In the political and public life of Armenia, after the change of government in 2018, which some, for various reasons, called a revolution, the religious issue was forgotten.  One should try to understand this phenomenon.

If before 2018 the religious fervor in Armenia was regularly heating up and, as a rule, with the steps of the authorities acting as a detonator.  The ruling Republican Party at the time was positioned as a conservative party, as evidenced by it, often emphasizing the role of the Armenian Apostolic Church at the expense of the rights of other organizations. From high tribunes, the Armenian Apostolic Church was declared a “state church” by state officials and party officials, and other religious organizations were pleasantly referred to as “sects.”  Naturally, this caused dissatisfaction among other organizations.

The ruling Republican Party, acting as a conservative party, tried to elevate its public legitimacy through the church, resulting in anti-church sentiments among citizens dissatisfied with the government.

Moreover, back in 1991, the law on religious organizations adopted during the Soviet era, was not replaced by a new one. In 2001, when Armenia became a full member of the Council of Europe, it undertook to adopt a new law.  The obligations to adopt a new law have long passed.

This was a brief overview of the sequence of events, but we are interested in another question, how the public attitude towards religious issues changed.  Interesting transformations have taken place here, which is interesting for discussion.

The “revolutionary” political leadership that came to power after 2018 initially pursued an anti-church policy, moreover, even the Prime Minister used insulting expressions towards the Armenian Church.  The new government was trying to become liberal with that.

As we see, the political power play had changed, the force that considered itself liberal came to power instead of those who considered themselves conservative.  Later, however, in the face of the severe problems facing the country, the religious issue was generally abandoned.  Moreover, losing its authority, the “revolutionary” government tried several times to normalize relations with the church, but this time, the Armenian Church is already keeping its distance from the government defeated in the Kharabakh war.

One of its most striking and scandalous manifestations was when Prime Minister Pashinyan was invited out of the church by one of the clergy of the Armenian Apostolic Church, where he had entered after the war to light a candle.  The most interesting part of this story was that after that action, the reputation of the church began to rise.  In fact, until 2018, when the church was trying to get the support of the government, it hit the public reputation of the church, and when the church keeps its distance from the government, it receives the opposite attitude.

This is one of the cases when the majority church, losing the support of the government, becoming independent and not afraid to express its independent opinion, which sometimes contradicts the official point of view, finds itself in a more favorable position with the public.

The same cannot be said of other religious organizations, which, as a rule, do not express their views out loud and try not to oppose the ruling power.  As a result of such behavior, they become marginalized communities.