foucault, 1979: 30) which aim to return deflected members of society to the healthy society. According to the psychology of prisoners, the state, and especially the policy system, are their main enemies. The church representatives organize various discussions with prisoners and tend to establish consensus between them and the state. Among the interests of spiritual service in the prisons is the establishment of the ‘divine truth’. Clergymen as intellectuals are trying to influence prisoners’ thinking in accordance with the Christian values. According to the Bible, people are punished because of their sins, and they were sent to jail because they did not follow God’s commandments. Through the Bible’s writing, church representatives act inside the individuals which gives prisoners an opportunity to figure out his or her life’s errors. Thus, church representatives not only affirm moral values among prisoners, but also support the actions of state system. This is an identical process because there is a trend towards the establishment of common identity. In this process, the role of the clergy is to structure mechanisms of individualization, and then transcend it into the totalizing form of power. To Foucault, state power ignores individuals and looks only at the interests of totality or a particular class (Foucault, 1982: 213). The historic bloc of clergy and ruling classes gives the state an opportunity to have both the totalizing and the individualizing form of power (Foucault, 1982: 213). The clergy class, as an ally of ruling classes, sets up framework of power relationships in the prisons through which the coercive instruments and consent instruments are employed as a single complex. Such examples endorse the insistence that the Republic of Armenian supports various operations of the Armenian Apostolic Church to provide maintenance of ruling hegemony.