Catholicos Karekin II — the head of the Armenian Apostolic Church and spiritual leader of millions of Armenians worldwide — went on trial alongside six other clerics on August 7, 2026, at the Armavir Regional Court in Vagharshapat, Armenia. The seven defendants are accused of defying a civil court order by failing to reinstate Bishop Gevorg Saroyan, who was stripped of his clerical rank (a process called defrocking) in January after the church accused him of abusing his authority and neglecting his duties. If convicted, each defendant faces up to two years in prison. Al Jazeera

The trial is widely seen as the latest escalation in a bitter feud between Karekin II and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. The confrontation has multiple intersecting threads: internal church discipline, territorial politics, and personal allegations that have eroded whatever boundary once existed between church governance and state power.

Bishop Saroyan is a supporter of Pashinyan. Both Saroyan and the prime minister have publicly called for the resignation of Karekin II, who is himself a prominent critic of Pashinyan. The Catholicos and the church leadership defrocked Saroyan in January 2026; when a civil court subsequently ordered his reinstatement and the church hierarchy refused to comply, the criminal prosecution followed. Al Jazeera

The roots of the broader confrontation extend to the 2023 Nagorno-Karabakh war, when Azerbaijan regained full control of the territory. Nagorno-Karabakh is a region that Armenians and Azerbaijanis have contested for decades; its loss was a national trauma. Karekin II blamed the loss on Pashinyan. The Armenian Apostolic Church has publicly criticised the prime minister's handling of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, particularly his decision to cede territory to neighbouring Azerbaijan. That territorial concession remains a deep wound in Armenian domestic politics, and the church has positioned itself as an institutional voice of opposition to the government's accommodating posture. Al Jazeera

Pashinyan has escalated the rhetoric further. He accused Karekin II and the Armenian Apostolic Church of spying for Russia, though he did not provide evidence to support the claim. He also accused the Catholicos of secretly fathering a child and breaking his vow of celibacy, and demanded his resignation. Karekin II and the church deny the espionage allegations. Al Jazeera

Opposition politicians, church leaders, and civil society groups have characterised the prosecution as politically motivated, framing it as part of a wider crackdown on government critics. Anna Melikyan, a lawyer at the Armenian non-profit group Protection of Rights Without Borders, said the case violated the constitutional independence of the Apostolic Church and called it "a clear interference of the executive power in church affairs." Al Jazeera

The institutional church has not been passive in the face of the confrontation. The Supreme Spiritual Council met at the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin — the church's headquarters — on January 27, 2026, under Karekin II's presidency. The Clergy Assembly issued a statement on February 10, 2026. The Assembly of Bishops of the Catholicosate of All Armenians convened from February 17 to 19, 2026, concluding with a Cathedral Message from Karekin II. On May 26, 2026, the Clergy Assembly gathered again under Karekin II at the Mother See and issued a statement during what it called "these days of trial." Armenian Apostolic Church Armenian Apostolic Church Armenian Apostolic Church

The sequence of these internal church proceedings, running from late January through May, traces an institution mobilising its deliberative bodies in response to mounting pressure from the state. The February bishops' assembly and the May clergy statement both occurred after Saroyan's defrocking and after Pashinyan's public demands for Karekin II's resignation, suggesting a coordinated institutional posture rather than ad hoc reactions. Reuters

The broader context here is a realignment of Armenian civil religion and state authority with few post-Soviet precedents. The Armenian Apostolic Church occupies a position in national identity that blends spiritual, cultural, and historical roles in ways that make a clean separation of church and state practically difficult. Think of the church less as a Sunday institution and more as a custodian of Armenian identity — one that predates the modern state by centuries. Pashinyan's layering of personal, espionage, and celibacy allegations onto a procedural contempt case suggests an effort to erode the Catholicos's moral authority before the legal process runs its course. The counter-argument from Melikyan and civil society groups, grounded in constitutional protections for church independence, frames the prosecution as executive overreach.

The trial's outcome at the Armavir Regional Court will carry weight beyond the criminal liability of seven clerics. A conviction would signal that civil court orders can override internal church disciplinary processes, effectively subordinating church governance to the judiciary. An acquittal or dismissal would reinforce the church's autonomy but would also leave unresolved the underlying political confrontation between Pashinyan and Karekin II, which has already drawn in bishops, opposition parties, and civil society organisations. Either way, the proceedings that began in Vagharshapat will test the boundary between two institutions that have co-shaped Armenian national life for centuries.