Religion: An American Orthodoxy?

• Share

(2 of 2)

Symbolic Eminence. The argument over the proposed American church is merely the most recent agitation in a simmering rivalry between Constantinople and Moscow that has gone on for centuries. Despite their symbolic eminence, Patriarchs of Constantinople retained little effective power in Orthodoxy outside of the Ottoman Empire after the fall of that city to the Turks in 1453; the Russian Church has tried sporadically to assume a de facto position of pre-eminence ever since. What particularly annoys Patriarch Athenagoras about the Russian proposal is that he has long dreamed of organizing a "holy and great synod" that would bring together all of Orthodoxy for the first time since the last worldwide synod, at Nicaea in 787. One topic on the proposed agenda for the synod would be the creation of a unified American church.

Athenagoras felt so strongly about the Russian plan that last January he wrote a letter to Patriarch Alexis of Moscow, expressing his "surprise and sorrow" and warning that if carried out, it would lead to "disastrous consequences" for Orthodoxy. He also threatened not to recognize the new church—an act that may well lead to a serious estrangement between Greek and Russian Orthodox churches.

Realizable Goals. The man most vitally affected by the quarrel is Archbishop lakovos, 58, head of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America. lakovos is not only Athenagoras' American deputy (and a possible successor to the Ecumenical Patriarch); he is also the most gifted and charismatic churchman of his faith in the U.S. As chairman of the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas, lakovos would be the logical choice to preside over a unified American church. He strongly feels that the Standing Conference, which includes bishops of the Metropolia, is the only organization that can create an American church without causing disruption. The Moscow plan, in his view, would seriously divide Orthodoxy in America, just at the moment when both unity and independence for the churches are becoming realizable goals. "Orthodoxy cannot survive in the form of national groups in this country," he acknowledges, but he adds that "my clergy and I feel that we are following the right path to Orthodox unity, and we will not unite with any other scheme. I can only hope that reason and prudence will prevail."

Whether prudence in lakovos' definition prevails now depends upon the decisions of a Russian Orthodox synod that will meet in Moscow, probably next month, to discuss independence for the Metropolia. If it goes ahead with the plan, Orthodox Christians in America may then be faced with a conflict between their yearning to ally themselves with the new independent church, and their traditional respect for the Ecumenical Patriarch as the living symbol of Orthodox unity.