The History of the Local Eparchial (Regional) Synod of H.O.C.N.A. in Light of the 34th Apostolic Canon
Download Word Document
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
The Holy Apostles established the Church, committing the word to faithful men who were able to teach others (2 Timothy 2:2) establishing bishops in every land. It was during this Apostolic era that the canons we refer to as "The Apostolic Canons" were written.
These Canons were recognized and ratified at the First Ecumenical Council. The Apostolic Canon that is the subject of this paper is the 34th, since it seeks to establish respect for the boundaries of each diocese (parish) and guidelines for maintaining harmony within the local synods of the Church:
34th Apostolic Canon: The bishops of every nation must acknowledge him who is first among them and account him as their head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent; but each may do those things only which concern his own parish, and the country places which belong to it. But neither let him (who is the first) do anything without the consent of all; for so there will be unanimity, and God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit.
This canon has a crucial significance within our own local Church in North America. When the group of clergy, parishes, and monasteries (now referred to as HOCNA) departed from the Russian Church Abroad, the clergy leaders sought out bishops that would take us under their omophorion.1
Eventually, Archbishop Auxentius of Athens, of blessed memory, of the Holy Synod of the Church of the True Orthodox Christians of Greece (T.O.C.) took us under his omophorion in 1987.
The Holy Synod of Archbishop Auxentius later established the See of Boston in 1988, when he ordained Bishop Ephraim. In 1989, the Holy Synod of Archbishop Auxentius ordained Bishop Photios for the Traditional Orthodox Christians in France. Later, in 1993, the Holy Synod of the T.O.C. ordained Bishop Makarios, for the See of Toronto.
Thus, there were two separate dioceses in North America, and one in France. It is an undeniable fact that Bishop Ephraim, Bishop Makarios and Bishop Photios were all bishops of the Holy Synod of the Church of the True Orthodox Christians in Greece and their clergy and parishes we considered as members of the Greek Orthodox Church even though they resided in the United States, Canada and France, respectively.
During the lifetime of Archbishop Auxentius there was no ambiguity regarding the fact that he was "the first" among the bishops due to the fact that he occupied the throne of Athens. Archbishop Auxentius reposed in 1994, and the Holy Synod elected a new Archbishop, Maximos, and he held the position of "the first" among the bishops.
Archbishop Maximos, sadly, fell from this ministry and was deposed in 1996 for his arbitrary and uncanonical actions.2 Metropolitan Athanasios of Larissa then became "the first" hierarch of our Holy Synod when he was appointed to the office of locum tenens of the throne of Athens.
I was ordained as an auxiliary bishop for the Metropolis of Boston in 1996 and Bishop Philaret was ordained an auxiliary bishop for the Church in France that same year. We were both ordained as bishops of the Church of Greece.
For reasons known to him, Metropolitan Athanasios withdrew from participating in our Holy Synod in 1997. At that time, Metropolitan Makarios of Toronto was appointed locum tenens of the throne of Athens and thus he inherited the position of "the first" among the bishops. We remained fully a part of the Church of Greece.
By the year 2001, the bishops in France had withdrawn from this Holy Synod and our membership was reduced to the three bishops in North America, who continued to identify themselves and HOCNA as belonging to the Church of Greece.
On September 25/October 8, 2001, the Holy Synod of the T.O.C. of Greece, consisting of the three bishops in America, made three resolutions: 1) to create another diocese, that of the Metropolis of Seattle, 2) to appoint me as the ruling bishop of that diocese with the title of Metropolitan, and 3) to establish a local eparchial synod3 in North America for administrative purposes. [See the December 18, 2001, letter of Metropolitan Makarios to Protopresbyter Victor Melehov (attached).]
Without question the September 25/October 8, 2001, minutes of the meeting of the Holy Synod (attached) constitute the foundational document of our Local Eparchial Church. In these minutes under item one it is stated:
1. The Sacred Synod unanimously resolves that the presiding hierarch is the locum tenens of Athens until such [time] as there is an Archbishop of Athens.
There is no ambiguity here. This resolution clearly recognizes that whoever occupies the throne of Athens -- be he the temporary locum tenens or be he the Archbishop of Athens -- is the presiding hierarch (and the first among the Hierarchs) of the local eparchial synod of HOCNA, and that our Mother Church is the True Orthodox Church of Greece.
The members of our Holy Synod are required by this resolution and the 34th Apostolic Canon to "acknowledge him who is first among them and account him as their head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent." Thus from 1997 until 2010, Metropolitan Makarios was recognized as the presiding hierarch of our Holy Synod because he was the locum tenens of the throne of Athens.
On September 21/ October 4, 2010, our Holy Synod made the following resolutions:
2) Motion by Bishop Demetrius: ...For reasons of Church unity, the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in North America also unanimously resolves to lift depositions imposed in 1985 against those bishops currently belonging to the Synod of the late Archbishop Chrysostomos Kioussis, with the aim of achieving full Eucharistic Communion in the future with this Synod, whensoever God wills it. In lifting these depositions, we hereby recognize de facto that the Church of Greece is headed by the Synod of the late Archbishop Chrysostomos Kioussis.
The faithful who travel to Greece are free to attend the Churches which belong to this Synod with the full blessing and approval of our Synod of Bishops. 2nd by Metropolitan Ephraim. Motion carries unanimously.
3) Motion by Metropolitan Makarios: that the Holy Synod dissolve the office of locum tenency of the throne of Athens held by Metropolitan Makarios up until now. 2nd by Bishop Demetrius. Motion carries unanimously.
These resolutions have far reaching canonical significance. But, before going any further, I should point out that the corporate by-laws of HOCNA, Inc. do not reflect what is required by canon law. The corporate by-laws were written in the form and language of our civil legal system. The text of the by-laws themselves admit the limitations of this legal document:
Section 1.6 b
Controversies or disputes may arise from time to time between or among persons within the Church that cannot be resolved on the basis of neutral principles of civil law. By accepting a position as a member, director, or officer of the Corporation, each such member, director, or officer acknowledges the hierarchical nature of the Church of which the Corporation is an integral part as described above and agrees that controversies or disputes that cannot be resolved on the basis of neutral principles of civil law should not be resolved by courts of civil law, but rather by recourse to ecclesiastical ways and principles, as delineated for example in the holy scriptures, the writings of the holy fathers, and the decisions and canons of the holy synods and councils.
The HOCNA, Inc. by-laws fail to mention our Mother Church in Greece, which is our canonical foundation and the source of our ordinations. Nowhere do the corporation by- laws acknowledge the presiding hierarch of Athens. These by-laws ignore the 34th Apostolic Canon. Due to its manifest deficiencies, we cannot look to the corporate by- laws of HOCNA, Inc. for guidance concerning the all-important canonical order of the Church.
As a bishop elected and ordained by the Church of Greece, I cannot ignore the history of our local Church and the 34th Apostolic Canon. I cannot ignore the fact that our local Church does indeed have a history and a "paper trail" that demonstrates that our ordinations and canonical foundation are rooted in our canonical dependency on the throne of Athens. The true Orthodox Church in Greece is indeed our Mother Church. When we speak of our unity, we must acknowledge our history and the fact that our unity begins with remaining united to the Church of Greece.
I am compelled by the vows I made at my ordination and by the foundational document for the formation of HOCNA (the minutes of our Holy Synod dated September 25/October 8, 2001), and by the resolutions that were made by the Holy Synod in October of 2010, to acknowledge Archbishop Kallinikos as the first among us and count him as our head.
As we were able to freely communicate with Metropolitan Makarios when he was the locum tenens of Athens, so also are we able to freely communicate with the man who is unanimously recognized as the Archbishop of Athens by HOCNA's Holy Synod as a result of its own unanimous decision at its meeting in October of 2010.
I know that some vigorously protest the fact that I wrote a letter to Archbishop Kallinikos asking him what would be required on our part in order to be in union with the Church of Greece.4 Those who have criticized me include hierarchs and clergy within HOCNA who reject the 34th Apostolic Canon, as is demonstrated by their opposition to our unity with the Church of Greece. Furthermore these clergy have rejected the resolution of our Holy Synod dated September 25/ October 8, 2001. (Both texts clearly specify that the presiding hierarch is either the locum tenens of the throne of Athens or the Archbishop of Athens.)
I would point out that HOCNA's Synod has never passed any resolutions contradicting its status, such as is reflected in Metropolitan Makarios' December 2001 public letter to a departing Presbyter, nor has it ever resolved to exempt itself from the terms of the 34th Apostolic Canon, nor has it ever rescinded its own foundational resolution naming the Archbishop of Athens (or the locum tenens of that See) as the first among HOCNA's Hierarchs. My decisions today, with respect to my relationship to HOCNA's Synod as the North American extension of the Church of Greece, are to be understood within the context of the actual history of HOCNA, and not of some revisionist history of HOCNA that ignores the plain, documented facts.
On Clean Monday, March 7, 2011, Bishop Sergios and I each received a letter endorsed by three of our bishops (Metropolitan Ephraim, Metropolitan Makarios and Bishop Demetrios) that falsely accuses us of submitting a petition to Archbishop Kallinikos to be received by the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians in Greece.
Furthermore, in this letter they claimed that they imposed an epitemion (a penalty) on me and on Bishop Sergios consisting of abrogating our canonical right to vote during sessions of the Holy Synod. If one cannot vote at a synod meeting, one cannot make a motion, second a motion or even speak, unless called upon.
This so-called "epitemion" effectively removed us from participating in the meetings of the Holy Synod. It effectively silenced two of the five bishops on the Synod. Since this decision was made outside a formal session of the Synod and without a trial, it is in fact uncanonical.
In the Orthodox Church, neither an individual bishop, nor a collection of bishops, has the authority to impose an epitemion on a brother bishop without a canonical trial. The canons safeguard the rights and responsibilities of a ruling bishop and his diocese. Otherwise, bishops would be able to undermine other dioceses and their bishops. Short of a penalty that has resulted from a properly formed spiritual trial a bishop can only admonish a brother bishop.
The only context that would allow a bishop to impose a penalty on a brother bishop without a trial is if one was a member of the Roman Catholic Church and the supreme pontiff (the pope) imposed the penalty. Presumably the three bishops are not claiming the right to do what they did on the basis of Roman Catholic canon law!
Three bishops made a decision, outside of the official sessions of the Holy Synod, to eject two bishops from voting at the sessions of the Holy Synod, thereby reducing them to the status of observers. This was so orchestrated as to appear to be a disciplinary action. The three Bishops who signed their names to this notification elected to take this action against two members in their absence, outside of a properly summoned session of the Synod, without notifying them that any such action was pending, and without providing them with a preliminary hearing of charges from the mouth of the supposed witnesses. These actions, again, are a serious violation of canon law.
This uncanonical penalty is an unlawful abuse of power. It offends conciliarity. It is based on misrepresentations of what Bishop Sergios and I said and did in October, in Athens. This penalty would be overturned in a legitimate spiritual court. The very men that Metropolitan Ephraim and Bishop Demetrius refer to as their witnesses have given me full assurance that they do not agree with these false assertions and that they are being misquoted.
If these charges had any merit Metropolitan Ephraim, Metropolitan Makarios and Bishop Demetrius would not ignore my requests for due process. Since their charges have no merit, they have not even acknowledged my many appeals for a meeting.
Metropolitan Ephraim's, Metropolitan Makarios' and Bishop Demetrios' action effectively removes me and Bishop Sergios from the Holy Synod.
This exclusionary action by these three bishops comes at a time when we are in the midst of addressing two urgent questions: What is HOCNA now? and, Who is our first hierarch?
The effect of their uncanonical decision is to attempt to silence two of the members of the Holy Synod when a full discussion of all points of view by the Hierarchs of the Church would be very much in HOCNA's interest at this critical point in time.
In addition to the matter of basic canonicity, issues of conciliarity and balance within the Synod itself are of equally serious concern. I would add that there is yet another issue: the pastoral need for Hierarchs to set good examples for the rest of the Church by their own behavior and by their handling of urgent questions, when they arise.
These events bring into sharp focus the reality that, thanks to the exclusion of two Hierarchs by three Hierarchs, there are now two groups within HOCNA that have different visions of our Church.
One group has a vision of establishing a local Church in North America that follows the requirements of canonical order and due process with legitimately functioning dioceses and legitimately functioning ruling bishops, all the while remaining part of the Church of Greece.
The other group desires to focus on personalities, with the parishes and dioceses functioning as outposts of those personalities' views. This group sees the bishops of the Church as owing obedience to elders, instead of to the canonical order of the Church. This group embraces an ecclesiology that is not in harmony with the hierarchical principle of the Church established by the Holy Apostles. The Orthodox Church is a hierarchical body. It is not a gerontocracy.5
Apparently the reason for our exclusion is that the three bishops do not want to have an open discussion of urgent concerns before us, either within the Synod or at an all HOCNA sobor.6 Such a Council was requested by the three deans (of the Metropolis of Boston, of Toronto and of Portland) in their personal letter to the Holy Synod dated February 9, 2011. Such a Council would have allowed everyone to hear the ideas and evidence presented by persons holding differing points of view.
Metropolitan Ephraim has now achieved his goal of "independence" by expelling the two bishops who wished to remain faithful to the principles of the founding documents of the local eparchial synod of HOCNA. These documents include the minutes of the September 25/ October 8, 2001 meeting of our Holy Synod wherein we formed the local eparchial synod of HOCNA, and the December 8, 2001 open letter of Metropolitan Makarios to Protopresbyter Victor Melehov.
This claim of "independence" has been used to sever HOCNA's appropriate canonical relationship with the Church of Greece. As a result, HOCNA is no longer a local eparchial (regional) synod of a Mother Church ( i.e., the Church of Greece).
In other words HOCNA, as we knew it, has departed from the Church of Greece and is no more. HOCNA, as we knew it is dissolved.
What is the "new HOCNA?"
Metropolitan Ephraim is fond of referring to HOCNA as "independent." An independent local Church can only be described as either autonomous (limited self-government in internal affairs) or autocephalous (fully independent as such).
An autonomous Church has limited independence. An autonomous Church is a daughter Church of a Mother Church. The "new HOCNA" has unlimited independence and it looks to no Mother Church. Therefore, the "new HOCNA" is a Synod of three bishops in a self-proclaimed autocephalous Church. This independence is claimed although HOCNA fails to meet even the minimal standards and numbers of bishops required by canon law to administer an independent Church.
These events have come at a time when the Synod of HOCNA has proven itself to be unable even to respond adequately to the preaching of a distorted notion of salvation.7 We have experienced the sad reality that the canonical safeguards provided by the Holy Fathers to insure that a local Church preserves its ecclesiastical integrity and the Orthodoxy of its faith can be circumvented when a few dominant personalities successfully isolate themselves from the rest of the Orthodox Church. And isolation is yet one more serious issue concerning HOCNA just now.
I pray for and care very much about the salvation of you all. I have no ill will towards any bishop or clergyman or layman or laywoman in HOCNA. However, in the light of the vows I made to God at my ordination to the episcopacy in the Church of Greece, my primary loyalty must always be to the canonical order of the Church without respect of persons. With the help of God, I intend to follow my conscience by following the consensus of the Holy Fathers and the mind of the Church.
For this reason Bishop Sergios and I have now sent a petition to the Holy Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos I of Athens, dated March 27/ April 9, 2011, asking to be accepted as bishops of the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians in North America. I emphasize that this is our first and only petition to the G.O.C. asking to be received into their Holy Synod.
I humbly remind you that, as Orthodox Christians, we belong to the One, Holy Catholic, and Apostolic Church, as we refer to it in the Nicene Creed that we all say at the Liturgy. The Church is an article of faith, an article of belief, for every Orthodox Christian.
"Catholic" means comprehensive or fully-adequate in Greek. The Church is not one diocese or one monastery and it is not run like a corporation with franchises. Do not be confused regarding what the Church is and how it works.
I am afraid that many of the laity have been misled and have lost a clear, orthodox understanding of these issues. I ask you to read the attached documents, to educate yourself and to follow your conscience regarding the serious questions that have been raised concerning the Church in North America today.
I pray that you will all come to a personal understanding of the fundamental importance of our actual, as opposed to any revisionist, historical canonical foundation; that is, the singular and urgent importance of our remaining fully part of the Church of Greece. May it be so.
Bishop Sergios and I are not going anywhere, but rather we are remaining where we have always been: members of the Church of Greece.
Amen.
____________________
1 The omophorion is a distinctive part of the bishop's vestments. To be under a bishop's omophorion is to be under his hierarchical authority.
2 Archbishop Maximos was not deposed for heresy, but rather for canonical infractions and for refusing to present himself at a spiritual court when summoned.
3 An Eparchial Synod is responsible for a specific region geographically separated from its mother Church, and is canonically dependent on the mother Church of which it forms one part.
4 At that time we were told by the bishops in Greece that each case is unique and the Holy Synod decides what is required for each applicant individually. The Archbishop assured us that they would form a committee to investigate all aspects of what would be required to achieve a future union. Contrary to what has been said by some, we did not proceed to the next step and submit a petition to be received by them.
5 See the excellent essay on this topic by Bishop Photios of Marathon (GOC), on the website of the Metropolis of Portland and the West: www.orthodoxmetropolisportland.org/sermon_hero_worship.html.
6 Sobor is the Russian word used for a conference including Hierarchs, Clergy and Laity, summoned to consider regular or extraordinary issues. The Greek term would be Synaxis and the English would be Assembly or Council.
7 As one noted theologian commented on this new false notion regarding enlightenment in Hades that has been the source of scandal and turmoil in HOCNA, "The notion that Christ will save souls outside the Church, that He will scurry about the dark halls of Hades till the Judgment, pleading with them to join Him, I find no place in the Tradition of the Church."