American Orthodox Catholic Church
(→A Promising Beginning)
|Line 55:||Line 55:|
Revision as of 07:37, June 11, 2005
|This article forms part of the series|
Orthodoxy in America
|American Orthodox Timeline |
American Orthodox Bibliography
Byzantines on OCA autocephaly
ROCOR and OCA
|Saints - Bishops - Writers|
|Antiochian - Bulgarian |
OCA - Romanian - Moscow
ROCOR - Serbian
|Christ the Saviour
|St. Tikhon's |
AOI - EOCS - IOCC - OCEC
OCF - OCL - OCMC - OCPM - OCLife
OISM - OTSA - SCOBA - SOCHA
|Amer. Orthodox Catholic Church |
Brotherhood of St. Moses the Black
Evangelical Orthodox Church
Holy Order of MANS/CSB
Society of Clerks Secular of St. Basil
|Edit this box|
The American Orthodox Catholic Church (in full, The Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church in North America) was the first attempt by mainstream Orthodox canonical authorities at the creation of an autocephalous Orthodox church for North America. It was chartered in 1927 by Metropolitan Platon (Rozhdestvensky) primate of the Russian Metropolia and his holy synod, and its history as part of the mainstream Orthodox Church ended in 1934. During its short existence, it was mainly led by Aftimios Ofiesh, Archbishop of Brooklyn.
A Promising Beginning
Fr. Serafim Surrency's book, The Quest for Orthodox Church Unity in America (1973) begins its account of the formation of this body thus:
- Starting in 1927 the first move was initiated to found a canonical American Orthodox Church with the blessing of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church and with the hope that world Orthodoxy would recognize the legitimacy of the new body. The initiative for this attempt belonged to Bishop Aftimios (Ofiesh) of Brooklyn and a member of the Council of Bishops in his capacity as Diocesan for the Syrians (Arabs) which acknowledged the authority of the Russian Church (pp. 32-33).
In this project, Aftimios had the assistance of two American-born Orthodox clerics who had been ordained to the priesthood in the early 1920s, Hiermonk Boris (Burden) and Priest Michael Gelsinger. Both men were particularly concerned about the loss of Orthodox young people to the Roman Catholic and Episcopal churches in the US—the Episcopal Church was of special concern, as it was a liturgical church in some ways similar to Orthodoxy and generally enjoyed a special status of prestige in American society.
At the outset, the new venture appeared quite successful—within the space of only four years, with the support of the synod of the Russian Metropolia, four bishops were consecrated and an impressive charter was granted from said synod, titled An Act of the Synod of Bishops in the American Dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church.
The charter itself—referencing the authority of a letter from Metr. Sergius (locum tenens of the Patriarchate of Moscow) which indicated that autonomous Orthodox churches could be founded outside Russia—granted to the new church body the full name The Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church in North America, with The American Orthodox Catholic Church as its "short name." Additionally,
- We hereby, on this 2nd day of February (new Style) in the year 1927, charge one of our number, His Eminence the Most Reverend Aftimios, Archbishop of Brooklyn, with the full responsibility and duty of caring and providing for American Orthodoxy in the especial sense of Orthodox Catholic people born in America and primarily English-speaking or any American residents or parishes of whatever nationality or linguistic character or derivation not satisfactorily provided with proper and canonical Orthodox Catholic care, ecclesiastical authority, teaching and ministrations of the Church or who may wish to attach themselves by the properly and legally provided means to an autonomous, independent, American Orthodox Catholic Church.... a distinct, independent, and autonomous branch of the Orthodox Catholic Church... (pp. 34-35).
Signed by the entire Metropolia synod at the time—Metr. Platon, Aftimios, Theophilus, Amphilohy, Arseny, and Alexy—it further named Aftimios as the primate of the new church and elected and gave order for "the Consecration of the Very Reverend Leonid Turkevitch to be Bishop in the newly-founded [church]... as assistant to its Governing Head..." (p. 35). Fr. Leonid eventually did get consecrated to the episcopacy, though not in the new church body, and is better known as Metr. Leonty (Turkevich) of New York, primate of the Russian Metropolia. His refusal at the time was based mainly on a "press of family obligations" which led to his insistence on "a specific stipulated salary which could not be met" (p. 36). To replace Fr. Leonid as the first assistant to Aftimios, Platon chose Archimandrite Emmanuel (Abo-Hatab), who was consecrated on September 11, 1927, by Aftimios, assisted by Theophilus and Arseny.
The constitution which was drawn up for the church by the Metropolia is twenty-eight pages long and quite detailed, indicating a great deal of thought went into its drafting. Though it was dated December 1 of 1927, it was not made public until the following spring. Two significant passages are noted by Fr. Serafim in his book. From Article III: "This Church is independent (autocephalous) and autonomous in its authority in the same sense and to the same extent as are the Orthodox Patriarchates of the East and the Autocephalous Orthodox Churches now existing." From Article IV: "This Church has original and primary jurisdiction in its own name and right over all Orthodox Catholic Christians of the Eastern Churches and Rite residing or visiting in the United States, and Alaska and the other territories of the United States, in Canada, Mexico, and all North America" (p. 37). Fr. Serafim then comments:
- "To anyone knowledgeable in Canon Law, these two sections just quoted are absurd. Not only did the Russian Bishops under Metr. Platon—whose own relationship to the Mother Church was abnormal—not only have not have any authority to set up an autocephalous Church but obviously by the logic of the 2nd Section quoted, Metr. Platon and his Bishops should have subordinated themselves to the new Head of the North American Church, Archbishop Aftimios... One can safely say that Metr. Platon (perhaps with the exception of Archbishop Aftimios) and his Bishops never had any intention of granting any such broad and unlimited authority and jurisdiction and indeed this may well have been a factor which turned Metr. Platon against the new Church soon after its very inception (ibid.).
Reaction and Opposition
The reaction against the establishment of the new church was "swift and negative," especially from the Karlovsty Synod (ROCOR), with whom the Metropolia had broken ties shortly before in 1926 and who viewed itself as the Metropolia's rightful canonical authority. (See: ROCOR and OCA.)
- In letters dated the 27th of April and the 3rd of May 1927, the Synod made clear their unalterable opposition to the formation of the new Church both on the grounds that Metr. Platon and his Bishops had no power or authority to authorize the founding of the new Church (it must be kept in mind that for almost two years now there had been a break between Metr. Platon and the Exile Synod) as well as on the grounds that there was no justification or rationale foe the establishment of an American Orthodox Church, at that time or at any time in the foreseeable future (p. 37).
Aftimios himself answered in June with "an equally forceful reply," denouncing the Karlovsty synod as "the uncanonical pseudo-Synod of the Outlandish Russian Orthodox Church," forbidding his clergy and faithful from having anything to do with them (ibid.). Like his estranged former associates in ROCOR, Metr. Platon himself almost immediately turned his back on his ecclesiastical daughter and became "increasingly unreliable in supporting the new Church," mainly because of its continual publication of "hard line" articles in the Orthodox Catholic Review (edited by Hieromonk Boris and Priest Michael) aimed at the Episcopal Church. In a letter to Aftimios, Platon wrote: "'I must attest before Your Eminence that without their (American Episcopalian) entirely disinterested and truly brotherly assistance our Church in America could not exist' and concluded his letter by asking Abp Aftimios to order Father Boris to cease his 'steppings out' against the Protestant Episcopalians" (p. 38).
To further worsen matters, in 1928, Archbishop Victor (Abo-Assaley) was sent to America by the Church of Antioch and then began to encourage Orthodox Arabs to come under Antiochian jurisdiction rather than that of the Russians or the new American church. He did not, however, make much headway in his endeavours. In the same year, Aftimios and his group mainly focussed on the establishment of their church's legal status and had some initial success. On May 26, another bishop was consecrated, Sophronios (Beshara) as bishop of Los Angeles, given responsibility "not only for the parishes who still considered themselves within the jurisdiction of the Russian Mission but also those parishes who comprise a part of the new Church and as a Missionary Bishop as well he was respnsible for all territory west of the Mississippi River" (ibid.). However,
- With three Bishops the fledgling Church would appear to have achieved a solid foundation—but such was not the case. It became more and more apparent that Metr. Platon had changed his mind about the wisdom of attempting to establish an American Orthodox Catholic Church. Not only were some of his Episcopalian allies against the new venture but it was increasingly clear that no recognition for the new Church would be forthcoming from any Autocephalous Church. In any case it is known that Metr. Platon categorically forbade Archpriest Leonid Turkevitch to accept consecration in the new Church (pp. 38-39).
Early in 1929, Aftimios attempted to gain support with the Greek archbishop Alexander (Rodostolou), the first primate of the newly formed reek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America. The archbishop's response was that he had authority over not only all the Greek Orthodox in America but over all Orthodox Christians there. They were apparently "vexed over the fact that the Reverend Demetrius Cassis, an American of Greek parentage, had been ordained by Abp Aftimios for the new American Church" (p. 38).
Fr. Serafim's analysis of the failure of this church is as follows:
- There can be no question that while the movers of the new Church were sincere and highly motivated that nonetheless they were fostering an idea whose time had not yet come, or to use more appropriate phraseology: Almighty God in his infinite wisdom did not see fit to bless this first attempt to have an American Orthodox Church. On the human level it is clear why the movement did not succeed. The Orthodox in America were still in their own particular ghettos... [the church] was unable to attract or find clergy theologically trained in the Orthodox tradition and able to communicate with the young people with immigrant parents (p. 33).
External pressures on the movement also contributed to its demise:
- While the Russian Council of Bishops gave initial support, it was only moral support, and the first person elected to be a Hierarch of the new Church in fact turned down the nomination because it was not possible to guarantee him any kind of salary—which is indicative of another primary deficiency of the movement, no adequate financing.... [The] new Church lost its most important supporter, Metr. Platon, because of antagonism of the clergy initiators towards the Protestant Episcopal Church.... [some of whose authorities] resented the American Orthodox Church as being a challenge to... the "senior Orthodox Church in America" [i.e., the Episcopal Church], and that pressure was put on Metr. Platon to withdraw his support or the financial assistance he was receiving from the Episcopal Church... would be cut off and perhaps he would be deprived of the use, on a temporary basis, of Episcopal churches (pp. 33-34).
- ...it would be most unjust to blame the failure of the "Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church in North America" solely or even primarily on Protestant Episcopal opposition. One can state it more strongly: the various Orthodox groups in America at that time simply were not ready in terms of church consciousness for the establishment of an American Orthodox Church (p. 34).
- The Quest for Orthodox Church Unity in America (1973), by Archim. Serafim (Surrency)