St. Barbara Greek Orthodox Church
Orange, Connecticut
October 4, 1998
St. Barbara Greek Orthodox Church
Orange, Connecticut
I am very happy to be with all of you this afternoon. I hope my remarks will be taken to heart since they address what I perceive to be one of the more subtle and divisive factors plaguing Orthodoxy in America.
My remarks focus on one word used by all jurisdictions and therefore by virtually every Orthodox bishop in America. It is a word that is used to signify Orthodox ecclesial unity and therefore gives the false impression that, indeed, progress is being made to overcome jurisdictional pluralism in America.
The word I am referring to is “pan-Orthodox.” It is a term, I am sure, with which all of us are familiar. It is a term associated with the Standing Conference of Orthodox Bishops in America (SCOBA), and is generally used to characterize the joint efforts of Orthodox jurisdictions. These joint efforts include liturgical concelebrations, episcopal resolutions responding to either national or international social issues, and the cooperation of local parishes in fostering outreach to Orthodox.
Pan-Orthodoxy has been held up as a paradigm since it provides much needed charitable work here and abroad. I need only refer to the pan-Orthodox food pantries and nursing facilities that exist in parts of the nation, and the International Orthodox Christian Charities (IOCC) which has provided food and medical care for the needy throughout the world. Ending, but not exhausting, this list of pan-Orthodox achievements is the establishment of the Orthodox Christian Mission Center based in Saint Augustine, Florida.
Given this list of programs and accomplishments, one may indeed ask, what is the problem with pan-Orthodoxy? What is the problem with jurisdictional cooperation in America? Certainly we must be thankful to God for all the good that has come from pan-Orthodox efforts. Yet, at the same time we must be very aware of the fact that pan-Orthodoxy is becoming an end in itself. We must be very aware of the fact that pan-Orthodoxy, with all its accomplishments, veils the status quo of Orthodox disunity in America. For this reason—and for this reason alone—all that is accomplished in the name of pan-Orthodoxy is undermined and ultimately compromised because of disunity.
The Church by its very nature is One. From beneath the veil of pan-Orthodoxy the lack of unity must be exposed. As Orthodox Christians we must acknowledge, we must confess, that our Church is divided. Only when we confess the sin of division will we also discover that there is a lack of vision for the Church in America. Tragically many Orthodox are satisfied with the status quo. Many prefer a semblance of unity maintained by the cooperative efforts to which I have already referred instead of one, canonical, hierarchically united local Church.
To begin overcoming the impasse of Orthodox disunity there needs to be an awakening to the fact that unity is a necessary condition for the Church. Without unity the Church risks not being itself. By realizing this, by awakening to this reality, the eyes of both the clergy and laity will recognize that jurisdictional pluralism is not only abnormal but sinful. To characterize our disunity as anything other than a sin would be to retreat from what is fundamental to our understanding and experience of the local Church.
The local church must be united in the person of the local bishop. There can be no other alternative, no other recourse. To overcome the impasse of disunity, clergy and laity must cease being afraid to pursue—let alone discuss—the most obvious path to Orthodox unity in America. And what is this path, after being in America for over 200 years? It is the way which leads to one, local, autocephalous Church! To avoid this path would surely be a betrayal of our Orthodox ecclesiology.
The seeds for establishing an autocephalous Church in America were sown in the 19th century. In the correspondence of Saint Innocent Veniaminov—one of the great missionaries to Alaska and, I must add, the first Orthodox bishop in America—the sale of Russian Alaska to the United States was seen as a great opportunity for the Orthodox Church. In a letter to D. A. Tolstoy, dated 5 December, 1867, St. Innocent (then Metropolitan of Moscow) saw the sale as an act of divine Providence “by which one Orthodoxy can insert itself into the United States….”
Saint Tikhon (Bellavin), the Patriarch of Moscow, who died a confessor and defender of the faith under the Bolshevik yoke in 1925, and who was (as it says on the back side of the FORCC leaflet you all have before you) “Ruling Bishop of all Orthodox Christians in America” from 1898 to 1907, shared and developed the vision of Saint Innocent.
(I would note at this point that the then Archbishop Tikhon truly felt himself to be the archpastor of Orthodox Christians of all ethnic backgrounds in North America. A well-educated man, he was capable of serving the divine services not only in the Church Slavonic with which he grew up, but also in Greek. Serving in Greek particularly delighted him because it was the tongue of the Greek Church which is the mother of the Russian Church. He also encouraged the use of English, particularly for preaching and instruction.)
Saint Tikhon was one of the first to recognize that the Church in North America was not simply a missionary diocese, but rather that it was, indeed, an emerging immigrant Church. In 1905, in a report to the Holy Synod of Russia, he proposed that the Russian-supported missionary diocese be allowed and encouraged to evolve into a self-supporting, multi-ethnic American diocese composed of distinct auxiliary dioceses for each Orthodox group in America. While this vision perhaps falls short of the fulness of the vision whereby the Church is ruled by “one bishop, in one place,” it is also clear that Saint Tikhon understood that the Church in North America would not only grow beyond the missionary stage to the immigrant stage, but also that it would grow beyond the immigrant stage to that of a Church which would truly be able to call itself, first and foremost, “American.”
Proof of this understanding is evidenced in a statement Saint Tikhon made in 1904. Speaking of his desire to establish a theological school, he said, “I have decided to found a seminary for young people born in America, who intend, as most of the priests from Russia, to stay here for good. This seminary will not be like the Russian ecclesiastical seminaries. We must establish a school to fit the needs of the people in America.”
Unfortunately, the chaos caused in the administration of the North American Church by the Russian revolution (which was paralleled by political instability in Greece and other parts of the world in the wake of the First World War), also led to the collapse of Orthodox unity in North America. Out of that chaos developed the “jurisdictional” solution for administering the Church in North America that is still with us today. I believe, however, as we prepare for the new millennium, we must all recognize this solution as being inadequate for our calling to witness to the Gospel of Christ in North America.
For Saint Innocent, Saint Tikhon and so many other visionaries, divine Providence brought the Church to America so it might grow and proclaim the Gospel in America. Yet, at the same time, we have now existed for almost a century in a way which treats divine Providence as an accident. Consequently, the roots of our Church have not been able to grow and yield a bountiful harvest. The vision for the Church in America must be one of unity. For without unity our words and our deeds will not be convincing, will not be compelling. Only when there is unity which rooted in the gospel will the Orthodox presence engage the culture. Only when there is unity based on purifying truth and sacrificial love will pan-Orthodoxy (the stage of development we are in today) be transformed into the manifestation of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church which is given to the world for the life of the world and its salvation.