Romanian Orthodox for Enquiry in America

Guardians of the Vatra

Orthodox Brotherhood Documents

ROAA/BOR Documents

Episcopal Assembly Concludes

Author: Theodore Kalmoukos
May 29, 2010
No Surprises as First Episcopal Assembly of Orthodox Hierarchs Concludes

From and originally published in the National Herald

ART. 6
26-28 MAY 2010 NEW YORK

BOSTON - The proceedings of the first Episcopal Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Hierarchs in North and Central America ended on Friday May 28, 2010 with the dissolution of SCOBA - the Synod of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of America. As reported, the two-day Assembly was held at the Helmsley Park Lane Hotel in New York on May 27-28, 2010 under the chairmanship of Archbishop Demetrios of America. By decision of the Assembly, all organizations and joint action projects operating under SCOBA, such as International Orthodox Christian Charities, will operate under the auspices of the Episcopal Assembly from here on in.SCOBA was first established back in 1960 in order to bring the bishops of the various Orthodox jurisdictions operating in America closer together, and promote cooperation and increased synchronization of their ministries. The late Archbishop Iakovos of North and South America had played a key role in the organization’s founding, along with Metropolitan Philip of the Antiochian Archdiocese.

The assembly came to a formal close with the celebration of the divine liturgy at the Holy Trinity Archdiocesan Cathedral, to mark the brotherhood and unity present at the assembly.

Metropolitan Philip of the Antiochian Orthodox Church had initially opposed the dissolution of SCOBA, but was eventually convinced and agreed with the majority of the hierarchs.

Other issues discussed included the requests made by Metropolitan Sotirios of Toronto and all Canada and Metropolitan Athenagoras of Mexico and Central America to partition the present region of the Episcopal Assembly of North and Central America into two distinct regions of the United States and Canada, as well as to merge Mexico and Central America with the Assembly of South America. These requests will be sent to the Ecumenical Patriarchate by the Episcopal Assembly.

Archbishop Demetrios of America served as Chairman of the proceedings, aided by Vice-Chairmen Metropolitan Philip of the Antiochian Archdiocese and Archbishop Justinian of Naro-Fominsk, who is Administrator of the Patriarchal Parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in the U.S. Bishop Basil of Wichita was elected as Secretary and Archbishop Antony of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA was elected Treasurer.

The Orthodox Church in America also was represented at the Episcopal Assembly, with Metropolitan Jonah in attendance. Although the Ecumenical Patriarchate does not recognized the OCA’s Autocephaly, Metropolitan Jonah told TNH that the Church he heads has liturgical communion with all the Orthodox Church, despite statements to the contrary made by Metropolitan Philip Saliba and Rev. Mark Arey, Director of the Office of Inter-Orthodox, Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, that OCA is not recognized by any Church with the exception of Moscow.

During the proceedings various committees were formed that will meet at regular intervals to discuss issues of common interest to all the Orthodox jurisdictions.

There were no direct statement regarding ecclesiastical autocephaly or autonomy, except for a few indirect statement by Metropolitan Philip in regards to the Orthodox Diaspora and Metropolitan Christopher of the Serbian Orthodox Church in North and South America. The American-born Metropolitan Christopher noted that the time is ripe for such an undertaking, but Archbishop Demetrios disagreed.

None of the bishops of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America made any mention of autocephaly or autonomy, while Archbishop Demetrios clarified the role, responsibilities, and goals of the Assembly, noting that coordinated cooperation was sought on behalf of all the Orthodox Churches. The date of the next Episcopal Assembly was not announced.

10 Comments to “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

  1. Administrator Says:

    An important outcome of the Episcopal Assembly was that: “The Orthodox Church in America (OCA) also was represented at the Episcopal Assembly, with Metropolitan Jonah in attendance.” The important conclusion to the Episcopal Assembly was the celebration of the Divine Liturgy by all Hierarchs present, confirming their acceptance of each other’s canonicity.

  2. Administrator Says:

    Un rezultat important de la Adunarea Episcopala a fost ca: “Biserica Ortodoxa Americana (OCA) a fost reprezentata la Adunarea Episcopala, in frunte cu Mitropolitul Jonah care a fost prezent.” Adunarea Episcopala a sfarsit cu o Sfanta Liturghie tinuta de toti Ierarhii prezenti, confirmand acceptarea reciproca a canonicitatii fiecarui participant.

  3. Seraphim Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    I have a number of important questions:

    # 1) At first I was skeptical about the the accuracy of the claims that Patriarch Bartholomew asked/told Archbishop Demetrios not to invite Metropolitan Jonah and the other OCA bishops to the Episcopal Assembly, but now I have seen enough information in the media to feel relatively comfortable believing that this is true, but I would like “proof”.
    Can anyone cite evidence to substantiate this?

    # 2) My understanding is that nobody was questioning the canonical status of the OCA bishops, as evidenced by the fact that they have pretty much always been in Eucharistic communion with all the other Churches & the primate of the OCA has always been a member of SCOBA, but, instead, it was the canonicity of their autocephaly that was being called into question by some. I thought that the Patriarchate of Constantinople, in refusing to recognize the OCA as an autocephalous Church, viewed it as part of the Patriarchate of Moscow similar to ROCOR. Am I wrong about this?

    # 3) If I am correct about # 2 (there was no question regarding the canonicity of the OCA bishops only the autocephaly) & if # 1 is true (Patriarch Bartholomew did indeed ask/tell Archbishop Demetrios to intentionally not invited the OCA bishops to the Episcopal Assembly) then what possible logic (I’m serious) could be behind this move given that all canonical bishops of the region were supposed to be invited?

    # 4) I have heard that Metropolitan Jonah does not have a seat on the Executive Committee of the Episcopal Assembly. Is this true?

    # 5) The documents from the 4th Chambesy conference (posted on the SCOBA website) are not very clear (one could even say contradictory) regarding who sits on the Executive Committee, for instance: The “Decision” document states in Section 2b):
    “These Assemblies will have an Executive Committee composed of the first hierarchs of the different jurisdictions that exist on the region.” The key word here being “jurisdiction”, which would mean that the Greek, Antiochian, Ukrainian, Carpatho-Russian, Albanian, Serbian, Romanian, Bulgarian, ROCOR, Moscow Patriarchate & OCA would each have their respective primates sitting on the Executive Committee, in a similar fashion to SCOBA. However, the “Rules of Operation” document states in Article 3:
    “The Episcopal Assembly will have an Executive Committee composed of the Primatial Bishops of each of the canonical Churches in the Region.”

    The key phrase here being “canonical Churches”, which raises a number of questions… Does Metropolitan Hilarion of the ROCOR “jurisdiction” have a seat on the Executive Committee or is ROCOR considered part of the “canonical Church” of Moscow, & if so does Archbishop Justinian hold the seat on the Executive Committee? Do each of the primates of the various “jurisdictions” under the Patriarchate of Constantinople have seats on the Executive Committee (ex: Metropolitan Nicholas of the Carpatho-Russian diocese, Bishop Ilia of the Albanian diocese, etc.) or do all these “jurisdictions” fall under the “canonical Church” of Constantinople meaning that only Archbishop Demetrios would hold the seat on the Executive Committee?

    I recall that Fr. Mark Arey, in an Ancient Faith Radio special entitled “Unraveling Chambesy” with Kevin Allen of The Illumined Heart podcast, stated that each “canonical Church” would have only one vote in the Episcopal Assembly. He went on to explain that all the “jurisdictions” of the Ecumenical Patriarchate would only have one collective vote, and they would have to reach an internal consensus before casting their vote. Is this still the case? If all “jurisdictions” fall under their respective “canonical Church” with only one primate sitting on the Executive Committee then I suppose I can see the logic behind not granting Metropolitan Jonah a seat given that the OCA is not universally recognized as being autocephalous. However, this begs the question of how the OCA bishops will cast their votes, I would assume with the Patriarchate of Moscow, which opens up another can or worms because it forces the Patriarchate of Moscow to deny the autocephaly they granted to the OCA. I suppose either Moscow or Constantinople has to compromise on the autocephaly of OCA issue.

    If the primate of every “jurisdiction” (except the OCA) holds a seat on the Executive Committee then this is the epitome of hypocrisy and must be rejected because granting Metropolitan Jonah a seat does not equate with the recognition of the OCA’s autocephaly any more than granting Metropolitan Nicholas of the Carpatho-Russian diocese a seat acknowledges that that “jurisdiction” is an autocephalous Church. Logic dictates that it cannot work both ways. Does anyone know how the seats on the Executive Committee & the voting are determined because the official documents dealing with this matter are clear as mud?

  4. George Michalopulos Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    … there are too many inherent contradictions in the Chambesy process, enough that it allowed everybody to see a “win” for their side (so to speak). When all is said and done however, the ROC [Russian Orthodox Church] “won” more in that it accomplished several things. Here they are in no particular order:
    1. the non-recognition of Estonia
    2. the advancement of the ROC up the dyptichs (to 3rd place), which means an automatic place on all presidiums in all the EAs
    3. the ability two have two votes in the North American EA (ROCOR/MP, the OCA’s vote is largely sympathetic to the ROC)
    4. the recognition of the OCA as a canonical church (and autocephalous? Probably)

    There are no doubt others. When all is said and done however, of all the patriarchates, only the ROC is able to subordinate the protocols of Chambesy to its own satisfaction. One could even say, override them. As an example, I cite the recent visit of +Hilarion to Alexandria, when he told the Pope that the ROC will set up its own churches on that continent. (As a concession, he said that Russia would pay for the education of natives in its seminaries. What’s a poor pope like going to do? say no?)

  5. Wesley J. Smith Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    I just read on another site that the OCA’s canonicity is now fully accepted, albeit not autocephaly. That’s a big step forward, isn’t it?

  6. Harry Coin Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    Wesley, not a step at all. For example, depending on the year, Antiochian seminarians would go to St. Vladimir’s. People routinely had ‘Sunday of Orthodoxy’ vespers with all the local Orthodox parishes, communion here or there among the parishioners has gone on for years and years. It’s [acceptance of OCA canonicity has] been a fact on the ground for a long time.

  7. Isa Almisry Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    … That step [accepting OCA canonicity] was taken when the OCA took her place on SCOBA.
    I notice that ROCOR has the statement on its website, where the ROCOR bishops are labeled as “Russian Orthodox Church,” and Met. Jonah and the Holy Synod are listed seperately “Orthodox Church in America.”

  8. Dean Calvert Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    You guys raise interesting points. I was thinking about the same during the weekend. I think the question is, “EXACTLY” what constitutes recognition?
    * Meeting with them officially – just occurred in NYC
    * Serving with representatives of the OCA – occurred last week in Moscow by the EP himself (with Fr. Zaccheus)
    * Being in a liturgy which commemorates the primate of the OCA – also happened last week in Moscow, with the EP present.
    To be honest, I’m not sure what else is left.
    What do you all think? Has the OCA been recognized in all but name?
    Honestly wondering if that wasn’t one of the results of last week.

  9. Isa Almisry Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    I’m taking the position that Met. Jonah, Archb. Demetrios and Pat. Kyrill are taking the strategy that one can be a little pregnant just for so long. Since the “registry of canonical bishops” contains the OCA, the OCA (and its autocephaly) cannot come under the perview of the “committee to determine the canonical status of local communities in the region that have no reference to the Most Holy Autocephalous Churches.”

    Does the OCA sit on the “committee to plan for the organization of the Orthodox of the region on a canonical basis?” Notice that the EA names itself successor to SCOBA, but did I miss any reference to the executive committee of the EA? Met. Jonah has not given up his claims to autocephaly: how is the Phanar going to explain that away? They are going to have to either go into denial and cut off communion, or face reality as they were forced to in Russia.

  10. George Michalopulos Says:

    as posted on‘Comments’: “Episcopal Assembly Concludes”

    Isa, excellent points all, as usual. However, I think we are coming close to a point that we can dispense with what the Old World thinks. Who cares? We’ve never been under any foreign patriarchates “protection” since the 1917. I mean, come on, has Bulgarian/Serbia/Greece/C’pole/Antioch/etc. ever paid for the erection of one building in North America? Have they subsidized the salary of so much as one cantor? Did they even donate one solitary pew anywhere? “Protection” means something, otherwise it’s an word devoid of all meaning.
    I know I’ve harped on this incessantly, but the idea that the American church is “immature” leads me to ask: OK, so if we were under your “protection” then it’s your fault things are so bass-akwards here.

Leave a Comment;

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for e-mail notifications.
Not all of your comments are necessarily displayed on this website.
Comments are not necessarily those of is the website of "Romanian Orthodox for Enquiry in America" and is not affiliated with the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America (ROEA) or with the Orthodox Church in America (OCA).


O Lord and Master of my life,
leave me not with the spirit of laziness,
of despair, of domination, or idle words.

Rather, give me, your servant, the spirit of integrity,
of humility, of patience, and of love.

Thus, Lord, grant me the wisdom to see my own faults,
and not condemn my brother;

for You are blessed, now and forever. Amen.


Our Father, who are in heaven,
hallowed be Your name.

Your kingdom come.
Your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.

Give us this day
our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those
who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.