en nh eMtoese .

Sere

cae heh Ree

NIAeths
RO whe
Rarareeturpntice
iAan bowel A-Ay
eect Wrivavaansh
Withien

OKA oAa:
PAYNRONha Par
vit :

annaeakterns
lose Bibsanhtalarmen
5 Pree
s
Hed
ros peer
ae AH FNS SA
hs
Ata
hey rah ELM ha

hag hseie
tetana Ratna

CIS.
he

*.
enue
a)
A Lew ABI
W-t Wicker

iy!
reer

aE
1) Hs"
Patt
ees

Sti

.f
Pt
. fo

4
Ra
AL

ein

ee

yayapat*
ie)
st

.
fs
;
e

>

|
:
ESP

oayi ‘ me
:

:
ay

; AO
: KAU

oye
Oe

ng
if Pats)
7
: pers
3 : re Tre
dak Ae
:

SAR
% 4 b
i ‘
t %+ Ae 9. Pe 54 .
petra CAUSA att oy
i ie ; ;
Dats
Hy italy ;
: Mynnlsias
: :;—<BkaN eh - aS
SRN I re: ; ays! kes
 Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2022 with funding from
Kahle/Austin Foundation

httos://archive.org/details/orthodoxamerica10000cons
ORTHODOX AMERICA
1794-1976
9]
 ORTHODOX AMERICA
1794-1976
DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA

General Editor: Constance J. Tarasar

Associate Editor: John H. Erickson

Editorial Committee
Alexander Doumouras
Reverend Leonid Kishkovsky
Vasily Lickwar
Reverend Alexander Schmemann

Cover Design: Reverend Laurence Lazar

Photography: Gregory Durniak

The Orthodox Church in America Department of History and Archives Syosset, New York 1975
ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA
1975
Printed in the United States of America
 ConTENTS
Foreword . ee Cig Se cats Bos
Dedication: Patriarch Tikhon 1925-1975 .
Introduction: To Love is to Remember
I. THE ALASKAN MISSION 1794—1870
Ruling Bishops: 16, Innocent, Bishop of Alaska: 21. Father Herman: 24.
Il. FOUNDATIONS FOR GROWTH 1870-1898 .
Ruling Bishops: 29, Parish Development: 32. Pioneer ee in Wilkeson: an Bathe
Nicholas Bjerring: 40. Father Alexis Toth: 50. Father Jason Kappanadze: 58. Father
John Nedzelnitsky: 60. News and Notes from the Messenger: 72. Journey to
Canada: 74. Educational Activity: 77. Life in the Missionary School: 79. Archiman-
drite Anatoly: 80. Translations and Publications: 81.
Il. ARCHBISHOP TIKHON AND THE NORTH AMERICAN DIOCESE 1898—1907 83
Patriarch Tikhon: 84. Inaugural Address: 90. Bishop Innocent: 94. Bishop Raphael: 95.
Archimandrite Sebastian Dabovich: 96. Church Institutions: 102. Archpriest Constantine
Popoff: 111. Recollections of Basil Bensin: 112. The Brotherhoods: 113. Parish
Development: 119. Father Theophan Buketoff: 123. Archpriest Benedict Turkevich: 125.
IV. DEVELOPMENT OF CHURCH LIFE 1907-1917. 127
Metropolitan Platon: 128. Archbishop Evdokim: 129. Bishop Philip: 131. Bishop
Alexander: 131. Bishop Stephen: 132. Reverend Michael Ilyinsky: 132. Church Insti-
tutions: 133. Father Nathaniel Irvine: 140. Educational Activity: 141. Survey of non-
Russian Orthodox Groups: 143. Protopresbyter Michael Andreades: 145. Metropolitan
Theophan Noli: 148. Parish Development: 149. It Happened in Elmira: 153. Father
John Gratson: 163. The “Foreign Colony” of Albion: 164. Archpriest Benjamin
Kedrovsky: 165. Diary of a Parish—Homestead, Pa.: 169.
V. CRISIS AND TRANSITION 1917-1922. 3 173
Archbishop Alexander Nemolovsky: 174. Father Alexander Paes: 170:
VI. NATIONALISM OR LOCAL CHURCH? 1923—1950. 182
A Counter-Sobor: 186. Archbishop Athnagoras: 189. Archbishop [akovos: 190.
Bishop Mardary: 193. Archbishop Aftimios: 195. Present and Future of Orthodoxy
in America, by Archbishop Aftimios: 196. Metropolitan Theophilus: 200. Educational
Activity: 202. Archbishop Benjamin: 204. Seminaries: 205. Basil M. Bensin: 209. The
Depression: 211. Parish Development: 214. Bishops from Abroad: 223.
Vil. SIGNS OF NEW GROWTH 1950-1965
Metropolitan Leonty: 232. Educational Activity: 234. ee Koulomzin: 235. First
Teacher’s Conference Recommendations: 237. Open Letter to the Churches: 238.
Development of Church Music: 240. Standing Conference of Orthodox Bishops: 242.
Campus Commission: 244. Membership in the World Council of Churches: 246.
Participation in the National Council of Churches: 248. Parish Development: 249. Those
“Wilderness Years’ of a New Parish: 256.
VUI. THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA 1965-1975 a See sys)
Metropolitan Ireney: 260. Autocephaly: 261. Telegram of April 14, 1970: 264.
Autocephaly—A Documentation: 265. Protopresbyter Joseph Pishtey: 271. Message to
all Orthodox Christians in America: 277. The Councils: 281. Archpriest Daniel
Hubiak: 284. New Bishops: 285. Diocesan Development: 288. The Diocese of
Alaska: 289. Canonization of Father Herman—Documents: 294. Orthodoxy in
Canada: 301. The Romanian Episcopate: 303. Bishop Polycarp: 307. The Albanian
Church: 309. Synodical Decree: 313. Message of Bishop Stephen: 314. The Mexican
Exarchate: 317. Spiritual Developments in our Time: 319.
PAPICTOLCCSa = inane OAR TI TOR hs MRL Se os, eee sO so EURO oid 5c ae 337
I. 1907 Parish Listing: 337. I. 1911 Parish Listing: 339. IH. 1918 Parish Listing: 340.
NCICCREIDUORTADRY age <a raed) ak evel: see 1s. ck. ate ere cere, eee ae 35]
CONTIDUIOTSE. 3. ae a, ee ee Dore... Bie 2 Bea Eee ea. ee aa ee ee Be)
 foreword
This book, published by the decision and under the authority of the Department of History and Archives
of the Orthodox Church in America, is our Church’s modest contribution to the Bicentennial of the United
States of America. We are convinced that there could be no better way for us to participate in the national
jubilee than by reminding ourselves and the American public of the path followed by the Orthodox Church
on this continent, of its progressive integration into the fabric of American life.
This is not, by any means, a full history of our Church, but only a very preliminary step towards such a
history. We are fully aware of the numerous deficiencies in our presentation, of its sometimes incomplete
and sketchy character. These defects are due primarily to the almost total absence of any serious studies of
The Orthodox in America, and to the impossibility for us to collect and to study all pertaining evidence.
We hope, however, that even in this imperfect form this book wil! give to its readers some taste of our past,
and the desire to know more, thus encouraging further studies.
We wish to express our deep gratitude to all those, too many to be named personally, who helped us by
sending materials and cooperating in the preparation of various chapters. A special gratitude is due to Miss
Constance Tarasar and to the members of the Editorial Committee.

ad beh bes Ls, Soule ie

Archbishop Sylvester, Chairman

Department of History and Archives

Phrcadin Sdrine amr,

Alexander Schmemann, Vice Chairman

Department of History and Archives

The Department of History and Archives

Archbishop Sylvester, Chairman Bishop Gregory
Protopresbyter Alexander Schmemann, Vice Chairman Archpriest Vladimir Borichevsky
Mr. John Erickson, Secretary Archpriest Dimitri Grigorieff
Mr. Serge Troubetzkoy, Archivist, Ex Officio Hieromonk Benedick (de Socio)
Archpriest Daniel Hubiak, Chancellor, Ex Officio Miss Constance Tarasar
Mr. Vasily Lickwar, Assistant to the Archivist
 a. :7
Vea
om

Oia’
: wy ie
‘ i a

= +o eee
» se J : 4 Le

iar a :
> ; : - ;

Ey : ; co : 7
poli) \aanemting b il? eee thaabta ta uh
Shed >
ings cyan
Fivegenesalkae ini
pttmxizntti iyo) tshwans Acnf) Gare =
oa fo Peay 75at?707.\(eW val’mehr cor ony
in Larngtlea thieFel Seyafteting,my nig
”
xaes id t steed Nase oat) vais en
;a— Mert tihewy
Pj Yoav 2ryine ta its awit) ity wt ena
, 5 Ty 4 sidetijersy ‘ oe COT: biol ene We
Th ys in aici Nas:mie af? a) yilteming sce ar
a vbitw oF tore towlten Cts ie ALLL) — A ik
oa ie
baw vy‘ifCite ile Oy taq Pirie et ©) yaam Vol sed) tle oy
2 be Shevat thierry tagoT) bd Se MAY (ha 7 [1h ext) LE

Tirume'D iesuctilel ate a pelea

_ = —
- \

aoe Reh Py SGD Dyan

Vee einsYE
CVO bie toe
a

-_ _
(SI ih! stern tm Mi
os) ~~
_ =a) 0" heii ut
ATA? Lee, 4

ao

7 1}
: >
| _ ny Orem sd * a
a . . ‘ oe fut me a te Nota er)

‘ | i ae FS
% es hel ‘awe eC ope ai ie _
wales) oq iheamG) teaagh pA a
; iia, aed tay ae “=
 DEDICATION
PATRIARCH TIKHON
1925-1975

“. .is the Word of God good only in the

old country and not in the entire uni-
verse? Is not the Church of Christ catho-
lic? Isnot the Orthodox faith the founda-
tion of the universe?...”
Archbishop Tikhon, Sunday of Orthodoxy, San Francisco, 1903

The fiftieth anniversary of the death of Patriarch Tikhon must become for us Orthodox the starting point
for deeper reflection about his unique place in the tragic history of Orthodoxy in the twentieth century. Many
today claim to follow the “Tikhonian way,” to be faithful to his message and to his principles. Amidst bitter
ecclesiastical quarrels and divisions his name alone, paradoxically enough, remains a common “term of
reference” and thus the hopeful sign of healing and reconciliation. But what is this “Tikhonian way,” what is
this message? If, as is clear by now, the veneration which has all these years surrounded his memory will sooner
or later find its fulfillment in official ecclesiastical canonization, if he himself has become a sign, it is essential
that we decipher this sign and make ours the meaning and the power revealed in it. Before icons of the late
Patriarch adorn the walls of our churches, we must try to understand the light of which these icons, as all icons,
are to be the presence and the reflection. Whatever the historical and geographical limitations ofhis biography,
a saint transcends them. His life, as it reveals itselfas vita, acquires an exemplary significance and a universal
value. It is in us, in our own particular situation, in our specific conditions, that it must bear its fruits. The time
comes when one has to look beyond “facts” and “data” into their essential significance for us, for the integra-
tion of the late Patriarch’s unique and personal testimony into the living tradition of the Church.
Psychologically, intellectually, spiritually the Patriarch was shaped by a world which seemed hopelessly
anachronistic even to many of his contemporaries. It was the quiet and patriarchal world of Russian
Orthodoxy as it had existed for centuries, protected from all storms and crises by the seemingly unshakeable
Orthodox Empire, a self-evident life style based on a self-evident set of values. Within that world many were
those who felt and announced the approaching crisis, the gathering storm. The prophecies of Dostoevsky, the
visions of Soloviev, the mounting revolutionary fever, the cultural and spiritual unrest—all this, however,

9
seems to have had no impact, no influence on the young Bellavin as he climbed one by one the steps of a rou-
tine, not to say banal, career. Son of a provincial priest, he followed the path which seemed predetermined:
Seminary, Academy, then return to Seminary as instructor, at the age of 23. The decisive yet also classic op=
tion: the vows of that “academic monasticism” which opened the door to the traditional cursus honorum:
inspectorship, rectorship and, finally, episcopate...A story repeated a thousand times, a well-oiled
mechanism, foreseeable in all its details. And in the man himself—nothing outstanding, extra-ordinary,
nothing of that which today one would term “prophetic” or “charismatic,” no claims to any particular “voca-
tion” or “mission” or “spirituality,” to theological originality or ecclesiastical leadership.
I say all this because it is this image of the future Patriarch as indeed an “average” man, the image which
remains his throughout his entire life, that constitutes in more ways than one the key to the role he played dur-
ing the most tragic decade in the history of the Russian Church. It is something deeply significant and certainly
not accidental that at the time of an unprecedented collapse, of a crisis which revealed the real value of so many
self-proclaimed leaders and prophets, it is this quiet and indeed “average” man who by divine election and the
unanimous recognition of the Church becomes the very bearer and the living symbol of the Church’s indestruc-
tibility by the “gates of hell.”
For what we, in our “human much too human” search for the original and the spectacular call “average,”
is revealed in Patriarch Tikhon as the primordial virtue and the essential grace: total humility, total obedience
to his calling, total identification with the Church. All his life he accepts offices and duties imposed on him by
others, and never once does he question any assignment in the name ofhis “personal vocation.” Faithful “over
a few things,” obedient to the Church in everything, he becomes ultimately the very epiphany of the Church, as
obedience to God, and of the episcopate, as the ministry of that obedience.
But then this quiet and humble ministry remains in the Church as a glorious victory. He is sent to America,
without having asked for that assignment, not concealing—in his very first sermon in San Francisco—that this
exile from his country, his family and his friends was difficult for him. “But now,” he says quoting Hosea, “I
will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people...” And this humble identification with the
real needs of this new people makes of Tikhon the unique Apostle of America, the one whom American
Orthodoxy will forever venerate as its “Father among the Saints.” And thus it is always and everywhere: the
same Obedience and therefore the same firm knowledge of what is good for the Church—of what expresses and
manifests the transcendent and eternal essence of theChurch—and therefore, ultimately, the same decisive vic-
tory.
It is of course at the end ofhis life, when he seems to have stood almost alone facing the “gates of hell,” that
Tikhon’s testimony, his martyria, acquired its fullness. And what we find at the heart of that martyria, as both
its moving power and its very content, is precisely the transcendence of the Church, the refusal to reduce it to
anything in this world, to let it be shaped and conditioned by any passing “situations.” It is remarkable indeed
that while for the Bolsheviks he was the Enemy, and while they spared no effort in harassing, torturing and
isolating him and—as is most probable—finally “liquidated” him, for many inside the Church, because of his
refusal of any “political” involvement or pronouncement, he appeared as a “compromiser.” He was abandoned
and often betrayed, deprived of all power, misunderstood, blamed, insulted. Yet it was then, during that
crucial decade, crucial for the entire Orthodox Church, that he shaped and determined that “Tikhonian way”
which since then has been so often corrupted in Russia as well as in “exile,” but which alone remains the true
way of the Church. In the long history of the Church, few are examples of such striking similarity to crucifix-
ion, of such lonely, yet truly saving suffering on behalf of many.
We are often tempted to think that the Church can be built on human wisdom and is to be measured by
this world’s idea and image of success. But then God sends to usa witness and through him reminds us that His
ways are not our ways, His wisdom not our wisdom. He reveals again the incomparable and ineffable beauty,
but also the power, of humility and obedience, reveals faithfulness as the true sensus Ecclesiae: the basic rule
and foundation of the Church’s life. The more we look, with reverence and love, at Patriarch Tikhon, at his life
and sufferings, the more we see in him one more icon of the Church, the one that today we need more than
anything else. At a time when everywhere in the world the Church seems mainly to be utilized for all kinds of
“causes” —national, ethnic, political—when in the midst of an unprecedented crisis and a truly universal
rebellion against God the Orthodox spend their time discussing their respective “privileges” and “rights,” this
man, stripped of all power and nailed to his cross, reminds us of the true power and the true glory of the
Church. It is of this mystery of the Church that the late Patriarch Tikhon is a God-sent witness and gift to us.
And it depends on us to accept his testimony and to make ours the truth and power revealed in it.
 ‘

To Love ts to Remember

To love is to remember. And to remember with love is truly to understand that which one loves and
remembers, to appropriate it as God’s gift. Thus with Orthodoxy in America. It was planted here only
eighteen years after American independence, whose Bicentennial we are about to celebrate. Yet many are
those who still affirm that the Orthodox have nothing to remember, nothing to love here except their
numerous “‘abroads,”’ those for whom America, from an Orthodox point of view, remains a meaningless no-
man’s land. As if the Church here had no past, no common destiny forged by generations of faithful, who by
their sacrifices and humble commitment have preserved our faith for us; as if God has not acted here, revealed
His will, bestowed His gifts; as if all this did not constitute a spiritual reality which every Orthodox, whether
he was born here or has come here and regardless of his background, must humbly accept.
Our only true participation in this country’s Bicentennial ought to be the rediscovery, in love and
gratitude, of our past, the one given to us by God as our common treasure, our common path, which by
determining our present reveals the way into the future. In these days of national remembrance and celebra-
tion, the question aimed at us Orthodox is this: is our faith, which we claim to be true and universal, to remain
a ceremonial and marginal accident in the texture of America, or is it, by the will of God, and essential event
which is happening not only in America but also fo America?
Perhaps the time has not yet come for a detailed and dispassionate study of this, our common past.
Such study, however, will never be possible if we do not begin by discerning and deciphering the signs by which
God has been revealing His will and His design to us. Simply to enumerate some of these signs is the purpose
of this introduction.

The Sign of Mission

The first sign is contained in the initial fact which both inaugurates and determines the history of
Orthodoxy in America. It is its appearance here as mission, the missionary origin and foundation of American
Orthodoxy. We must never forget that long before successive waves of immigration brought to these shores
sons and daughters of virtually every Orthodox nation, the Orthodox faith was implanted here by the basic
imperative implied in that faith itself: the desire to bring the Gospel to those who, not knowing Christ, “‘sat in
darkness and the shadow of death.”
If, less than five years after his ecclesiastical canonization, St. Herman of Alaska has generated so much
|ove, suchh truly
truly all-A
all-American veneration
veneration (already
(alrea six
ix 4new parishes
arishes have
ha placed
ac tl1emselves
| ler hishis holy
under holy
patronage), if this veneration unites people of different backgrounds, is it not because the humble Alaskan

1]
elder, his life, his total and unconditional commitment to the iand and the people to whom God sent him,
have been spontaneously accepted by the Orthodox in America as the personal focus of their spiritual identity,
of their reality under God? It was a Russian mission, we are told, sent to a Russian territory. True. But then is
it not even more significant that the aim of that Russian mission was not to make Alaskans into Russians but
to make Orthodoxy native, i.e. Alaskan? That it began not by teaching the natives Russian, but by translating
Russian liturgical books into Aleutian? What is eternally important, what makes that mission the permanent
foundation and inspiration of American Orthodoxy, is that its spirit and motivation were those of Christian
mission everywhere: the total identification of the Church with the people and with their real needs, spiritual
as well as material. We know that this identification, the defense by missionaries of the natives against foreign
exploitation, resulted in persecutions, sufferings, in what — from a human point of view — could seem a failure
and a defeat. That defeat, however, was transformed into a spiritual victory. Not only did Orthodoxy remain
in Alaska when the latter ceased to be Russian, but the Alaskan Orthodox mission became the source of
American Orthodoxy, its ultimate spiritual criterion. No external achievement and success, no numerical
growth will ultimately have any meaning if they betray and obscure the pure light forever shining from the
humble grave of St. Herman, truly the ““wonderworker of all America.”

The Sign of a Local Church

The mission growing into, fulfilling itself as the local Church: such is the second fundamental fact and
essential sign in the history of American Orthodoxy.
When we say “local Church” we mean much more than a permanent ecclesiastical unit and administra-
tive structure. We mean a Church with her own and unique identity distinguishing her from other Churches.
For if the Orthodox Church is one and indivisible — in faith, in tradition, in hierarchical order, in sacramental
communion — this unity not only does not exclude, but on the contrary, implies a diversity among Churches
in the way in which each of them “‘incarnates” the same divine gift. The one and same Orthodoxy fulfilled
itself in different ways and “incarnations” — in Africa and Syria, Egypt and Greece, Russia, Serbia, Bulgaria,
Romania, etc. And to deny the possibility of such incarnations — in the past, present or future — is to deny
that the Church “never grows old but always rejuvenates... .”

Now, the unique particularity of American Orthodoxy — and this almost from its very beginning — is
that it became a living encounter, after centuries of mutual isolation and even alienation, of virtually all
Orthodox traditions, of all treasures accumulated throughout centuries. Land of immigrants, America is there-
fore the land where the heritage of some can become the heritage of all, where, in other words, a living syn-
thesis is the very form of life. Hence a permanent tension between two tendencies: that towards an acute
“‘ethnicism,”’ the self-defense of each immigrant group against the loss of “‘roots” and “‘identity,”’ and that
towards “openness,” the desire to transcend the “ghetto” by discovering the universality of the cultural values
preserved by it. It is obvious that Orthodoxy here could not escape this tension. But the significant fact of its
history is that the local Church established here more than a hundred years ago was meant from the very
beginning to resolve that tension, to be not the extension of a “‘national”’ or “ethnic” Orthodox identity, but
the fulfillment of Orthodoxy as a common “‘identity” of all Orthodox.
When today, almost two hundred years after the implanting of Orthodoxy on the American continent,
one hears endless debates about the future Orthodox unification in America as a remote and not too realistic
ideal, to which one ritually pays lip service while in fact opposing its realization, one is amazed by the con-
scious or unconscious denial of a simple fact: that this unity did exist, was a reality, that the first “‘epiphany”’
of Orthodoxy here was not as a jungle of ethnic ecclesiastical colonies, serving primarily if not exclusively the
interests of their various “‘nationalisms’” and “‘mother-churches,” but precisely as a local Church meant to
transcend all “natural” divisions and to share all spiritual values; that this unity was broken and then arbitrarily
replaced with the unheard-of principle of “jurisdictional multiplicity” which denies and transgresses every
single norm of Orthodox Tradition; that the situation which exists today is thus truly a sin and a tragedy.
For this reason we should always remember that not only the ideal but also the very reality of one
Orthodox Church in America is an integral part of our heritage, a Church which truly unites in herself all the
treasures of Orthodoxy, presenting all of them as one treasure to the West, a Church whose proper vocation
and “identity” is to transcend and to heal the sad nationalistic fragmentation and isolationism in which the
Orthodox Churches lived, alas, for many centuries. When one reads the report presented in 1906 by Tikhon,
Archbishop of the Aleutian Islands and North America, to the Holy Synod of the Russian Church, a report
dealing with the future of American Orthodoxy, one realizes the depth of his vision, one hears the prophecy
that should guide us in our ecclesiastical efforts. One realizes that there is no other way for American
Orthodoxy than to return to that prophecy and to that vision, to fulfill today that which was given from the
very beginning.

2
The Sign of Suffering — The Cross
A common past, a common destiny is made up not only of victories and achievements but also of
failures and defeats experienced together and understood in the light of God’s will. Of such failures and
defeats our Church has had a full share and even today she hardly can claim to have solved all problems, over-
come all obstacles, reached all goals. And yet nowhere is her way under God and towards God clearer than in
the successive storms that challenged and are still challenging her. It is as if with each crisis a new dimension, a
new depth has been added to her life, a lesson taught and ultimately understood.
So it was at the time of the Russian Revolution when, suddenly and without any preparation, our
Church was deprived of the guidance, help and support of her Mother-Church and had to meet the challenge
of choosing her own way, of finding — in darkness and chaos, among divisions and rivalries — the permanent
foundations for her life. Yet that storm, whose aftermath we still feel sometimes, strengthened her unity, in-
spired clergy and laity alike with a new sense of responsibility for the Church, and resulted — without any
exaggeration — in a new awakening to the Orthodox understanding of the Church.
So it was with the difficult and painful adjustment to a totally new situation of the parish, with the
need to reconcile within a truly Orthodox framework the respective rights and obligations of the clergy and
the laity, to transform a “‘conflict” into “synergy” and a deeper experience of the Church as truly the People
of God.
So it was with education and seminaries, publications and press and virtually every aspect of the
Church life. The fiery debates at our Sobors and Councils, the conflicts and clashes which at times seemed so
deep as to exclude any solution, may have appeared sometimes as a sign of weakness and decay. In reality
those were the signs of strength and growth. Little by little we learned how to listen to one another, how —
together — to work for the Church and not for “our’’ particular interests in her. And now, in retrospect, one
can say that if not all problems were solved, all were faced and taken seriously, not dissolved in escapist
rhetoric.
Thus these conflicts and difficulties constitute the third “sign” of our past and present, the clearest
announcement of our future. There is no Christian life — personal or corporate — without a Cross. If together
we have gone through darkness and difficulties, if we have survived and grown, it means that the Church has
truly permeated our lives, that she has become a reality for us.
There are many around us who do not share this vision, who ignore this common past, who refuse to
read in it God’s will. Our answer to them can come only from our life itself. The future of our Church depends
on us, not just on our strength and ability, but above all on our obedience to Christ and to the wonderful
heritage He has bestowed on us.

Alexander Schmemann, Vice Chairman

Department of History and Archives
14
SHS Voy.
y
77
Z

oma
® Ye coriyMU
R

Vida
CHAPTER I

The Alaskan Mission 1794-1870

In 1741, while the American colonies were embroiled in
England’s war with Spain, and while the British were un-
successfully attempting to dislodge the Spanish from Flor-
ida and Cuba, the Russian explorers Bering and Chirikov
were opening Alaska and the Aleutian Islands to explora-
tion and colonization. On July 15, 1741, Captains John J.
Bering and Alexis J. Chirikov sighted the coast of Alaska,
and on the same day, Chirikov discovered Sitka Bay. Five
days later, July 20, 1741, on the Feast of St. Elias, the
priest-monk Illarion Trusov, assisted by the priest Ignaty
Kozirevsky, celebrated the first Orthodox Liturgy in Amer-
ica, on the ship St. Peter, which was commanded by Vitus
Bering and Chirikov, Alaska was exploited by hunters, free-
of America — Alaska — is for Orthodox Christians the old-
est part of Orthodox America and the source of their
spiritual roots in this land.
The First Mission: Kodiak
For approximately fifty years after the discoveries of
Bering and Chirikoff, Alaska was exploited by hunters, free-
lance adventurers, and merchants who sought to make their
fortunes on the furs which were so plentiful in this virgin
land. Pillaging and crime were not uncommon as natives and
exploiters sought revenge for each other’s terrible deeds.
It was within this context that the merchant Gregory Sheli-
kov organized the Golikov-Shelikov Company and outfitted
three ships with the intention of establishing a permanent
colony in the new territory. Landing at Three Saints Harbor
(now known as Old Harbor), not far from the present city
of Kodiak, he established his first settlement. Two ships
had been lost on the way, the journey was long and diffi-
cult, but the survivors arrived in July 1784 and proceeded
to build a small village and, in the two years spent at Kodi-
ak, established a dozen outlying stations. The nearest
settlement of Europeans at this time was a tiny Spanish
settlement at San Francisco, founded eight years earlier.
Returning to Russia in 1787, Shelikov sought government
aid for his colony and to enhance further hiscause he visit-
ed the Valaam Monastery, requesting the Church to estab-
lish a mission at his colony, which he promised to support.
Shelikov had boasted of having already built a school and a
chapeland of converting thousands of natives; unfortunately
when the missionaries finally arrived in Kodiak, none of
these accomplishments proved to be true.
In 1793, by directive of the Empress Catherine to
Metropolitan Gabriel of St. Petersburg, the Abbot Nazarius
of Valaam Monastery was instructed to recruit mission-
aries for the colony in Alaska. On December 25, 1793,
eight monks left St. Petersburg for America: Archimandrite
loasaf (Bolotov), head of the mission; the priest-monks
Juvenaly, Makary (from Koniev Monastery near Valaam),
Athanasy; the deacon-monks Nektary (from St. Alexander
Nevsky Monastery) and Stephan; and the monks Joasaph
and Herman. After a journey of 293 days and 7,327 miles
the mission arrived in Kodiak on September 24, 1794. They
had begun their journey at Valaam Monastery near St.
Petersburg, traveled across European Russia and all of
Siberia to the Kamchatka Peninsula, where they completed
their journey by sea to Kodiak, having traversed one-third
of the world’s circumference while never leaving the Rus-
sian Empire.
Arriving in Russian America, the members of the mission
found the most primitive conditions, with the barest mini-
mum of the amenities of the civilized world. Some of the
natives had been baptized into the Orthodox faith by lay-
men, but their knowledge of the faith was minimal. By
November 21, 1794, the Holy Resurrection Church was
established in Kodiak. Within the next two years, the priest-
monk Makary was sent to the Aleutian Islands, and the
priest-monk Juvenaly into the interior of the mainland,
where he was killed by the natives on September 29, 1796,
at Lake Illiamna. During this time, many natives on the
Aleutian Islands, the Kenai Peninsula, as well as the popula-
tion of Kodiak were baptized and a school for children was
established, despite the hardships suffered by the entire
community. Father Herman, a simple monk all his life,
worked among the Aleuts for 43 years, teaching them both
by word and by example. The last surviving member of the
Kodiak Mission, Father Herman died on December 13,
1837, at the age of 81. (Cf. Chapter VIII: Canonization of
Father Herman.)
The Holy Synod of the Russian Church decided to estab-
lish a missionary bishopric in the Aleutian Islands and Alas-
ka and called Archimandrite Ioasaf back to Russia, where
’ Holy Resurrection Church, Kodiak, Alaska.
 RULING BISHOPS 1799 - 1870
On May 4, 1793, permission was granted by the Empress
Catherine If of Russia to the Holy Governing Synod of the
Russian Church to establish an Orthodox Mission in
America. The first missionaries arrived in Alaska on Septem-
ber 24, 1794, headed by Archimandrite Ioasaf. On July 19,
1796, by decree of the Holy Synod, the Vicariate of Kodiak
was established and the first hierarch, Bishop Ioasaf, was
consecrated in 1799 for the new see. Although he never was
able to assume the duties of his cathedra, having perished at
sea on his return, Bishop loasaf was the first of the follow-
ing hierarchs consecrated for service in the new missionary
territory of Alaska.

Kodiak Vicariate of the Diocese of Irkutsk

Bishop loasaf (1799)
Bishop lIoasaf (Bolotov) was born on January 22, 1761,
in Kashin district. After studying at the Yaroslav Seminary.
he entered the Valaam Monastery in 1786. In 1793, he was
appointed the head of the Mission to America. The Mission
left St. Petersburg on January 22, 1794, and arrived at
Kodiak Island on September 24, 1794. Archimandrite Ioasaf
served as head of the Kodiak Mission until 1799 when he
was consecrated Bishop of Kodiak, Vicar of Irkutsk, on
April 10 by Archbishop Benjamin of Irkutsk (probably the
only hierarch in the history of the Russian Church to be
consecrated by a single bishop). He perished at sea in May
1799 on his return to Alaska. The Kodiak episcopal cathe- Bishop Innocent (as Metropolitan of Moscow)
dra was closed by the Holy Synod in 1811.

Diocese of Kamchatka, the Kuriles and the Aleutians
Bishop Innocent (1840-1858)
Bishop Innocent (John Veniaminov-Popov) was born on
August 26, 1797, in Anginskoe of the province of Irkutsk.
After graduating from the Irkutsk Seminary in 1818 (having
been ordained to the diaconate in 1817), he chose to enter
parish life and was ordained to the holy priesthood at the
age of 23 in 1821. He arrived in America with his family on
July 29, 1824, and assumed his duties as priest of Unalaska
and the surrounding territory. In 1834, he was transferred
to the parish in New Archangel (Sitka). While on a visit to
Russia in 1839 to arrange for publication of his translations
and ethnographic works, his wife died; he consequently ac-
cepted monastic tonsure on November 29, 1840, and eleva-
tion to Archimandrite. On December 15, 1840, at the Kazan
Cathedral in St. Petersburg, he was consecrated Bishop of
Kamchatka, the Kuriles and Aleutians, with the cathedral
see at New Archangel (Sitka). Leaving St. Petersburg on
January 10, 1841, he arrived at his see in Alaska on Sep-
tember 26, 1841. In 1850, Bishop Innocent was named
Archbishop and in 1852 his diocesan seat was moved from
Sitka to Yakutsk, where he governed until 1868. By decree
on January 31, 1858, two auxiliary bishoprics (vicariates)
were established in the Diocese of Kamchatka: Yakutsk and
New Archangel. On May 26, 1868, Archbishop Innocent
was named Metropolitan of Moscow. He died on March 31,
1879, at the age of 81.
New Archangel Vicariate
of the Diocese of Kamchatka
Bishop Peter (1859-1867)
Bishop Peter (Lysakov) came to Alaska as Archimandrite
and Rector of the Sitka Seminary. He was consecrated
Bishop of New Archangel on March 29, 1859, in the
Cathedral in Irkutsk. Carrying on the work of his predeces-
sor, Archbishop Innocent, he opened two additional mission
schools in Kodiak and Unalaska and extended missionary
activity to the Bering Straits. He returned to Russia in 1867,
upon the cession of Alaska to the United States, and was
appointed Bishop of Yakutsk. He died in Ufa in 1882.
Bishop Paul (1867-1870)
Bishop Paul (Peter Popov) was born in Krasnoyarsk,
Russia. An unmercenary who lived a life of Christ-like
poverty, this meek and peaceful man assumed the bishopric
of New Archangel in 1867, ruling during a time of great un-
rest and transition in Alaska as the territory was ceded to
the United States. Facing the exodus of Russians to Russia,
military occupation of the territory, and the influx of sec-
tarians, his rule was marked by great difficulties which led
to the eventual transfer of the seat of the diocese to San
Francisco in 1872. During his return trip to Russia, on
November 12, 1870, he consecrated the first Orthodox
church in New York City, Holy Trinity Greco-Russian,
organized by Father Nicholas Bjerring.

16
he was consecrated Bishop of Kodiak in the cathedral of
Irkutsk on April 10, 1799. He never reached his see, how-
ever, for in May 1799 the boat of the Russian-American
Company, the Phoenix, perished in stormy waters near Un-
alaska with Bishop loasaf and his companions, the priest-
monk Makary and the deacon-monk Stephan. There was no
episcopal appointment for forty years. Remaining to carry
on the work of the mission were only the priest-monk
Athanasy, the deacon-monk Nektary and the monk Herman.
Unalaska
The mission, which was part of the Diocese of Irkutsk,
had to face many problems, the greatest being the lack of
clergy willing to service its flock. Since Alaska was a mis-
sion, the Bishop of Irkutsk had to rely on volunteers to fill
its needs, and volunteers to such an outpost were rare. Only
five old priests had remained to serve the faithful, and of
the four or five churches and chapels that existed, only
those at Kodiak and New Archangel (Sitka) were in regular
use. Most of the missionary priests failed to learn the native
languages and were hesitant to visit the more remote areas.
Lay people continued to baptize and hold services when
priests were not available.
For two years, the community in Unalaska was without
a priest and the native Aleuts were in danger of forgetting
the faith they had received, but in 1823 a young, energetic
and scholarly priest volunteered to enter the mission field,
Church of the Ascension,
against the advice even of his bishop. Father John Veniami-
nov at the age of 27 arrived in Unalaska, after a journey of
almost a year, on July 29, 1824, with his wife, a new son,
his brother and his widowed mother. They settled among
the natives and immediately began to study the native cul-
ture and language. Soon Father John began to translate the
catechism into Aleut, for which he created an alphabet
from the Cyrillic, a dictionary, a grammar and a primer.
Later he translated the Gospel of St. Matthew and parts of
the Divine Liturgy. He taught the Aleuts the basics of agri-
culture, carpentry and metal work, established Alaska’s first
meteorological station, and compiled a three-volume ethno-
graphic work: Notes on the Islands of the Unalaska District.
He also built with his own hands the church dedicated to
the Ascension of Our Lord, which was consecrated in Un-
alaska on July 29, 1826. Under his supervision, a school, an
orphanage, and many chapels on nearby islands were built
during his decade of service in Unalaska. His school had over
100 pupils of both sexes, where housekeeping, trades and
religion were taught along with reading, writing and arith-
metic. By the end of his period of service, he had established
literacy in the Aleut region in the native tongue of the
peoples, having developed the written form of what is now
referred to as the Aleut-Fox dialect. In 1834, Veniaminov
was persuaded by Governor Wrangell to move to New
Archangel to expand his missionary work in the territory.
Unalaska

New Archangel (Sitka)
The first priest to arrive in New Archangel was Father
Alexis Sokolov, who began his work in the colony in 1816.
The governor of the colony, Alexander Baranov, who for-
merly had never been much of a supporter of church life,
had become frail and sickly; upon the arrival of Father
Sokolov, Baranov determined to proceed with the building
of a church, even utilizing his own funds rather than those
of the company. The first church building was to be a re-
modeled ship that was hauled up on the land. Special fur-
nishings were prepared: the shipyard foundry cast a bell,
the blacksmiths fashioned the eucharistic vessels, the vest-
ments were sewn with fine beadwork on silk by the women.
Father John Veniaminov came to New Archangel in
1834, where he also began immediately to learn the language
and culture of the Tlingit Indians, who had been tradition-
ally hostile to the white population. Although conversions
were few, he managed to gain the confidence of the native
people while helping to combat an epidemic of smallpox by
preaching the necessity of innoculations. In 1836, he was
asked to visit a small post in California, where a chapel had
been established in 1812 at Fort Ross on the Russian River
L rapidly began to exhibit the signs of church growth and
Chapel at Fort Ross, California
(about 80 miles north of San Francisco). During this visit,
he was fascinated by his encounters with the Franciscan
missionaries, with whom he was able to converse in Latin.
After visiting several Franciscan missions and noting their
accomplishments and needs, he later built a number of
barrel-organs, which he sent to them in appreciation for the
reception he was given. Father John traveled extensively in
the southern part of Alaska, just as, during his stay in Un-
alaska, he had traveled extensively throughout the Aleutian
Islands on frequent missionary journeys. Often, especially
on his early travels, he journeyed by native kayak, some-
times up to 15 hours at a time, and in freezing weather, re-
sulting in partial crippling of his legs, from which he suffer-
ed in later life. In 1838, he was given leave to go to St.
Petersburg to request assistance for the colony, to present
the recommendation for the creation of a separate diocese
which would train its own native clergy, and to arrange for
the publication of his translations and various works. While
18
in Russia, his wife died and Father John immediately be-
came one of the candidates for the position of bishop of the
new diocese whose creation he supported. The Holy Synod,
impressed by the dynamic and zealous missionary, recom-
mended that he return to New Archangel as the bishop of
the diocese. After much soul-searching, Father John accept-
ed the tonsure of a monk and was consecrated as Bishop
Innocent of Kamchatka, Kurile and Aleutian Islands on
December 15, 1840, in the Cathedral of Our Lady of Kazan,
St. Petersburg, with the American mission having thus been
released from the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Irkutsk.
Bishop Innocent arrived in his new diocese, whose see
was New Archangel, in September 1841. He continued to
further the missionary efforts among the Aleuts and also
continued his linguistic work among the Tlingits. A native
Aleut of mixed (Aleut and Russian) parentage, James Nets-
vietov, a graduate of the Irkutsk Seminary, had continued
the work on the Aleutian chain and was persuaded also to
expand his efforts to include missionary work among the
Athabasca Indians on the Yukon River.
The Diocese of Kamchatka, Kurile
and Aleutian Islands
The center of the new diocese at New Archangel (Sitka)
organization. The New Archangel Spiritual Consistory and
Ecclesiastical Seminary were established in Sitka during the
period of Innocent’s administration. In 1842, construction
began on the Mission House (still the oldest standing build-
ing in Alaska), which contains Annunciation Chapel, the
oldest house of Orthodox worship in continuous use in the
western hemisphere. Two years later, in 1844, construction
began on the Cathedral of St. Michael the Archangel, the
first cathedral in America, consecrated on November 20,
1848, in the presence of nearly fifty clergy of the Alaskan
mission, who had gathered for the celebration. The sudden
rise in the number of clergy had been due directly to the
establishment in 1845 of the first Orthodox seminary in
America, housed in the Mission House. Twenty-three native
ay ee i *
Sitka Ecclesiastical Seminary Building
 St. Michael’s Cathedral, Sitka, 1880

and creole students enrolled in the opening class for a cur- after it had ceased to be part of the territory of the Russian
riculum which included, in addition to theological studies, government after the sale of Alaska to the United States in
six hours per week of native languages (Aleutian, Eskimo, 1867.
Tlingit), three years of medicine and three years of Latin. During the years prior to the sale of Alaska, the Diocese
In 1852 Bishop Innocent was given charge of the continued under the leadership of Bishop Peter, who ex-
Yakutsk Diocese. Henceforth his time was divided between tended the missionary activity to the region of the Bering
Alaska and the Asiatic mainland, where he continued his
missionary and linguistic work among natives of the Russian
Far East. By 1858 the New Archangel Seminary was trans-
ferred with him to Yakutsk, and the see of New Archangel
received the status of an auxiliary bishopric in the Kam-
chatka Diocese (January 6, 1858). In 1859 Innocent, now
Archbishop, paid his last visit to Sitka, where he had served
for 15 years as a priest and 22 years as a missionary bishop.
The former rector of the Sitka seminary, Bishop Peter
(Lysakov) was appointed as the auxiliary bishop for Sitka.
In an 1860 government inspection, the Church in Alaska
was said to include some 12,000 native Alaskan Christians,
and 43 communities with 35 chapels, 9 churches (two of
which were in Sitka), 17 schools and 3 or 4 orphanages. But
Innocent, the “Apostle of Alaska,” did not forget his first
diocese; when elected Metropolitan of Moscow, one of the
highest offices in the Russian Church at that time, he work-
ed toward the formation of the Russian Imperial Missionary
Society, which was founded in 1870 under his leadership
and over which he presided until his death in 1879. The
Missionary Society was responsible for providing the funds
necessary for the continued support of the Diocese even Raising the Cross on the Tower of the Sitka Cathedral

Be,
 Straits and encouraged the work of the native clergy. Bishop
Peter initiated the first formal inquiry into the life of Father
Herman, which led eventually to his formal canonization a
century later. The ceding of Alaska coincided with the ap-
pointment of Bishop Paul (Popov) to succeed Bishop Peter
in 1867. Church life, however, became increasingly difficult
with the exodus of the ‘Russian colony after the sale of
Alaska and the military occupation that led to a general
degeneration and disintegration of life in Sitka and the
Alaskan territory, while the American Congress generally
ignored the care of the new land. Due also to the fact that
the diocese was now in foreign territory, the Holy Synod on
June 10, 1870,created the separate Diocese of Alaska and
the Aleutian Islands for the new situation. Bishop John
(Mitropolsky) was appointed the new bishop of the Dio-
cese, and Bishop Paul returned to Russia. Two years later,
Bishop John unofficially moved the bishop’s see from Sitka
to San Francisco, a move which was officially sanctioned
under his successor, Bishop Nestor. The future events of the
Diocese of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands were to have
their chief focus now in the “lower 48,’ as new movements
led to an even greater expansion of church life across the
American continent.

Report of Affairs of the New Archangel Ecclesiastical

Administration (Sitka) 1869

A gett ” sae . caicuinabeentamens --

Saree : ‘s i gs qn:

| O Vhwupeoraroryluobietistprlaileshk
| f ,) corr 3 a

| é
{ | } 2»
Mik ion scene Cote : : 4 VIW NL eraccemssmsers ¢ Mamerart &
a enon, i a Mb oprcvmmssce 4
nf
: eek aea wisithipovren j ii ;
* Plewcvrvcave
Bs
40

ta MCD 2 i (Mprerrortspees dijewmarsia: Spesisran bere ye

Pg hs Fb crarontifen “ps, i a

ce Freee 2
a“

vA &
+

{ *

Saree Mae we eene soe i cA

HOR waitin Dion
te.Chek tote j Fe
ke eth Dit, Mae mney
z seas a9 gS PEEL DEORE
. i . A
4
: x ipl
y pe

j
OF, rome PlmacsHe
Foy aceianan
wnnet i 6.
Sx tumumtnecnn Y
S GeThccsey., : *e
a ye RO hosakon
:
ae? a GP mincneichnllh bad y
aes Mt et Paar cmpenidncat all
on a ey Oty é

be Can, EPS iar dmilioas i

Co Pe ee a ie anne ,
gr ai om ml fh ovvrm ; *
te ee Praag os
5 a nee eae Ba
tw Fe 4
A vbome
7 2 op sre * 2 #
See Kt
0 oS, ath on estmipsraise
thts ae 2 “;
vA Pin tenle dann 2
i be theo : <is 4
° id a4
| canbe o

List of Alaskan Clergy from 1841

INNOCENT
Bishop of Alaska
1840 — 1878
Bishop Innocent of Alaska, later Metropolitan of Mos-
cow and first hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church,
has been described by one author (Hector Chevigny,
Russian America) as “‘Paul Bunyan in a cassock’’ because
of his size and impressive appearance, yet all who met him
were struck by his gentleness and compassion. After the
original Kodiak mission had dwindled to only the elderly
Father Herman of Spruce Island, he came to carry the
apostolic mission of bringing Christianity to native Alaskans.
Innocent was born as John Popov on August 27, 1797,
in Aginsk, a small village near Irkutsk, Siberia. His family
was deeply involved in the life of the Church and by six
John was reading in his parish although he had no formal
education. At the age of nine, he entered the Irkutsk Theo-
logical Seminary and proved to be its most brilliant pupil
during his eleven years at the school. Whatever John did, he
excelled in it. Besides his seminary classes, he read all of the
books in the well-stocked tibrary dealing with history and
the sciences. While still a student he began to construct
Bishop Innocent of Alaska
different types of clocks and acquired the skills of carpen-
try, furniture making, blacksmithing and the construction
of musical instruments. At the age of seventeen, in recogni-
tion of his outstanding achievement at the seminary, his last
name was changed to Veniaminov in honor of the late
Bishop Veniamin, or Benjamin of Irkutsk. John was to have
attended the Moscow Theological Academy, but instead he
married the daughter of a priest and was ordained to the
diaconate. In 1821, he was ordained to the priesthood and
given a parish where he instituted religious education classes
for all ages.
Father John could have continued a more or less com-
fortable existence as a parish priest in Russia, but stories he
heard while a seminary student gave him the desire to serve
as a missionary. While still very young, Father John listened
to the stories of an old man who had spent thirty years on
Unalaska, in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. He heard of the
simple, loving people of Unalaska who had never heard of
Christ, and of the beautiful land in Alaska. In 1823, when
 HAYATKH
XPHCTIAIAAA AUNT ACHE ALIA
XPUCTIAHCKATO YUEHIA
HT AWC HIFNHS
itt
.
BEATHAR CRHIEINAS ae
HCTOPIA aihwondannn dacan.

& HOTTY PUA

RPATHIN NPUCTIANOEEH ‘ : Rant
KATHXIEBNCB eee
RATHXHSHGA.

Hasera rau oe lodnex Reriaamnons faayeraeane

Bastrasnn weSude aneASHE Ndacaane rebate
rears gat rf eSamettica niin, Hany pig Tan.
BALAK Ans et yavarseu at WHR: TATA RAAT
rh ang fiers Hagnberone nasyense He Seesy T8.
esest Hhrsinaye ves vic HAAR tA Pana.
ane Baarstee Kar EA asst Heie wryLtseRT,
| SHSTURIREE EOS,
fvwogaseuse Teworrs esa
VENTAMINOV?S CHAIRS oh Se eer bes
Father Veniaminoy spent many of his spare hours in cabinet making; the priests’s
house at Sitka contains some notable examples of his works sa nship,
PATHEK VENTAMESCAUA CATH EIST

Examples of Father Veniaminov’s craftsmanship are these Sacred History and Catechism written by Veniaminov for use in
chairs made by him. Alaska 1827-1837.
the Bishop of Irkutsk was asked to send a priest to Un- In 1834, Father John and his family were transferred to
alaska and everyone else refused, Father John volunteered Sitka, where they found that the Tlingit Indians disliked
to go, against the wishes of his family and friends. After the Russians’ leadership. He learned their language and
fourteen months of travel across the wilds of Siberia and culture, but they showed no real interest in his preaching
the Bering Sea, he arrived in Unalaska with his wife, son, until a smallpox epidemic hit the area. Father John con-
mother and brother. vinced many of the Tlingits to be vaccinated, and thus many
Upon arriving on the island, there was no house or of them were saved. This epidemic proved the way in which
chapel, but Father John welcomed this as an opportunity he would reach these natives. Gradually, by teaching and
to teach the natives. He first built a home for his family, example, he gained their love and respect. In 1836, Father
but he used the work on this house to teach the natives
carpentry. Constructing furniture for the new home, he
taught the natives furniture building. With these new skills,
the natives assisted Father John in the construction of the
cathedral of the Ascension, which was completed in 1826.
All during this time, Father John’s primary work was con-
verting and educating the natives. His first task was to learn
the Aleutian language and the life style of the people. He
and his wife organized a school for the natives and their
own six children. One of the required subjects was the
Aleutian language, for which Father John had devised an
alphabet based on the Cyrillic. He translated services and
the Gospel of St. Matthew and even wrote a small book
called A Guide to the Way to the Heavenly Kingdom in the
Aleut language. Everywhere he went, Father John recorded
his observations.
He traveled throughout the Aleutian Islands to teach
and baptize people. It was from missionary work and teach-
ing the Gospel that he received his greatest joy. He traveled
to the other islands in a bidarka, a small canoe in which one
must sit with his legs stretched in front of him. In this
position for long periods of time in the chilling waters,
Father John eventually experienced a partial crippling of
his legs and constant pain. While preaching, he always
managed to communicate effectively with the poeple, as an
aged Aleut revealed years later:
When he preached the Word of God, all the people
listened, and they listened without moving until he
stopped. Nobody thought of fishing or hunting while
he spoke; nobody felt hungry or thirsty as long as he
was speaking, not even little children. Mantel Clock made by Father Veniaminov.

i) i)
John went to serve the Orthodox at Fort Ross, California, Pr Ree
for six weeks and toured the Spanish missions. He was able faa BSarnan ane Marin amma, i
Sty Anwi rua meade Si. Kawa xe Kaamenna
to communicate with them in Latin, which he had learned nanerhr‘s cae "any Srey OA, KW BHQarE: oN
©, VSan Amey aSenrcanns 408
AY MAWKARK adn’
& A na name skannor,
AY GER, Canad FAoKo,
in the Irkutsk Seminary. Saath SHOW AIDA Kasetes Aer sYoua Baum, aio taglines, pesererwertd wae Kiabe, VAAN i dele ex pagorrin aylia.
Bie Tala quinn cae wate Hi. Aawing wo rsardan Ro as arenyr dyer aera Gt
In 1836, Father John decided to return to Russia to Yavisaarn mene nana. RAMA, HW ANEZHFPOHRL raat arerations
ABI: AaUANNARSrA Nay AS B npiniaumyar nomen bie ma IniSeieednn rane Bs. Me Smare see wopies
report to the Holy Synod on the needs of the Alaskan KAT HEA ONO ATO sagérn, dae aigRTe, Aasmaan saat ana yh mx ces, do npan
piments
MraMyWSAdre, MAAN eet fee sighete: a cantuaen, | Gera: saiswn xe ated,
Mission. After leaving his family in Irkutsk, he went on to TTANNWIFATE 4 TanerAnRLte Gee cawimere, So nL
Aer eraseswana at
TH.
nears eAuiwe sare sual Hak rominle caoant page,
Moscow, where he met with the Holy Synod after a fund ators ERA Bane Heys Wade. : suaniyeatione nana dale cosaamnaerta.
KART% saa ratininste ane4 N= Nee ins viawyans
raising tour of several Russian cities. The Synod approved reeeriacaaiorn PUAN. : Saanaadadar avin, =
his request for more priests and funds for the Mission and fie Ame remy
gs waSserayT
weer a.
eax ngieed chegacw.
Ba we eftantenery oe Aca EAA Ge A chameoe sa Sip.
“ufa,ofGorn,canna dee,
wanted to publish his translations. It was also in Moscow swmin Sua doneta ofsa cee, ad
AieTA ROPSTENRA, BOAAE,
that he learned of the death of his wife and was encouraged £1. Bact rammed
- * eo < . . .
fis “Tanarnine cenvr AY ie rman hee ates
mannenarcaacatonas ser. f89K0 apreia Sone pag ou saparrantoa HAR AAPEE ROBO. BEEZ RAORA
by Metropolitan Filaret of Moscow, who found an apostolic Wea UN cam eden abana. AER ESART av. : sehuln canis sys unary:®
Abie, TARrAYICRy AKA. SARK OR ReRERRAETE IRSPMIRE AUNT ARE Kut
quality in Father John, to become a monk. He did this HALIAR Ky ore STAT weraye scheme 62 signage Ene AYRANSR

after much prayer and after assuring himself that his chil- Aiearas WRARY
Sh RR MO
was THe
ery ySat
He Gera. GR pe adore ire Auscaiin ene PATE
AQUHAKANE MELANIE vita
ve. A ebairoe aa poephe
gin, @ Gera. eARnnad
Fhannos -
dren would be cared for by the Holy Synod. Soon after Rats WaSaw seed ¥ NE AREER ee NENERIALY HORo 8 pradovkaca: nme
Haboniray nas Hays 4 ANA YE LUEERUP sYxw ROLE punonETs,
this, the Alaskan Mission became a diocese and Father John,
who received the monastic name of Innocent, was conse-
Pages from the Aleut Bible prepared by Father Veniaminov.
crated Bishop of Kamchatka and Alaska on December 15,
1840. As bishop, he traveled all over his vast diocese in
Asia and America to teach and organize churches. Every-
where he preached and served in the native language. In
of Japan (canonized in 1970), who was just about to begin
Sitka, he organized a seminary to train native priests and
his life’s work, and he gave Nicholas advice on missionary
built a new cathedral dedicated to the Archangel Michael.
work. Despite declining health and his request to retire,
Even though he was preoccupied with the affairs of the
Innocent was elevated as Metropolitan of Moscow in 1868.
diocese, he found time to construct, with his own hands,
He was loved by the people for his charity work, and he
the large clock on the front of the Cathedral. remembered his missions by organizing the Imperial Mission
In 1850, Bishop Innocent was raised to the rank of arch- Society, which he served as its first president. Almost blind
bishop, and the Archdiocese was enlarged to include more and in constant pain, Metropolitan Innocent died on Holy
territory in Asiatic Russia, with a new center at Yakutsk. Saturday, 1879, at the age of eighty-two. He had served
Once more he and his priests set out to learn languages and Christ and the Church with his entire life, having distin-
cultures. They taught by example and with gentleness. In guished himself as a true missionary and apostle — the
1860, Archbishop Innocent met the future Bishop Nicholas apostle to America.

°
*

.
.°
4
y ae

oe
a Y
*
+

*
2

Yi
«
«
.

*
*
<A
s.
‘e
.oe
a.
See
ats

i
e

¢
«
eo
*. OY
o
ee
Oe
F886
Doe
BOs
eee
8:
6
Keeae

6
OHHH
TOTS
GES
FO
4.8
DRO
HOt
OR
RR
He
©

Calendar devised by Father Veniaminov for

the natives to help them count the passage of
Bishop Innocent, his son and grandson. time and know the days of the church feasts

tOws)

Monk and Missionary
Among the monks sent by the Holy Synod of the Rus-
sian Orthodox Church for missionary work in Alaska was
the simple monk, Father Herman. It was Father Herman
who was to carry out the work of the original mission after
all of the others died or returned to Russia. He dedicated
his life to bringing Christ to the native Alaskans and to help-
ing them in any way possible. They, in return, grew to love
and revere their ‘Apa,’ which is an affectionate title for
grandfather or elder.
Little is known of the early life of the monk Herman. He
was born in the town of Serpukhov in the Moscow Diocese
around 1756. At the age of 16, the future Father Herman
entered the monastic life at the Trinity-St. Sergius Her-
mitage which was near St. Petersburg. While he was at this
Hermitage, Herman developed a severe infection on the right
side of his throat which brought him to the point of death.
However, after fervent prayer before an icon of the Theoto-
kos, he fell into a deep sleep. During this sleep, Herman
dreamed that he was healed by the Virgin and upon waking,
he had completely recovered. After remaining at Trinity-
Sergius for about five more years, he moved to the Valaam
Monastery on Lake Ladoga.
It was from Valaam that Father Herman and the other
monks left for their mission to the Alaskan colony. During
his stay at this monastery, he developed a strong spiritual
attachment to the Elder Nazary. He found in Nazary a
gentle yet effective spiritual guide whom he would rem-
ember for the rest of his life. At this time Gregory
Shelikov, head of the Golikov-Shelikov Company, visited
24
Father Herman
the Valaam Monastery and requested monks to work in
this new mission. Father Herman was among the monks
selected for this endeavor in 1793.
After almost a year’s travel, the little band of eight
monks arrived on Kodiak Island on September 24, 1794.
From Kodiak, the monks began their effort to convert and
educate the natives. Several thousand Alaskans were con-
verted, but somehow the mission did not have the success
that had been expected. Archimandrite Ioasaf, who headed
the mission, was consecrated a bishop but died with two
others when the ship on which he was returning to Alaska
sank, and Father Herman became the head of the mission.
Eventually only Herman survived from the original mission.
From the beginning, he distinguished himself with his
humility, compassion for the natives and his administrative
skills.
Father Herman and the other members of the mission
felt that it was their duty to protect the Alaskans from
harm and exploitation. They defended them against the
often cruel treatment of the Russian-American Company,
which controlled the colony under the leadership of Alex-
ander Baranov. The monks protested strongly against the
company’s harsh treatment of the people and were perse-
cuted because of this. In 1800, Baranov placed the monks
under house arrest and forbade them any contact with the
newly converted Christians. Within a year the monks further
enraged Baranov and incurred threats of physical violence
from him for trying to place the natives under imperial
protection by administering an oath of allegiance to the
Czar to them. After this threat, the remaining monks with-
drew into their compound in Kodiak and refused to serve
in public as a protest.
Sometime between 1808 and 1818, Father Herman left
Kodiak and went to Spruce Island, which he called “New
Valaam.” He spent the rest of his life on the island, where
he cared for orphans, ran a school and continued his mis-
sionary work. His life on the island was that of an ascetic
and was in many ways similar to the lives of the early Chris-
tian monks who lived in the desert. He built the small
chapel, school and guest house. Food for himself and the
orphans was produced from his own experimental garden.
Caring little for himself, Father Herman wore the oldest
and simplest clothes under his cassock and ate very little.
His cell was very simple and practically empty. His free time
was devoted to prayer and to following the services he
could do as a simple monk who in humility refused to be
ordained. When asked if he was ever lonesome, Father Her-
man answered, “No, I am not alone there! God is there, as
God is everywhere. The most holy angels are there. With
whom is it better to talk, with people or with angels? Most
certainly with angels.”
Father Herman continued to grow in his love for the
natives while he was on Spruce Island. He saw them as
newly-born children in the faith, who had to be guided and
taught. He had a special love for the children and they were
very fond of him. One of his greatest pleasures was being
with children, teaching them and giving them the treats he
made. During this time a ship from the United States
brought an epidemic to the Alaskans. Hundreds of them
died, but they were not alone for Father Herman remained
with them constantly. He went from person to person com-
forting the dying and praying with them. After the epidemic
was over, Herman brought the orphans back to New Valaam
with him and cared for them. On Sundays and holy days,
Father Herman loved to gather the people for prayer and
singing. He would give sermons that captivated all of those
present. He could see into the hearts ofhis spiritual children
and help them.
The natives saw Father Herman as their intercessor with
God. They recognized his holiness and turned to him for
help. Once there was a great flood on Spruce Island and the
natives came to Father Herman for help. He took an icon of
the Theotokos, placed it on the beach and said, “Have no
fear. The water will not go any higher than the place where
this holy icon stands.” On another occasion there was a fire
on the island and the people once again turned to Father
Herman.
Prior to his death, Father Herman revealed what would
happen to him. He told the people that when he died there
would be no priest in the area and the people would have to
bury him by themselves. He also said that he would be for-
gotten for thirty years and then he would be remembered.
Father Herman died on December 13, 1837, in the manner
in which he had described to his people. They continued to
revere his memory, but the outside world seemed to forget
him until the first investigation ofhis life in 1867 by Bishop
Peter of Alaska.

Srapeut. Tepaanz npxeyterayerz py capt rsoken ranapaysn-monayost WerHaaia H Madapia OTOAT, KYAA KOMMY
MATH TpOKOREARBATS | £bAG ApOHIXOAHTT Ha OrTpOKh Konbaxt va Topeh, (7 KOTUQOH SHAHO H ANODE H RZ ASAHHE NYPRAR
RY Amepuxt Apanecnagnas utpxoke Rocwprcinfa

The elder Herman is present during an argument between his companion monks Juvenaly and Makary about who is going to
preach. The event takes place on a hill on Kodiak Island from which can be seen the sea and the valley where the Church of
the Resurrection, the first Church in America is located.
 ee

Father Alex 1s Toth

26
CHAPTER II
Foundations for Growth
The period of 1870-1898 is characterized by the gradual
development of Orthodox parishes across the continent of
North America. The movement on the coastal areas actually
begins in the mid-1860’s in New Orleans, San Francisco and
New York. Within the next three decades, parishes are es-
tablished not only in port cities, but in industrial centers,
mining and farming areas in widely-scattered parts of the
United States and Canada. The character of these parishes
differs greatly: mixed ethnic (Greek-Russian-Serbian) as in
San Francisco, Consulate members and American converts
as in New York, former Uniates in Minneapolis and Pennsyl-
vania, an Arabic parish in Brooklyn, a Serbian parish in
California, and Russian and Ukrainian parishes in Canada.
Out of this diversity grows a certain unity of purpose and
common witness which provides a foundation for the future
growth of Orthodox Church life in America.
The transcontinental growth of Orthodoxy can be attrib-
uted to a combination of factors: the degenerating condi-
tions in Alaska (particularly in Sitka where, during the ten
years of military occupation, raping, pillaging and looting
were common; by 1877 when the army left, Sitka was re-
duced to a ghost town with only twenty families left, five
of them Russian) which certainly contributed to the reasons
for the move of the cathedra to San Francisco, the prospect
of new missionary work among European immigrants and
non-Orthodox Americans, and the particular conditions
which led hundreds — and later, thousands — of Uniates
back to Orthodoxy. Such opportunities were undoubtedly
recognized by the Holy Synod, as is reflected in the choice
of bishops for the Mission during this period, as well as in
the change of status of the Mission itself from an Auxiliary
Bishopric or Vicariate to an autonomous Diocese: the Dio-
cese of the Aleutian Islands and Alaska, created by the
Holy Synod on June 10, 1870.
Several outstanding personalities emerge with the spread
of Orthodoxy in America: Archimandrite Sebastian Dabo-
vich, Father Michael Andreades, Father Dimitri Kamnev,
Father Alexis Toth, and Father Nicholas Bjerring, plus an
entire group of talented missionaries who accompany Bishop
1870-1898
Nicholas to the United States; some of these men distinguish
themselves in this period while others assume positions of
influence and leadership during the Tikhon era and suc-
cessive decades.
The bishops themselves were particularly suited to the
task of missionary activity, each exhibiting differing
strengths and interests that aided the development of the
extremely diverse segments of the Diocese. Bishop John, a
scholarly theologian, fluent in English, was anxious to begin
work in the “lower 48.” Bishop Nestor, fluent in several
languages, was an able administrator who saw to the pro-
tection of Church interests in Alaska. Archbishop Vladimir,
a co-worker of Nicholas of Japan, sought to adapt Orthodox
liturgical life to the American scene with English transla-
tions in artfully arranged musical settings. Bishop Nicholas,
who arrived in America with more than thirteen of the most
talented graduates of several academies and seminaries in
Russia, was ready to expand and establish the Mission on
a solid foundation for its further development as a Diocese.
Concern for education, translations and publications also
contributed towards the clarification and strengthening of
the goals and activities of the Church. Mission schools were
established, and a pastoral school for choir directors and
readers was organized in San Francisco. Newspapers such as
the San Francisco Slavonian, the Oriental Church Magazine
of Father Nicholas Bjerring, and the Russian-American Or-
thodox Messenger, catechisms and brief expositions of the
Orthodox faith, and liturgical texts in English not only
satisfied the immigrant populations and assisted their transi-
tion to American life, but also provided a witness to the
non-Orthodox world that led a number of converts to the
faith.
Finally, the phenomenon of the “brotherhood” or
mutual-aid society was instrumental in the creation and sup-
port of new parishes, reception of parishes from the Unia,
and the development of a national churchly consciousness,
as well as meeting the practical and charitable needs of the
Church’s members.
 Diary of Bishop Nestor for the year 1880

cy ti cw 2 they ¢
wh Bttigtiicte thea Ba, ove a& Ce ad
bof tio a 6 FAO crew Ove | hadne
saben triag Uo vee 60a
fe
Fx event, eels deefi ke ~
oy
oe ” oe 2 we CB eA TBR Mee Chine
few te bx 6 Ben bf 8
eet FE BOOK
OL Ca MONE at Cet cece Ap ctne MLR he
Fares BC £44, 40 C046 Hf a defect
CORinkee Ce “th / fh alFa2 4;
df ctan cece ht hn
Visbice Cre Gusce, , “ he boi
Cade.
7 tH. -
CA pcdh ruetsds baw PR
feseal, Eee AK AG ther Pt fcetia le 0b JO ahd ttimite Cf ef al n
* get lich APE EVR « CF hee KD JPl pasa a16k, Prt ON /
Ok cute Mas , big
CvE fo9 «tae Z,
AD
f , 2h ceatay Fee .44 Hy
Fa tttant B76
Hh ttc fh ty wee fia Ong,
re Za tifa eeudine | BE APEEG (LS E rp0 00 Kh peh HO eh
4 bt bees ree dh LOA G18
/
BH 404 sirbat FEA Otcs Rap,
Ate, tee hat
5
feta fe
wd, far
& 6 FZ ane. b jek. one Fl ek ae ws keagece fh aes Cam ancee»
EG
VM 7 b perce ren wab thee, VL Low oR HK of” e 4 Ofte nee £2. My 220 at ATE ee
Cascucbh,
vA
J Lt ittiwromabucwrr pide * “
Prbirrouketes tay Tegegipises
ran 4 4 Ma whepr'e he Y Veet Cue
4, eis ice 8 6k Cet, Lewes ILL
PTE POO a APE «
Atocey Ins $45 Be MAP SAE CAAA OY Fh ih. Hie fa Bate of
Ye % 4h fe 6 Mitscth 6 (ac yasthee bt Fi oe oboe. fee
thee 4h
he Cm. Keancres asefenreth Fi fru Che get ve : we eis
ae iby A hati G EG 6RON?
ROAD 44 SOIT Es Dy om Gi ftw -
be ; at Cn Wht ae. be Gif atte 4.0 6 ee MAB Ca ting —

i eee 26 Syn akg #3% tit teat. fe, F Sha cnet aM cad
James fe ws Jd a fe Ae yy,
Lo Pt wen ohes t4 £E

#7 Ontnf ate Yo od Bt es
fe
foafeb
rh
tte Ofencn81 hace lt Merdeka. S Cath, wo
Pt # at <
ye Peed Eb Mth 4 Be
fost
Pits btranfear
de fagcrtth fe/
Us
Ait ME Fh, Gey KE- x
Pepe Koh aG
bt anabitchags ¢ Facer Ke 27 JO tae, i” > F
FO ps tho a o% feael Reise tea fog Mice Flajehr hep rd
f ee
he nay fsProse tesfost Pad thte toautld Fite OM we fths@ fe Lb too, Me 01/20 i _ f
ee ee Meee ws
Da pK tty Me 6 2. ates a bc . fyVth BZ a
PEL Gg, we fet a ee
7 Mftes #2 HOS Mat Aeon
ergs ih buyaut Le hte Ae purr tas if
*op hae
Faery Kepeba MapKok ¢ “200, btoer iste xe,
Khana Ej dono womJk tell edhen Ti tt $eet.nh
Ma
fg Y :
Ae hady A poe b Jie 6 tx ML LL or? Sie oe aera
tuted Cle Jha Fs th few, fe é > Checitt, Tae
Hoa rtrertee 'G 1 fed timestand é is LES SOE </%
fe fren, mem 2) otAlt Sere gohan
he
Cn10 2 Ud by Rak Goat, tafe €e
fe Fier eft¢endh & Be ois eo Ft, MP aah te, ae ee
ae
e. oe an Se at,
eet AS Meee ‘ Ws te tein TEC ¢
~ feiesettht . nett i 3
KOC
Af a — aha itre Bb gna , Beoude,
g
“eae
cM
Cg g-.
2m tn toh ch 900 acagem Pa 4, Othe tue
/ 7d :
G00:
-
few,
5 C470taihhom.. pew e906 Mg whole PRR BORE 86 nee

28
RULING BISHOPS 1870-1898
Bishop John (1870-1876)
Bishop John (Stephen Mitropolsky), an uncle of the late
Archpriest Nicholas Mitropolsky, was born in the Kaluga
District in 1836. He was graduated from the Moscow Theo-
logical Academy in 1862 as a “‘Master of Theology.” In
1861, he received the monastic tonsure and on July 5,
1870, he was consecrated Bishop of the Aleutian Islands
and Alaska, a title which signified an important change: for
the first time, the Alaskan Mission was not designated as an
auxiliary bishopric but as an autonomous diocese. On
November 14, 1870, upon stopping in San Francisco en-
route to Sitka, Bishop John met his predecessor, Bishop
Paul, on the eve of his return to Russia.
Bishop John was a scholarly theologian who enjoyed
writing theological articles and essays. He possessed an ex-
cellent knowledge of the English language, which enabled
him to see his task as a missionary in North America not
only to preach the Gospel to the native tribes of Alaska,
but to preach the truths of the One, Holy, Catholic, and
Apostolic Church to the heterodox on the North American
continent. He had great intentions of defending and pro-
claiming Orthodoxy in America by scholarly methods. This
can be seen in his five-volume work: From the History of
Religious Sects in America (a review of Congregationalism,
Episcopalianism, Methodism, Presbyterianism, and sectari-
anism). His proficiency in English allowed him to pursue his
eager interests in disputing the heterodox in the American
press. Some additional literary-theological accomplishments
of Bishop John were his four hundred-fifty page symposium
entitled The History of the Ecumenical Council and his
published translation of the Akathist to the Sweetest Jesus.
Considering the particular capacity of missionary service
in which Bishop John felt that he could be most effective as
the ruling hierarch of North American Mission, it is under-
standable that he encouraged the move of the Diocesan
Administration from Sitka to San Francisco. In 1872, the
Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in Russia granted per-
mission to Bishop John to transfer the Diocesan Adminis-
tration, Mission School and cathedra from Sitka to San
Francisco. In the midst of the large American population of
San Francisco, Bishop John said, the Orthodox Church
would be able to reveal her truth to the heterodox, all sec-
tarians and the American society in general with greater
effect and impact. After moving the Administration to San
Francisco, Bishop John erected a new Cathedral there on
Pierce Street to the honor of St. Alexander Nevsky.
In 1876, Bishop John was called back to Russia where
he died in retirement on May 3, 1914, in the Protection
Monastery of the Astrakhan Diocese.
Bishop Nestor (1879-1882)
Bishop Nestor (Baron Nicholas Zakkis) was born on
December 20, 1825, in Archangelsk, Russia, into a family
of Russian gentry. He was consecrated Bishop of the
Aleutian Islands and Alaska in St. Petersburg. Prior to
his ecclesiastical career, he had served as a naval officer in
the Russian Imperial Navy. Although most of his theologi-
cal knowledge was self-taught, it was quite sufficient. He
was an extremely energetic person with great administrative
ability. He had fluent command of English, French and
German. The American experience was not new for Bishop
Nestor. He had previously spent a year in the United
States during the American Civil War as a monk-chaplain
on the Russian frigate The Oslyablya commanded by Rear-
Admiral Lesovsky.
The task of his episcopal administration in the Diocese
of the Aleutian Islands and Alaska was the protection and
defense of the Church’s rights and interests in Alaska after
its sale in 1867 to the United States government. His assign-
ment was to observe the Church’s state of affairs on Alaskan
soil more so than in the southern continental states.
Although his center of operation was San Francisco, he
spent more time in Alaska making episcopal visitations to
Orthodox communities in the remotest depths of Alaska’s
wilderness. After completing one circuit of such visitations
in Alaska, he began a second such cycle in May 1882, in-
tending to focus his attention for the coming year on the
mission to the Eskimos of the Yukon River Valley, known
as the Kwipach Mission. He voyaged as far North as St.
Michael’s Redoubt, sailing on the ship St. Paul of the West-
ern Fur Company. On the return trip to San Francisco, he
drowned in the Bering Sea on June 30, 1882. His body was
recovered at the mouth of the Yukon River and he was
buried at the Holy Ascension Cathedral, Unalaska, Alaska.
He was the second Orthodox bishop who lost his life in the
Mission.
During Bishop Nestor’s episcopal administration, the
translation of the Gospel into Eskimo was begun. He con-
sulted with the Vermont State Library about making a set
of type for the thirty-four characters of the Eskimo alpha-
bet. Bishop Nestor carried on correspondence with several
significant clergy and laity concerning the Mission. Among
them were Rutherford B. Hayes, President of the United
States of America; Metropolitan Isidore of Novgorod and
St. Petersburg; Priest Nicholas Bjerring in New York City,
editor of the Oriental Church Magazine; the Russian Am-
bassador in America, Shpiegel, and members of the Smith-
sonian Institution.
29
Archbishop Vladimir (1888-1891)
Archbishop Vladimir (Vasily Sokolovsky) was born on
December 31, 1852, in Poltava, Russia. He graduated from
the Kazan Theological Academy in 1878 and was ordained
a priest-monk on October 3 of that year at the age of
twenty-six. Prior to his consecration as Bishop of the Aleu-
tian Islands and Alaska on December 20, 1887, he served
as Inspector of the Kholm Theological Seminary and in the
Japanese Mission as an assistant to Archbishop Nicholas
Kasatkin, who was canonized in 1970 as St. Nicholas the
Enlightener of Japan. Bishop Vladimir arrived in San Fran-
cisco in March 1888 along with eighteen student workers
for the mission and five colleagues from the Kholm Semi-
nary. His arrival marked the end of the six year period dur-
ing which North America had been without a bishop and
was administered through St. Petersburg.
Bishop Vladimir was a culturally refined and pious man,
talented in linguistics and music. He developed his musical
ability in the area ofliturgical singing. Enroute to America,
he organized a choir which later enhanced his own personal
effectiveness among the Orthodox in California by attract-
ing them to the Church with artfully conducted liturgical
services. He combined his knowledge of languages with his ee] Beds + a
musical talent by setting his English translation of Divine
Services in the common chants of the Russian liturgical fice, The Holy Trinity Cathedral on Powell Street, had
tradition. These were taught and directed by Professor Paul finally to replace it. Records from this time indicate that
Zaichenko, choirmaster of the San Francisco Cathedral. In out of the seven hundred Orthodox faithful in California,
addition, he appointed Father Sebastian Dabovitch as the three hundred and fifty lived in San Francisco. Bishop
English preacher of the Cathedral. The impact of their co- Vladimir was the first in America to attempt such linguistic
operative efforts in liturgical life manifested itself by a and cultural transitions in the liturgical life of the Orthodox
church so filled beyond capacity that another, larger edi- Church in America.

Bishop Vladimir with students and faculty of the Pastoral School he organized in San Francisco for readers, singers and choir
directors. Father Theoclytos is seated on the left of the Bishop; Professor Paul Zaichenko stands behind Father Theoclytos.

30
 Bishop Vladimir was a tall, slender, meticulously
groomed man with a refined, gentle character. He had a
love for great solemnity that was apparent in his personal
relations as well as in his liturgical practice. He was under-
standing and considerate of others, enjoying the company
of people and treating them with great respect, while having
no regard for his own personal needs. He led a highly as-
cetical life, observing a sparse vegetarian diet.
Under his leadership, the Uniates began their return to
Orthodoxy: Bishop Vladimir received Father Alexis Toth
and the Minneapolis parish into the Orthodox faith, an ac-
tion which later bore an abundant harvest of new life for
Orthodoxy in America. Metropolitart Leonty referred to
Bishop Vladimir as ‘The Meteor,” not only because he was
the first bishop to traverse the American continent, but also
because he made three such trans-continental episcopal
journies in search of Orthodox communities and people to
lead back into the faith.
Bishop Vladimir was called back to Russia in October
1891 and was appointed Bishop of Ostrog. Upon retire-
ment in March 1910, he was appointed Rector of the Spaso-
Androniev Monastery in Moscow where he died in 1933.

Bishop Nicholas (1891-1898)

Bishop Nicholas (Michael Zacharovich Ziorov) was born
on May 21, 1851, in the District of Kherson. After his
graduation from the Moscow Theological Academy in 1878,
he held the position of Inspector in the Vologda and Mogi-
lev seminaries, while still a layman. In 1887, he received the
monastic tonsure and ordination to the diaconate and the
priesthood, and served as Rector of the Moscow Theological
Seminary, until he was consecrated Bishop of the Aleutian
Islands and Alaska, on September 29, 1891. Bishop Nicholas

Bishop Nicholas was a stern, quick-tempered man. He

required immediate compliance with his instructions. He
was straight-forward, but diplomatically careful. Once he
addressed the State Department, rebuking it for poor man-
agement of Alaskan affairs. At the same time, however, he
was good-natured and always ready to make amends with
those who suffered his flares of impulsive anger. Many of
his co-workers were given gold watches by him “for brav-
ery, as they said jestingly.
Bishop Nicholas carried himself with a certain stately
dignity. He had active interests in theological studies and
maintained a good library, which he left behind for the
seminary in America. His handwriting was almost inde-
cipherable and could be made out only by the patient
Father Theodore Pashkovsky.
Bishop Nicholas had an ability for choosing and sur-
rounding himself with good assistants such as Fathers
Alexander Hotovitsky in New York City, Theodore Pash-
kovsky in San Francisco, Jason Kappanadze in Cleveland,
John Kochurov in Chicago, Alexis Toth in Minneapolis, the
four Kashevaroff brothers of Alaska and Archbishop
Raphael (Hawaweeny) in Brooklyn. All were extremely
significant personalities in the growth of the Mission in
North America.
During the administration of Bishop Nicholas, the Rus-
sian American Messenger, an English-Russian language week-
ly, began to be published under the editorship of Father
Alexander Hotovitsky at the request of Empress Maria
Fyodorovna. Bishop Nicholas traveled throughout Alaska
twice, visiting the nine parishes and thirty chapels which
serviced the 15,000 native Orthodox Christians there. When
he arrived in North America, there were five parishes in the
“Lower 48.” By the time he left, he had brought twelve
more parishes to Orthodoxy from the Unia: Chicago, Illi-
nois; Cleveland, Ohio; Pittsburgh, Osceola Mills, Old Forge,
Wilkes-Barre and Catasaqua, Pennsylvania; Buffalo, New
York; Ansonia and Bridgeport, Connecticut.
He was the first bishop of the Mission to visit Canada
(1897). He transferred the mission school from San Fran-
cisco to Minneapolis, and sent several American theologi-
cal students abroad to study at the Petersburg Theological
Academy.
In 1898, he returned to Russia and served as Archbishop
of the Diocese of Tver and Kashin and finally as Arch-
bishop of Warsaw until his death in the autumn of 1915 at
Petrograd.

‘Ww io
 General view of Fort Ross, California.
PARISH
The sale of Alaska to the United States in 1867 marked
an important point in the history of the Russian Mission in
North America. Until then, the Church in Alaska existed
within the boundaries of the Russian Empire. After 1867, it
became a Russian Mission on the territory of a different
sovereign state. The Orthodox people were no longer under
the protection of the Russian government. Under the new
system, with a sharp separation of Church and state, the
Orthodox in Alaska, Russians and Indian natives, were
governed by an administration that knew very little about
these new citizens and that possibly was even hostile toward
them. Within a decade after the sale, Sitka was reduced to
an insignificant village, as most of the Russians departed
and many of the Indians fled to the interior.
Another factor in the decline of the Mission in this
period was the dissolution of the Russian-American Com-
pany in 1863. This company had been the main source of
financial support for the Orthodox Church in Alaska. Thus
the focus of attention shifted to San Francisco, where a
parish was started in 1864. Reflecting this shift is the
change of the status of the Mission in 1870 to an autono-
mous Diocese with headquarters in San Francisco. The new
title is the Diocese of the Aleutian Islands and Alaska. It
was no longer a vicariate of a Diocese located in Russia.
California and the West Coast
In 1805, shortly following arrival of the Kodiak Mission,
Count Nicholas Rezonov, having secured permission of the
Russian Czar, voyaged to Hawaii and the California coast to
seek out possibilities for establishing a colony that would
produce food supplies for the Russian-American Company’s
sh!
DEVELOPMENT
Alaskan colonies at Kodiak and New Archangel and that
would serve as a commercial foothold in that Spanish-ruled
territory. The Spanish gave their approval and Rezonov
chose a site on the bank of a river about 100 miles north of
San Francisco. The river was consequently named Russian
River and the colony that he established there was called
Fort Ross (Russ). By 1810 Russian traders and farmers
were settled at Fort Ross, and in 1812 they founded the
Orthodox Chapel of St. Helen there. This was the only
Orthodox church on the West Coast for about fifty years.
This period of imperial colonization in California, though
it was short-lived, saw a great testimony to the Orthodox
faith in the year 1815. Fourteen Aleuts who had been con-
verted to Orthodoxy by Father Herman on Spruce Island
and who were in the company of the Russian colonists sent
to Fort Ross by the Russian-American Company were
forcibly taken into custody by Spanish missionaries near
San Francisco. During an inquisition conducted for the
purpose of making the Aleut prisoners Roman Catholic,
one Aleut youth, Peter, was martyred by being dismem-
bered. His thirteen companions, who were present at his
interrogation, reported that Peter kept confessing to his
torturers that he was already a Christian, as they severed his
fingers and bones joint by joint. The others were to be
martyred in the same way on the following day, but they
were commanded to be released by an order from Monterey,
the headquarters of colonial administration in California.
Father Herman at Spruce Island, upon being informed of
Peter’s manner of death, glorified him as a martyr for the
Faith.
Following the gradual disintegration of the Russian-
American Company throughout the 1820’s, most of the
Russian colonists returned from Fort Ross either to Alaska
or to Russia, and in 1840 Russia sold all her possessions in
California — Fort Ross, the Faralone Islands, and the Napa
and Sacramento Valleys — to the California pioneer, John
Augustus Sutter. After the Russian-American Company’s
retreat from California, apart from a visit by Father John
Veniaminov, there was no known significant Orthodox
Church activity for almost three decades.

San Francisco, California

The next considerable influx of Orthodox Christians in

California accompanied the arrival of the Russian Imperial
Pacific Fleet, under the command of Admiral Popoff, which
Large bell of the San Francisco Church given by the Tsar to the
came to the West Coast in 1863 during the American Civil Cathedral of the North American Mission.
War. Orthodox chaplains from the six man-of-war ships
served their crewmen and the Orthodox people who had rouble stipend. In 1870, the parish initiated publication of
remained on the California coast. Among those serving on a multi-lingual newspaper, The Slavonian, a testimony to its
these ships were a certain Hieromonk Cyril, who baptized missionary and pan-ethnic spirit.
American-born John Dabovich, a child of Serbian parents
From 1868 to 1872, the Orthodox Church in San
who was to become Hieromonk Sebastian in the American
Francisco was called “Prayer House of the Orthodox Orien-
Mission, and Officer Nicholas Zakkis, later Bishop Nestor of
tal Church” and was located in a house at 504 Greenwich
the American Mission. This influx, in addition to the many
Street. Services were conducted there on Sundays and all
Greeks, Russians, Serbs and Syrians who had been attracted
feasts in Slavonic and Greek. When Bishop John (Mitropol-
to California by the “Gold Rush” of the 1850’s, provided
sky) transferred the episcopal residence from Sitka to San
the possibility of establishing a local Orthodox parish in San
Francisco in 1870, Father Kovrygin’s successor as rector of
Francisco.
the California parish, Archpriest Paul Kedrolivansky, was
In 1864, several Orthodox Christians in San Francisco responsible for the organization of a new diocesan seat.
gathered to form the Greek -Russian-Slavonic Church and
Philanthropic Society. Their aim was to inaugurate a pro-
gram for building a church. At their first meeting each of
the sixteen members gave an initial contribution of $20.00
towards their goal. The Imperial Russian Fleet offered the
use of quarters on one ship for a chapel and the generosity
of the crew supplied all liturgical furnishings. The nascent
parish received notice at the highest levels: A note of Count
D. A. Tolstoy, Ober-procurator of the Holy Synod, dated
August 26, 1865, and addressed to the Minister of Foreign VOLUME 4

Affairs, stated the need for a church to provide spiritual EDITORIAL, PEPARTNENT

life for the Orthodox residents of San Francisco and for the
Russian sailors stationed there and to answer to the growing
interest in the Orthodox Faith among American Episcopa-
lians.
In December 1867, the Orthodox Society was chartered
as the Greek-Russian-Slavic Orthodox Church and Chari-
table Society. Among its members were the Russian Consul,
Martin Klinkovsterem, and the Greek Consul George Fisher.
The charter of the new Parish and Charitable Society stated
clearly that the organization was pan-ethnic, its common
language was English and its sole purpose was to propagate
and preserve the Orthodox Faith. On June 13, 1868, the
Society petitioned the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church
in Russia to assign a priest to their parish. On September 30,
1868, Priest Nicholas Kovrygin and Reader Vasily Shishkov
of the Cathedral of Sitka were assigned to the new San
Francisco parish. The Russian Czar contributed 12,435
roubles towards the building of a church and the Holy
Synod subsidized the parish rector with an annual 1,000

oe}
oe
 The establishment of an episcopal see in the United
States was given careful study by the Holy Synod of Russia
over a two-year period. It took so long because the Russian
imperial government was concerned that the establishment
of a see on the territory of the United States, but sub-
ordinated to the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox
Church, would be almost an interference in the internal
affairs of another state. Finally, on June 10, 1870, the
decision was reached. An ecclesiastical administration was
formed which was to take into account the distinctive
features of the government in the United States.

The present Holy Trinity Cathedral, Green Street.

building — the present Holy Trinity Cathedral — still stands,

a center for Orthodoxy on the West Coast.
San Francisco continued to be perhaps the most impor-
tant center of Orthodoxy in North America, especially on
the Pacific Coast, for the remainder of the nineteenth
century. The community remained united throughout the
entire period, with active cooperation on the part of the
Greek consul.
These bonds began to loosen in the 1890’s, following the
arrival of more Greek people in San Francisco. Soon a
special Greek Society was formed within the parish. It was
the seed of an eventual split in the parish along ethnic lines,
a feature that was to become prominent later on in the
twentieth century. The fruit born of the seed planted in
San Francisco was the formation of a separate Greek parish
shortly after 1900. Later on, other ethnic groups formed
their own parishes.

Interior of the present San Francisco Cathedral, Metropolitan

Leonty serving.
San Francisco Cathedral on Powell Street before the fire of 1906.

In 1872, Bishop John moved the church to 915 Jackson

Street, where he made his residence; it was consecrated to
the honor of St. Alexander Nevsky.
In 1874, the church was moved again, this time to Pierce
Street, into a larger building designed to house the church
administration offices. Bishop John’s successor, Bishop
Nestor, who arrived in 1881, purchased a building on Powell
Street to house the offices, archives and school as well as
the church. In 1888 it was enlarged and remodeled by
Bishop Vladimir and re-dedicated in honor of St. Nicholas
the Wonderworker. On May 9, 1889 — the feast of the
transfer of St. Nicholas’ relics — the church was destroyed
by fire. It soon was rebuilt, this time to the honor of St.
Basil the Great. After being remodeled again, the church
was reconsecrated by Bishop Nicholas (Ziorov) on Novem-
ber 16, in honor of the All Holy Trinity. A final disaster
occurred in 1906, when the church was destroyed by the
great San Francisco earthquake. Again it was rebuilt, at a
new location acquired by Archbishop Tikhon on Green
Street and Van Ness Avenue, and it was consecrated on
June 28, 1909. More fortunate than its predecessors, the

34
 Milesaa
CONSECKA VW On
Portland, Oregon
In Portland, Oregon, the first parish was started in 1890.
It began as a chapel built by a man named Lavrenti Stevens
(known also by the surname ‘“‘Chernov’’), who was an Alas-
kan of mixed Native-Russian birth. The chapel was not
completed until 1894. In that same year Hieromonk Sebas-
tian Dabovitch arrived and helped by painting a few icons
and preparing drawings of the altar. The first services were
held on February 26, 1895. Father Dabovitch conducted
the services. The small congregation included two Russians,
six Syrians and four Serbs.
By 1900, the Orthodox population in Portland had in-
creased significantly. Father Vladimir Alexandrov visited
the chapel on April 21, 1900, and reported that there were
about SO Orthodox in the community, including recently
arrived Greeks. This time, the service was conducted in
English.
On September 6, 1905, Father Michael G. Andreades
visited the chapel and found it in poor condition. The un-
painted exterior walls were rotting in places and a make-
shift iconostasis held no icons. He returned to Portland in
April 24, 1907, to celebrate the Liturgy for about 80 per-
sons, mostly Greeks and Syrians. At the time, most of the
Russians were working out of the city. The parish elder
(starosta) was a Syrian named Gregory Darvish. Father
Andreades was very disappointed to see that very little
progress had been made to improve the chapel’s appearance.
Part of the problem apparently was that the chapel was
located too far away from the city.
In 1907, the chapel was given temporarily by Archbishop
Platon to the Greeks in Portland. The chapel was repaired
and a sidewalk was installed. However, it was vacated in
1909 because the Greeks constructed their own church in
another section of Portland. The seeds of dissention and
separatism were sown successfully once again. The chapel
remained in the possession of the Russians. Later on,
separate parishes were formed by the Syrians and Ukrainians.
Seattle, Washington
The St. Spyridon parish of Seattle was founded in 1892
by Russian immigrants and scores of young Greek immi-
grants in a joint effort which was prompted by an offer
from the Russian government to provide a bi-lingual priest
if the two groups would combine their resources and con-
struct a church building. The offer was accepted and a
parcel of land was donated by a Greek couple, Mr. and Mrs.
Nicholas George. In 1895 the building was completed and
the first priest, Father Amvrosius Vretta, was appointed.
The Church was known as the St. Spyridon Greek-Russian
Church, a title bestowed by the parish’s benefactors.
In October 1896, Bishop Nicholas visited the parish to
conduct the service of the blessing of water.
The second priest to serve the parish was Father Dimitri
Kamnev (1897-1898). Under his leadership, additional
Orthodox national groups were brought into the parish,
including Serbs, Ruthenians, Bulgarians, Syrians, and even
gypsies.
On August 12, 1901, Bishop Tikhon paid a visit and
placed the Holy Antimension on the altar. During the
Liturgy, the choir of school girls, led by Matushka Kamnev,
responded in Slavonic, Greek and English.
This parish remained united until 1916, when the Greek
population in Seattle reached nearly 2,000. After the de-
parture of Father Michael Andreades, who served the parish
from 1905 to 1916, the Greeks made plans to form their
own parish. The new parish, St. Demetrios Church, was
formally organized in 1918.
ww nN
 Wilkeson, Washington
PIONEER DAYS AT HOLY TRINITY, WILKESON
Not far from Seattle, in the town of Wilkeson, a small
“Grandma” referred to below is Maria Kochen Krutilla, community was started in 1899 by Father Dimitri Kamnev,
who was married at Holy Trinity in 1904. A picture of her the priest at the Seattle parish. Construction of a chapel
wedding may be seen printed here.
began in 1900 for the parish of forty-two persons. It was
For whatever interest it might be, I’d like to pass on to completed in 1901, and the same building has been in use
you some things Grandma has shared with me about the ever since. It probably is the oldest original church standing
church during the years she and Grandpa lived in Wilkeson. in the Diocese of San Francisco and Western United States.
Some dates Grandma remembers keenly — she recalls Because of its small number of Orthodox communicants,
coming by train from her sister’s home ‘in Elizabeth, the parish’s spiritual needs, until recently, were usually
Pennsylvania, to Tacoma and switching trains to arrive in attended to by the priest from Seattle.
South Prairie on the morning of April 26th, 1904. Grand- Colorado
ma smiles when she tells of a young man who met her
Several parishes were formed in Colorado at the end of
when she got off the train — someone she vaguely recog-
this period, around the turn of the century. The Church of
nized from a picture sent to her by her sister living in
the Transfiguration of Christ was organized in Denver in
Wilkeson. That was my Grandpa and he carried her suit-
1898. St. Michael’s Church in Pueblo was formed in 1903,
*e as they walked the distance from South Prairie to
and in Calhan, St. Mary’s Church was organized in 1905.
Wilkeson (S miles, much of it uphill!). Grandma was 20
There is evidence showing that there was a mixed ethnic
years old then and had been in America for about a year.
Orthodox population in Colorado at the time. Shortly after
Evidently Grandma’s sist. Xena, and her husband its formation, Bishop Tikhon paid a visit to the Pueblo
Michael Polanski had been busy making plans for Grandma parish. He was accompanied by a Greek priest, Father
before her arrival. Some twenty days later, on May 15th, Theoclytos Triantafilidis, who preached in Greek for the
Maria Kochen and Vasil Krutilla were married in the benefit of the Greek parishioners. But, the pattern of sepa-
Orthodox Church. Grandma recalls that the church was rate ethnic parishes found its way to Pueblo as well, for
not completely finished on the inside at the time of their soon after, the Greeks formed their own community.
wedding — she explains that holy pictures were still being
given to the church by families in the community. As he
related to Grandma, Grandpa helped build the church
with his hands and pocket book along with his fellow coal
mine workers, although Grandma doesn’t know what year
that might have been. She recalls that Grandpa was elected
“cashier” for the congregation after they were married and
that the priest would come once a month from Seattle to
conduct the Sunday Liturgy.
Grandma has recalled how beautiful the altar was and
had often told me that she wished I could see how pretty
the church was inside. It is because of her special stories
about the church that Chuck and I ventured to see if
services were still being held. Grandma recalled to us all
the special Easter festivities — the candlelight procession,
the blessing of the Easter food. (In the old country —
Czechoslovakia — Grandma recalls baking paskha — Easter
bread — in the clay oven and carrying it to church wrap-
ped in a linen towel slung over her back.) And so we came
this Easter season with very hopeful hearts that we might
experience a little of what Grandma had known. There’s
so much joy in your church — it made us very happy to
have the chance to participate and to tell Grandma how
welcome each one made us feel.
Again, let me say what a pleasure it is for my Grandma
to know that the people in the congregation at Holy
Trinity Orthodox Church are so kind to her grandchildren
and that the church is still carrying on the holy traditions
she remembers.
(Excerpted from a letter dated May 5, 1973,
with the kind permission of its author
Mrs. Jade Trevere Barth) Maria and Vasil Krutilla in Wilkeson, Washington.

36
 Greek Immigration and the South
Removed from the mainstream of the Orthodox Mission,
which was strongest in Alaska, along the Pacific Coast and
in certain western states, was the immigration of Greek
settlers in the southern part of the United States. Because
of great distances, mountainous and desert terrain and other
forms of danger, the Greek settlers in the South lived in
virtual isolation from any immediate Orthodox ecclesiastical
supervision or guidance.
Florida
An early Greek settlement, which unfortunately did not
flourish, was the New Smyrna colony in Florida. It was
started in 1767 as an English colony under a Scottish doctor
named Andrew Turnbull for the purpose of cultivating cer-
tain products needed in the British market. Greeks were
brought to the colony, together with Minorcans and Italians,
because it was felt they were best suited to labor in the
Florida climate. The failure of the colony was due to miser-
able conditions, exploitation, sickness and death. A revolt
against the English authorities took place in 1769, marking
the beginning of the end of the Florida experiment. By
1780, New Smyrna was a ghost town. There is no evidence
that any Orthodox liturgical services were held in the
colony or that the settlers were accompanied by a priest.
The earliest permanent Greek settlers in the South found
their new homes in port cities along the Gulf of Mexico in
Louisiana and Texas. Evidence of organized parish life dates
back to the Civil War.
Archimandrite Theoclytos Triantifilides
Galveston, Texas
Some evidence shows that an Orthodox parish was
formed in Galveston in 1862. The parish, named Sts. Con- Bishop Nicholas. Father Shamie was assisted after 1901 by
stantine and Helen, included Greeks, Syrians, Serbs and Alexander Kukulevsky, whose first assignment in America
Russians. No records have been discovered which indicate was as a psalm-reader in Galveston. Father Kukulevsky later
which priests served this community in its formative years. reported that at that time, “I was the only Russian in the
It is known, however, that the parish was served in the late parish. The priest was a Syro-Arab.”
1880’s by Hieromonk John (Shamie) who was sent by Later, during Bishop Tikhon’s administration, Archi-
mandrite Theoclytos Triantafilidis, who arrived from Ath-
ens, was assigned to the parish. Like several other Greek
priests in America before World War I, Father Triantafilidis
received his training in a theological academy in Russia. He
even taught at the Russian ecclesiastical seminaries of
Volynia and Ekaterinoslav. From 1884 to 1889, he served
as the educator of the children of the Prince of Greece. He
received Russian citizenship from the Russian Czar and was
then sent to the North American Orthodox Mission. He
served in several parishes in the Mission before coming to
Galveston, Texas, where he died in 1915 after serving for 21
years. A telegram from the parish to Archbishop Evdokim
reveals the warm love the people had for him and for his
successor, Father Michael Andreades. It reads:
Last Sunday after the Divine Liturgy we held a
requiem service on the grave of the deceased Archi-
mandrite Theoklitos whose departure grieved us very
much. But in the person of Rev. Michael Andreades,
whom Your Grace had the kindness to send us, we
SS. Constantine and Helen Church, Galveston, Texas. found a worthy successor, and being satisfied with his
 appointment, we, the trustees of the Galveston Greco-
Russian Church hereby respectfully offer to Your
Grace our heartfelt and warmest thanks.
(signed) D. Caragnostis
T. Pamukis
E. Cerovitch
S. Mitrovich
L. Sanicich
Like Father Theoclytos, Father Andreades represents a
certain type of Greek priest, those who had lived and work-
ed among Orthodox people of various nationalities in
Europe and felt right at home in a Russian mission in
America. They were fortunate to know several languages
and to have received a high calibre theological education.
Most of all, they were inspired by a zeal to preach and
spread the Orthodox Faith in the New World. Father
Andreades served the parish until the financial collapse of
the Diocese following the Russian Revolution when he
petitioned for a parish in the newly-formed Greek Diocese
in America. The parish remained in the North American
Diocese, though after a struggle for control between Greeks
and Serbs, the Greeks left in 1934 to build their own
church, leaving behind a few Serbs and Russians. The parish
was revitalized in 1935 with the assignment of Father Alexis
Revera by Bishop Leonty of Chicago.
Alabama and Oklahoma
St. Nicholas Church in Brookside, Alabama, was organ-
ized in 1894 by immigrants from Austro-Hungary who came
to work in the Alabama coal fields. At that time, Brookside
was a much larger town than at present, and the Slavs held
a predominant position in local affairs. The first temple was
destroyed by a tornado, the second church was leveled in
1912 by fire. In 1916 the present structure was built.
Around 1926, many parishioners migrated to the Cleveland,
Ohio, area because of the depletion of the coal resources,
and the parish was greatly reduced in numbers. A similar
situation is to be found in Hartshorne, Oklahoma, another
mining area settled by Slavic peoples from Austro-Hungary.
This community was organized in 1897 and still exists,
though again with greatly reduced numbers.
Russian School, Hartshorne, Oklahoma, with pastor, Father Basil
Basalyga (later Bishop Benjamin), 1913.
38
* ee SRO <i
Funeral of Father Theoclytos.
New Orleans, Louisiana
The Greek parish in New Orleans was founded in 1864.
In some ways, it resembles the other missionary parishes in
the southern and western parts of the United States. In
others, it suggests a starting point of a new trend among
Greek parishes.
As in the case of parishes described above, the member-
ship of this parish included a variety of nationalities. Be-
cause of this, services were conducted in Church Slavonic,
Greek and English. Since the latter language was the only
common denominator, English became the official language
for parish records and procedures. One of the leading fig-
ures in the community was the Greek Consul of New
Orleans, Nicholas M. Benakis. Helping in this matter were
Greek cotton merchants of New Orleans. During the latter
part of the nineteenth century, this community maintained
periodic, though rather vague, contacts and relationships
with the Russian Mission. Various church vestments were
donated by Alexander II, Czar of all the Russias. In 1886, a
visiting Russian bishop conducted services in the New
Orleans parish. The priest at the time was Father Michael
Karydis, a native of Philipoupolis, Bulgaria, who served that
parish from 1880 (or 1882) until 1901. It is interesting to
note that members of this parish became involved in the
Civil War. Government records show an unofficial memo-
randum mentioning ““Greek Company A,” Louisiana Militia,
1861. The company included a captain, three lieutenants,
eight non-commissioned officers and twenty privates. Al-
though it was called “Greek,” the list included other Ortho-
dox people residing in New Orleans after 1860.
There were certain differences, however, in the forma-
tion and early history of the New Orleans parish. The first
priest, a Ukrainian named Father Agapius Honcharenko,
was not appointed by the Holy Synod of Russia. His
appointment was arranged through the Greek Consul of
New Orleans. Needing a priest for the parish, Greek Consul
Nicholas M. Benakis contacted Demetrios Botasis, the Con-
sul General in New York City. It happened that Father
Honcharenko, ordained on Mt. Athos in Greece, arrived in
America in January 1865 after fleeing from Europe, where
he was involved in anti-Czarist movements. For a variety of
reasons, Father Honcharenko did not remain long in the
New Orleans parish.
Unlike many parishes, this parish did not experience a
split around the turn of the century. The community re-
mained intact and eventually joined the Greek Archdiocese
after its formation in 1921. It is not clear what happened
to the non-Greek parishioners. They either remained, Peete at eee io BRPRREK
ABER E SRE RENAE
moved to another city, or left the Church completely. "HOLY TRINITY.
The local Russian Orthodox bishop in North America
had very little contact or influence over this parish. There
is no clear evidence of archpastoral jurisdiction over the
parish as might be evidenced by a steady stream of corres-
pondence or the appointment of priests.

The East Coast and New Immigration

Holy Trinity Greco-Russian Church
The first parish in New York City was organized by
Father Nicholas Bjerring, a convert from Roman Catholi-
cism. After his ordination in St. Petersburg, Father Bjerring
was assigned to open a church in New York City; he was
given a salary of $1500 a year, plus costly ecclesiastical
vestments and objects. Upon his arrival in New York, in the
summer of 1870, Father Bjerring organized a congregation
and purchased a plot of ground on Fifty-first Street where
he planned to build a permanent church the following year.
In the meantime, the parlor of his home at 951 Second
Avenue was converted into a chapel. A permanent church
was never built and the Chapel was used regularly for twelve
years until it was closed. Bishop Paul of Alaska, on his re-
turn to Russia,.served the first liturgy held in the chapel and
consecrated it in the name of the Holy Trinity. The service, Perove, later chaplain at the Petersburg-Konstantinov Mili-
which was held November 24, 1870, was attended by many tary Academy; and A. P. Lopuchin, who was later a pro-
city officials and newsmen. Throughout its history, many fessor at the Petersburg Academy and author of several
dignitaries from the United States and Russia visited the works on religion in America.
small chapel, among them the bishops of Alaska, John and According to Lopuchin, the congregation “was not large
Nestor. American, Greek and Russian holidays were com- but it was diversified.” It was composed of members of the
memorated in the chapel. The sign above the door of the Greek and Russian consulates and of about 100 Russians
church read “Greek-Russian Church.” who lived in the city, together with some Serbs and Greeks
All the services in the Chapel were, from the beginning, and an occasional Syrian. The Greeks and Serbs seem to
conducted in English, though later some foreign languages have been the best supporters of the church. Between 1870
were also used. The translation of the Divine Liturgy in use and 1880, there were fifty-five baptisms, twelve marriages,
was the one published anonymously in 1865 by S. G. Hath- fourteen burials and four converts received in the Church.
erly, approved — with alterations — by the Holy Synod of In the Spring of 1883, for unknown reasons, the Russian
the Russian Church. government withdrew all financial support from the Chapel
Metropolitan Isidore assigned lay assistants to help and directed Father Bjerring to close it. The little chapel
Father Bjerring, whose knowledge of Russian and Church had served its purposes both as a ““show-place” for the non-
Slavonic was very limited. These assistants, who were Orthodox, as it had been visited by ecclesiastics from all
chosen from among the best students at the St. Petersburg sects and denominations as well as many American and
Academy, were assigned to serve the parish for three-year foreign dignitaries, and as a center for ministering to the
terms. Among these were E. V. Smirnoff, later the embassy Orthodox peoples living in New York City. The parish had
chaplain in London; A. I. Mikhailovsky, later a lecturer in laid the foundations for the future parishes that were to
English language studies at the Petersburg Academy; A. Y. develop in the city.

FATHER NICHOLAS BJERRING
Father Nicholas Bjerring, an American citizen
Danish birth, was a convert from Roman Catholicism who
founded the first Orthodox Church in the eastern United
States. Born in 1831, Nicholas Bjerring was the son of a
high official in the city of Vejle, Denmark. He was educa-
ted in Vejle and studied philosophy and theology at the
University of Breslau. He was appointed to various posi-
tions in Roman Catholic schools in Europe and spent
some time in missionary work in Lapland. In 1868, he was
appointed professor of philosophy and history at the old-
est Roman Catholic seminary in America — St. Mary’s, in
Baltimore, Maryland.
When the new Roman Catholic dogma of papal infalli-
bility was promulgated in 1870, Bjerring left the Roman
Church, protesting the dogma in a letter to Pope Pius IX,
written January 24, 1870. In the letter, he denounced
papal infallibility and other Roman errors and stated his
belief that true catholicity existed only in Orthodoxy.
The letter, which was translated into several languages and
published in many periodicals, created much excitement,
especially among American Roman Catholics. Bjerring
first became interested in Orthodox Catholicism by read-
ing L’Union Chrétienne, a scholarly journal edited by
Very Rev. Dr. Vladimir Guettée, a converted
Jesuit, and the Very Rev. Father Joseph Vasiliev.
After careful study and consideration, Bjerring peti-
tioned the Holy Synod of Russia to be received into the
Orthodox Church. The Synod, receiving his letter in Janu-
ary 1870, requested him to appear in person. In accord-
ance with Decree #782, dated April 25, 1870, Nicholas
Bjerring was received into the Orthodox Church on May 3
in the chapel of the St. Petersburg Academy. The Liturgy
was sung in German by the rector of the Academy, Proto-
presbyter I. L. Yanishev, and was attended by many dig-
nitaries, including Father Vasiliev, who came from Paris.
Metropolitan Isidore of St. Petersburg and Novgorod
ordained Nicholas Bjerring to the diaconate on May 6 and
to the priesthood May 9, 1870. Father Nicholas celebrated
his first liturgy on May 17, 1870, in the academy chapel
“before an assemblage of the most distinguished Russian
nobles.” Not being acquainted with the Church Slavonic
language, he served the liturgy in German. Father Bjerring
was directed to establish a church in New York City and
was appointed its pastor.
At this time in America, the only areas of Orthodox
Church life were in Alaska and in a few isolated places in
the West (San Francisco, New Orleans, Galveston).
Orthodox bishop of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands still
resided in Sitka, though the move to San Francisco was
made within the next two years. In 1864, Rev. Dr. John
40
Young Freeman, on behalf of the Russo-Greek Committee
of the Protestant Episcopal Church, had visited Metro-
politan Filaret of Moscow and requested the establish-
ment of an Orthodox center or “show-place,’” where
Protestants could view Eastern Orthodox rites in their
proper setting. Therefore, in view of the lack of Orthodox
life in the eastern part of the country, the actions and
of
conversion of Bjerring appear all the more extraordinary
for the time, as there was almost a complete lack of
Orthodox witness in the European West.
Father Bjerring, however, was familiar with German
translations of Orthodox services and dogmatic treatises
and, after his reception into the Orthodox Church, began
to ‘publish these works in English. In 1872, he published
the Office for Admission and Reception of Converts into
the Orthodox Eastern Church, which was most likely
translated from the German translation that was published
in Berlin in 1868 (taken from the Slavonic) by the Very
Rev. Tarasius Seredinsky, chaplain to the Russian Embassy
in Berlin. Copies of this edition were soon exhausted and,
at Bjerring’s request, it was reprinted in London in The
Orthodox Catholic Review in 1875 by the editor of the
Review, Rev. Dr. J. J. Overbeck (a convert to Orthodoxy
in London).
In 1873, Bjerring published Father Hatherly’s (another
convert in London) from Greek and Slavonic of The Di-
vine Liturgies of our Holy Fathers John Chrysostom
and Basil the Great, which previously had been officially
approved and now was republished with the authoriza-
French tion of the Holy Synod. He also published his own
translation of The Russian Orthodox Church by Very
Rev. Basaroff, chaplain to Queen Olga of Wiirtemburg,
which contained a short history and description of the
services and customs of the Church in Russia. This treatise
was originally written in German to acquaint western
Europeans with the Orthodox Church. The same year, he
published a translation of The Greek Catholic Faith, a
homily written by Bishop Anatolius of Mogilev and
Mstislav. Bjerring’s translation of Sacrament of Matri-
mony, arr exposition of the doctrine, ritual and symbolism
of Holy Matrimony by Very Rev. F. Basaroff, was pub-
lished in 1876; it was also reprinted in the Orthodox
Catholic Review in 1876.
In 1884, Father Bjerring collected all translations of
church services published in his Oriental Church Magazine
(with the exception of the Panihida, i.e. Memorial Service
for the Departed) and published a volume entitled The
Offices of the Oriental Church. This volume contained
Hatherly’s translation of the Liturgies, plus translations of
the Sacraments, a form for Communion of the Sick, and
the all-night Vigil — Vespers, Orthros (Matins), and the
First Hour.
The One of Bjerring’s best-known publications is The Orien-
tal Church Magazine, published from November 1879 to
October 1881. An English-language quarterly that pub-
lished articles on religion, science, literature and art, the
journal was funded primarily by his American friends and
acquaintances. The purpose of the magazine, as stated by
Bjerring, was “a desire to lay before English-speaking
readers a candid and authoritative statement of the con-
stitution, tenets, and progress of the Oriental Church,
which are so little known and understood on this Western
Continent, except by that limited circle of students which
makes the religion of mankind a special study.” He stated
that the mission of the magazine was not one of prosely-
tizing and that it would not enter into “the arena of
sectarian polemics.” His purpose was to spread knowledge
about Orthodoxy, and he was convinced that heated
polemical controversies seldom had any good results,
while frequently they disgusted those seeking the truth.
In three years the periodical issued a mass of interesting
material on Orthodox Catholicism as well as on the cul-
tures of Greece and Russia, often correcting the vast
amount of erroneous opinion about Russia which was so
prevalent at that time. The journal’s impact encouraged
many Protestants to study Orthodoxy, and several books
appeared as a result.
In January 1881, Father Bjerring and P. de Kartchen-
sky, the Russian Consul-General, together with some Rus-
sian residents of New York, organized the Russian
Benevolent Society, whose purpose was to render material
assistance and advice to needy Russians, to help them to
find work, to care for the sick, and to send them back to
Russia if they so desired. Father Nicholas served as presi-
dent of the Society.
Leatered seb drt
v a
A.pete Ct tase ttt
“ ‘
Adecesetieel
All who met Father Bjerring were impressed by his
background as well as his appearance. He was described as
being tall and stately, with long hair and beard; when
dressed in his cassock it is said he could never be taken for
a non-Russian. Bjerring was married while yet a Roman
Catholic and, at the time ofhis reception into the Church,
had three children. He mingled with men from “the
clergy, the bench, the bar, the medical profession, the
army, the navy, presidents and professors of colleges,
artists, musicians, southern planters, bankers, authors,
editors, diplomats and educated men of any specialty, ”
having been an attendant in the 1870’s at Mr. Hamersly’s
salon, where every Friday evening this wealthy New
Yorker entertained gatherings of men from every walk of
life. It is reported that Ulysses S. Grant was one of his
closest acquaintances. Bjerring gave many lectures in
schools, colleges and in learned circles and was a member
of various clubs and societies. He was well read and had a
profound understanding of philosophy, history and litera-
ture. As a linguist, he could speak fluently in German,
English and Swedish, besides his native Danish, and had a
scholarly knowledge of French and Latin, though —
according to Lopuchin — he was not conversant in Russian
nor could he read it. What efforts Bishop Innocent had
exerted in preparing texts in the native languages for the
peoples in Alaska, Father Bjerring had provided for the
English-speaking peoples of North America. His contribu-
tions paved the way for the further growth and develop-
ment of the Orthodox Church in this land.
Father David Abramtsev
Oba1fa.
2 x : yiespin
APMP LILES Gaiam: codecbe MUU IY
t
Sopruate fea tetestias ath
Father Bjerring’s Metrical Book
for 1875, showing births and
baptisms of his daughter and
of the daughter of the Greek
Consul, Luke Ralli.
St. Nicholas Chapel
Within a decade a second mission parish was established
by the Holy Synod. It began sometime in the early 1890's
in New York City, but began to flourish after 1896 under
the leadership of Father Alexander Hotovitzky. Father
Hotovitsky was born in Kremenetz, Volynia, Russia, the
son of the rector of the Volynia Theological Seminary.
He was one of the graduates of the St. Petersburg Academy
to accompany Archbishop Nicholas to America in 1895.
The Archbishop assigned Hotovitzky as a reader in the new
parish in New York, then located in 323 Second Avenue.
On January 28, 1896, he married Maria Vladimirovna
Scherbutchin, a graduate of the Petersburg-St. Paul Insti-
tute. He was ordained to the priesthood in San Francisco by
Archbishop Nicholas on February 25. Since a Father Bala-
novich, the pastor of the New York parish, had returned to
Russia, Father Hotovitzky was appointed his successor.
In 1901, Father Alexander traveled to Russia to collect
funds for the construction of a cathedral. As a result of his
tireless activities, on April 18, 1902, the parish moved to
15 East 97th Street and became the new St. Nicholas
Cathedral. He served as Dean of the Cathedral for the next
twelve years. From 1903, this Cathedral became the new
center of the Russian Mission Diocese for North America.
Father Hotovitzky was very successful in his pastoral
work in America. His fluency in English aided him im-
mensely. He was publisher and editor of the Russian-
American Orthodox Messenger, the chief publication of the
Russian Mission in America. He also helped lay the founda-
tions for founding parishes in Pennsylvania, New England,
Canada and all along the east coast, and played a very
instrumental role in the organization of the Russian Ortho-
dox Mutual Aid Society (Orthodox Brotherhoods) in the
Vapi A pee
East. Father Alexander Hotovitzky
After a very successful career of missionary efforts,
second community, the Annunciation Church, was an
traveling, preaching, publishing and witnessing to the faith,
Father Hotovitzky returned to Russia on February 27, Archimandrite Kallinicos Thilveis who was sent by the
1914, where he was reported to be martyred by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. This was a significant development
Bolsheviks. in that trom the start a kind of dual ecclesiastical authority
was established over the Greek community of New York.
Holy Trinity Greek Church The authority, however, was not a local one. In fact, the
Unlike Greek parishes on the west coast, Holy Trinity Greek parishes throughout the United States had no resi-
Greek parish in New York City did not establish an intimate dent bishop until 1918.
relationship with the Russian Mission.
The early Greek parishes on the east coast differed in
This parish was founded in 1892, having already a their constituency from Orthodox parishes established ear-
membership of about 1,000 families. A year before, in lier in the southwestern and Pacific coast areas. The latter
1891, the community leaders sent a petition to the Holy were international; the former were almost exclusively
Synod of the Church of Greece to send a priest. Greek. This is an extremely important point for the proper
The first service was held in January 1892 in a Protestant understanding of the history of Greek communities in
church on West 53rd Street by Archimandrite Paisius Feren- America. It was demonstrated quite clearly in an incident
tinos. After several moves the church was finally located at described below, which took place in New York City in
153 East 72nd Street. When the church was destroyed by 1904.
fire in 1927, the community erected a new building on ‘From 1892 to 1904, the Greek parishes in New York
East 74th Street. City conducted services and carried on a parish life primari-
Annunciation Greek Church ly as though they were still situated in their native land.
Due to the large Greek population in New York City at The difference is that théir administrative ties with a bishop
the time, a second parish was started in 1893. Serving the were somewhat vague because the ecclesiastical authorities

42
were thousands of miles away. Support for the parish came
largely from the local membership. Hence, the parish coun-
cil wielded great authority. As the parishes grew, it became
evident that the community, like other religious bodies in
New York, should be incorporated under state law. In at-
tempting to do this in 1904, however, the Greeks discovered
that the Russian Mission had already been incorporated as
the “Greek Orthodox Church.” Furthermore, there were
provisions stating that, to become incorporated, every
Church of Orthodox Dogma had to be certified by the
Russian Minister in Washington, D.C., and by the Russian
Consul in New York. The result was that three laymen from
among the parish leadership undertook the responsibility to
incorporate the parish in their own name, using the word
“Hellenic” in the corporation title. The three Greek-
American citizens were Peter Minadakis, Kyriacoula Tsikla-
kou and Constantine Vlahos. The latter was also the pub-
lisher of the Greek newspaper, the Atlantis.
It is difficult at this point to determine exactly what the
relationship was, if any, between the Greek people in New
York City and the clergy of the Russian Mission before
1900. It would seem that the contact at best was rather
negligible. It is clear, however, that by 1904, the Greeks
were ready to reject Bishop Tikhon, who had established his
headquarters in New York a year earlier, as their ecclesias-
tical superior. An incident took place on Good Friday in
1904. Bishop Tikhon, not knowing about the private in-
corporation, appeared at the Church and announced that he
was their bishop. When informed of the private incorpora-
tion, he was obliged to leave. This apparently set the pattern
of incorporation for most Greek parishes as waves of immi-
grants arrived from Europe in the early 1900’s.
This does not mean that all contact ceased between
Greek parishes and the Russian Mission. A friendly relation-
ship often existed, and on a number of occasions, Greek
parishes in the east as well as in other parts of the country,
sent requests to the bishop of the Russian mission for
“antimensia,” the altar cloths upon which the Divine Litur-
gy is served. Records of such requests exist throughout the
period prior to World War | and the establishment of the
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese.
Throughout the period of immigration that began in the
1880’s, in addition to Greeks, who comprised the largest
group, Orthodox immigrants from many other parts of
Europe, the Near East, and North Africa began to settle
along the east coast and in a number of eastern states.
Among the settlers there were thousands of Uniates from
Eastern Europe, many of whom were subsequently reunited
with the Orthodox Church during this period.
Alexander Doumouras
The “Unia’’ and the Return to Orthodoxy
In the late 1870’s, emigrants from the Carpathian moun-
tains of Austria-Hungary came to America to settle. In
nationality they were known as Carpatho-Russians, Ugro-
Russians, Galicians, ““Rusins,” etc. — the names are numer-
ous — from regions that were once part of Russia and that
are referred to collectively as Chervonnaya Rus or Russia
Rubra. In faith they were Uniates. In their villages in the old
country, their ancestors had been Orthodox, but on account
of the coercion of the Roman Catholic state church of
Austria-Hungary, they were compelled to unite with it, al-
though they were permitted to follow the Orthodox rites in
their church services. From generation to generation, how-
ever, they identified themselves as “Pravoslavni’’, i.e.
“Orthodox.”
Poverty and want forced them to leave their native land
and come to this country. Although life in America was not
easy for the immigrant, it was much better than life in the
old country. Work was easy to find and the pay fairly good.
With zealous endeavor and modest living, one could even
put aside some savings for emergencies. Thanks to these
conditions, and from the letters written back to friends and
relatives, a wave of immigration soon reached the thousands.
As usual with immigrants who came provided only with
their passports and enough money to buy the necessary
food while traveling, they first settled in the east, princi-
pally in New York and other port cities of their initial
arrival, and later moved west to the mining regions of
Pennsylvania where they could secure a living by working
in the mines and steel mills.
The people from Russia Rubra had an important effect
on the American populace, especially in the anthracite coal
fields in Pennsylvania. “. . . Their native tongue is far re-
moved from our own, their illiteracy is great (40%); their
economic efficiency is low, and their religious and moral
training is not up to the American standard. Hence, the gap
between these immigrants and our people is great, the
process of assimilation is difficult, and the tasks of changing
from the old to the new is fraught with danger.” (“Foreign
Population,” Wilkes-Barre Record, May 9, 1907, p. 11)
The immigrants were, it is true, ill-equipped to become
part of American life. They settled in certain areas, centered
around industries, and formed ghettoes which pushed out
the native-born original inhabitants, wholly isolating them-
selves thereby from the influence of American ideals and
habits. This can clearly be seen in the case of Pennsylvania,
where statistics show less than one half of one per cent of
the immigrants classified as professionals, less than ten per
cent as skilled workers, and the money brought with them
from the old country being less than eleven dollars per
capita.
Ninety per cent of them being unskilled workers, “they
enter those spheres of employment which demand more
brawn than brain.” Nevertheless, had such a source of un-
skilled labor been cut off, industries would have been para-
lyzed and industrial development arrested.

The Slav underwent persecutions that so often affect the
minority group, as well as the humiliation of being con-
sidered an undesirable. He worked for lower wages than the
Anglo-Saxon unskilled laborer, and under labor conditions
that would be resented by his Anglo-Saxon counterpart.
Animosity was created by the fact that he took the Anglo-
Saxon’s job, thus decreasing the wage scale and demoraliz-
ing the labor market. Through labor unions, which minister-
ed to their necessities, and other forces which appealed to
their prejudices, the immigrants came to have a sense of
unity, common cause, and the necessity of gaining their
individual rights.
The attitude toward the Russia Rubra immigrants was
not completely negative. It was said of them that they
“appreciated favors shown them, they are anxious to please
and to learn, they are brave and amenable to discipline, in-
tensely practical and thrifty, they love their families and
their church, and become American citizens for the sake of
their children, whom they are anxious to start in life on a
higher plane than that upon which they were started.” They
were energetic people who built homes and churches: “
never did immigrants into this country give of their earnings
more freely for church edifices and parsonages than these
from Southeastern Europe.”
The immigrants arriving in the United States came with-
out an intelligent dedicated leadership. Other national
groups immigrating to the United States came with their
own priests, teachers and leaders to organize their religious,
cultural and economic life. The majority of the Russia
Rubra immigrants were deeply religious; the church was an
important and vital part of their lives. Lacking their own
churches, they began attending Polish and Slovak Latin
Rite Catholic churches. Some became associated with vari-
ous Protestant denominations, and others lost their faith
completely.
The unity of national consciousness brought by the im-
migrants to America was quite independent of the part of
the world from which they had come. On the foundation
of traditions deeply rooted, they continued to preserve that
44
Group of immigrants from Galicia with
Count Bobrinskoy
which they already had. But the need for a church of their
own, which could give them a deeper sense of identity and
the opportunity to worship in their own language, was
strong.
The First Uniate Parishes
In 1884, some immigrant coal miners in Shenandoah,
Pennsylvania, sent to the Metropolitan of Galicia, Sylvester
Sembratovich, the following letter:
Your Excellency: Though illiterate, we have come
here alone. But we are not entirely the same as we
were in Our own country, because something is lack-
ing to us. Lacking to us is God, Whom we could
understand, Whom we could adore in our own way.
You, Your Excellency, are our father here, too, be-
cause you are the father of the Rus. Therefore we
beseech you: give us our priests, give your blessing
towards the building of churches, so that in this new
land we may have that which is holy in Russia.
(Isidore Sochocky, ‘“The Ukrainian Catholic Church of the
Byzantine Slavonic Rite in the U.S.A.,” Ukrainian Catholic
Metropolitan See, trans. Conatantine Berdar, Philadelphia,
Byzantine Rite Archeparchy of Philadelphia, 1959, p. 250.)
The Metropolitan’s reaction to this letter was to send to
the United States the first Greek Catholic priest, Father
[van Volansky, and through him a pastoral letter to the im-
migrants in this country:
Beloved in Christ... faithful of the Greek Catholic
Rite in America: ...1 have heard that many of our
people had gone away to find work. I was very sorry
to hear that they did not have their own spiritual
father, who would in time of necessity, be able to
encourage them and to give them God’s graces, take
care of their spiritual needs, confess them and nourish
them with Holy Communion, reunite them with God,
when the Lord God would call them to Himself. I was,
therefore, very pleased when I received your letter
with your signatures and request for a pastor of souls.
At this moment I have for you one of our pastors
from the Archdiocese of Lvov. He will leave for Amer-
 ica shortly, as soon as passage money can be obtained,
and since he is to be married, even though he does not
have any children, the fifty dollars you sent is not
enough for the two of them to make the trip. He will
be ready to go to Shenandoah in America in a few
days. His name is Ivan Volansky and I presume that
you will be pleased with him.
Strive to remain true to your Eastern rite and our
Greek Catholic Church, and the merciful God will not
abandon you, but will send you His heavenly bless-
ings, for which | pray and which I myself send you.
For the time being, | am writing you briefly. Write
to me concerning whatever you may need, and I will
see to it that you receive it. ...1 greet you once
more and admonish you to behave yourselves:
morally, industriously, virtuously, soberly, as true
Christians.
Father John Volansky was a married man when he ar-
rived in America in December 1884. He was greeted with
great enthusiasm by his own people, but he soon discovered
that everyone else treated him with open hostility, particu-
larly the Polish and Irish Roman Catholics. They simply
could not accept the idea of a married priest under the
jurisdiction of the Pope of Rome. Father Volansky finally
was forced to celebrate his first Divine Liturgy in a private
home. The great festivity of this occasion was described by
Dionisij Salej, one of the founders of the parish, in the
“Remembrances of my Journey to America in 1881.” The
first Rusins in the area had attended the Irish and later the
Polish church, but always dreamed of the day when they
could have a church of their own rite. When that day came,
every Rusin in the anthracite region traveled to Shenandoah
to participate. “All the ‘diaki’ (cantors) of which there were
quite a number from Galicia and Ugro-Russia, tried to out-
do each other. It was like the Syrian Church in New York
during a hierarchal liturgy.”
Soon after this service, Father John traveled to Phila-
delphia with a delegation of the most distinguished members
of the community for an audience with the Roman Catholic
Archbishop, Patrick John Ryan (1884-1911). In place of
Archbishop Ryan however, Volansky was interviewed by
his chancellor, Ignatius Horstmann, the future Roman
Catholic bishop of Cleveland (1892-1908). The latter, learn-
ing of Volansky’s marital status, not only refused to honor
his documents but declared that, because of his situation as
a married priest, he could not be considered a Catholic.
Introduction to the archbishop was denied. Subsequent to
this meeting, the announcement was made in all churches of
the archdiocese of Philadelphia that Volansky, enjoying no
jurisdictional rights, could be considered functioning only
as a schismatic and, therefore, an ipso facto excommunicate.
The delegation returned home greatly frustrated and at a
loss as to their next course of action, since they lacked
authority to begin construction of a church without the
permission of the proper ecclesiastical authority. Their
troubles were compounded by vicious attacks from the
pulpits of both the Irish and Polish Roman Catholic pas-
tors, who took the action of the Archbishop as approval
of their own prejudice. However, under the advisement and
encouragement of a friend of the Rusin colony, Casimir
Reis, who told them to ignore the Archbishop since this
was a free country, and in that Father Volansky had the
necessary authorization from his own Metropolitan in
Lvov, they purchased land and proceded with the blessing
of the foundation of the new church, which brought to-
gether a huge crowd for the festive occasion.
Dionisij Salej describes the blessing of the foundation:
“The lots were purchased and the construction began.
When the foundation was completed, the ceremony of
blessing was arranged and a great number ofpeople gathered
to participate. The weather was beautiful. When the rite of
blessing was begun, great tears of joy watered the ground.
We are incapable of describing the joy, even though we saw
the insulting behavior of the ‘lyakhs’ toward us, for they
did not remove their hats before the holy Cross. But they
did this because of their fear of Lenartowicz (the pastor of
the Polish church), who threatened every Pole with expul-
sion from the church if he dared to participate openly in
the blessing of the foundation of the new church.”
This feeling of animosity for the Greek Catholics on the
part of their Roman Catholic brethren was the dominant
attitude for many years and lasted well into the middle of
the twentieth century, although, in fairness to the individ-
uals involved, there were many like Casimir Reis who helped
the Rusins. However, if one were to examine the official
biographies of both Archbishop Ryan and Archbishop Ire-
land (who had an historic encounter with Father Alexis
Toth in St. Paul, Minnesota), he would find no mention
whatsoever of either Father John Volansky or Father Toth.
One must assume that either the incidents which loomed so
large in the eyes of the Greek Catholics were completely
unimportant to the two hierarchs of the Roman Catholic
Church at that time, or that they remained for many years
a source of real embarrassment to them.
Consultation of Greek Catholic Clergy
Father John Volansky ultimately built the church in
Shenandoah, and more Greek Catholic priests arrived in the
next five years to establish parishes in Hazleton (1887),
Kingston (1888), Olyphant (1888), Jersey City (1889),
Freeland, Wilkes-Barre, Shamokin, Philadelphia and Minne-
apolis, Minnesota (1887). In 1890, on October 29th, eight
of the ten Greek Catholic priests in America held their first
formal meeting in the parish home of Father Alexander
Dzubay in Wilkes-Barre. The two who refused to attend
did so because they preferred to meet in a hotel room
rather than in the parish home. Despite the pleas of Father
Alexis Toth, Father Constantine Andruhovich of Shenan-
doah and Hicromonk Cyril Gulovich of Freeland did not
attend this historic first meeting. The clergy who did partic-
ipate met under the presidency of Father Alexis Toth of
Minneapolis. The secretaries of the meeting were Father
Theophan Obushkevich of Shamokin and Father Eugene
Volkay of Hazleton. Other participants were Fathers
Alexander Dzubay and Stephan Yatskovich of Wilkes-
Barre; Joseph Zapototsky, of Kingston; Gregory Grushka,
of Jersey City; Gabriel Visloky, of Olyphant.
fs Nn
 x ge
Group of first Uniate Clergy in America. Photo taken at 1890 meeting. Sitting (L to R), Fathers Vislotsky, Zapototsky Toth and
Obushkevich. Standing (L to R), Volkay, Dzubay, Yatskovich, Grushka. The four leading priests of this group returned to the Orthodox
Faith: Toth, Dzubay, Yatskovich and Grushka.
After the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, including a
remembrance of “Many Years” for their bishops, Metro-
politan Joseph of Lvov, Bishop John of Presov and Bishop
John of Peremysl, and the singing of “Eternal Memory” for
the newly-departed priest Zenovij Lyahovich, the clergy
held a formal meeting in the rectory. The agenda for the
meeting was a comprehensive survey of all the major prob-
lems the Greek Catholic clergy and their parishioners faced
in an ethnically and religiously hostile climate. The agenda
was couched in formal phraseology, but reveals nonetheless
problems of deep emotional, spiritual and psychological
depth and complexity. Point two of the agenda states: “‘to
beg our home bishops (ordinaries) not to release us from
their jurisdiction, and not to turn us over to the care and
jurisdiction of the Latin bishops here.” It was one of the
most important items on the agenda, for it struck at the
very heart of the dilemma of the Greek Catholic Uniate
priest who found himself trying to organize a parish life
while under the authority and jurisdiction of bishops who
were either indifferent to him or who openly rejected him
as a priest. They had even gone so far as to make formal
complaints to Rome, asking that the Uniate priests be for-
bidden to come to America. The problem was real, for the
46
ee ee
Greek Catholic priest was totally different from the Roman
Catholic priest. His rite was not the Latin, but Eastern; his
nationality was Rusin (or “Ruthenian” as the. Roman Cath-
Olics called them); he was married and had a family; the
language of his church was Slavonic, not Latin. Though the
Roman Catholic bishops and clergy were familiar with the
Greek Catholic rite, theirs was a book knowledge, an ab-
straction. They had never had occasion to meet them in
their home countries, let alone have them living across the
street in their own towns.
European bishops gave their blessing to priests emigrat-
ing to the United States, instructing them to report to their
local ordinaries in order to receive necessary jurisdiction
and faculties. But the bishops overlooked the fact that the
American hierarchy was unfamiliar with the Byzantine rite
and the Uniate Greek Catholic Church. The Greek Cath-
olics were a new and strange phenomenon to the Amer-
icans, who had no way even of knowing whether the creden-
tials presented by the Greek Catholic priests were authentic
Latin documents issued by a recognized Roman Catholic
bishop in Europe. Too, the European bishops had granted
or were understood to have granted these priests jurisdiction
over the Greek Catholics in America. As a result, a duality
was created — the priests were responsible both to the
bishops who had given them jurisdiction and, at least nom-
inally, to the Roman Catholic Church in America, which
did not accept them into its ranks. However the Greek
Catholic priests, despite this lack of acceptance by the
Catholics, thought themselves to be sufficiently justified
because they had their jurisdiction from the European
bishops, and did not need the authority of the American
hierarchy. Many misunderstandings arose between the
American Latin ordinaries and the Byzantine Rite Catholic
priests. The Roman priests were unacquainted with the By-
zantine Rite and were suspicious of such practices as the
marriage of clergy and the administration of the rite of
confirmation by priests. The two parties refused to ap-
proach each other; there was mutual distrust. (Stephen C.
Gulovich, Windows Westward (New York: Declan X.
McMillan Co., 1947), pp. 127-129.)
Union of Greek Catholic Brotherhoods
To bolster their missionary activities and to unite more
strongly the immigrants in the face of this Latin opposition,
the Uniate priests, in February of 1892, organized the
Sojedinenije, the Union of Greek Catholic Brotherhoods in
North America. In the words of one of the founders, Cor-
nelius Laurishin, ““There already existed here at that time a
Slovak society, founded upon purely national grounds, the
Narodni Slovenski Spolek. In its service the Slovak news-
paper, the Slovenski Novini, was published which, because
of its exaggerated national politics as well as its attacks
against the Catholic clergy, was not in the least desirable or
satisfactory for our Greek Catholic Ugro-Russian people.
The Slovak Catholic organization, Jednota, established by
the Slovak Catholic clergy to counter the above, likewise
proved unsatisfactory. On the one hand, it would have led
to the linguistic Slovakization of the people and, on the
other hand, it would have provided an opportunity for the
Slovak Roman Catholic priests to lead our people into the
Latinsrite.d
To promote its own views, then, the Sojedinenije began
publication in Mahoney City, Pennsylvania, of its own news-
paper, the Russkij Viestnik, under the editorship of Paul
Zatkovich. The first issue appeared in March 1892.
Satisfied with having secured the national future of the
Carpatho-Russian immigrants, at least temporarily, through
the establishment of the Sojedinenije, the Uniate priests
now turned their full attention to guaranteeing their eccle-
sial future. Toward this end, they again began petitioning
both their European hierarchs and Rome for the appoint-
ment of a bishop.
With the establishment in the United States of the Vati-
can’s diplomatic legation and the arrival of the first papal
envoy, Archbishop Francesco Satolli (1893-1896), the suc-
cess of this project seemed within reach. Upon Satolli’s
suggestion, the Uniate clergy gathered in Olyphant, Pennsyl-
vania, on September S, 1893, to nominate one of their
number as vicar. The sealed ballots, together with the
minutes of the meeting, were presented to the archbishop
by a specially named committee. It was Nicephor Chanath,
then pastor of the Uniate community of Passaic, New Jersey,
who received the greatest number of votes. Consequently,
Chanath was empowered by Satolli as vicar to all Roman
Catholic diocesan bishops within whose territories were to
be found Uniate communities. Definitive papal appointment
was promised in the near future ... Yet the appointment
was not forthcoming. Upon his elevation to the College
of Cardinals, Satolli left America, to be succeeded by
Archbishop Sebastiano Martinelli (1896-1902). Constantly
repeated petitions for his intervention likewise proved
without result. Rome continued in procrastination. And the
immigration continued in confusion.
Finally, through the influence of the Hungarian govern-
ment, Andrew Hodobay, a Uniate priest of the Diocese of
Presov, was appointed by Rome in 1902 as Apostolic
Visitator to the Uniates of America. His administration,
however, proved such a disaster that eventually “all ties
with him were broken by laity, clergy and hierarchy alike
so that, when he left America (1907), it was as if he had
never been here.” Preoccupied with the desired weight of
the episcopal mitre on his head, Hodobay, excelling in
divisive tactics, filled the Uniate mission with intrigue.
On August 27, 1907, the Galician Bishop Soter Ortinsky
arrived in New York, having been appointed by Rome
bishop for the Uniates in America. His tenure, ending with
his death on March 24, 1916, was marked by agitation,
dissension and factionalism. Opposition to Ortinsky was
voiced on many levels. Administratively, Ortinsky did not
possess full episcopal jurisdiction. Functioning more as a
vicar than as a bishop, he was obliged to seek jurisdiction
over his parishes by delegation from the Roman Catholic
bishops in whose dioceses Uniate communities were estab-
lished. Ecclesially and liturgically, he was bound to imple-
ment the directives of the Ea Semper decree, promulgated
by Rome on June 14, 1907. As one commentator has
elaborated,
The Ea Semper decree, beside relegating Ortinsky
to a position of a vicar-general, also required the
Ruthenian clergy to be celibate and forbade the clergy
to administer the sacrament of confirmation. The
decree also placed the American Ruthenian Church
directly under the jurisdiction of Rome through the
Apostolic Delegate. This action severed the juris-
dictional ties with both the bishops of Galicia and
Ugro-Ruthenia. Other regulatory provisions affected
mixed rite marriages, salaries of the clergy, stipends
and organizational matters.
Interestingly, it was the officers of the Sojedinenije, through
the voice of the Russkij Viestnik, who proved most forceful
in the attack against Ortinsky. This struggle came to a head
in 1911-1912. On August 30, 1911, a meeting of forty-four
Carpatho-Russian Uniate priests was held in Scranton,
Pennsylvania, to devise ways to obstruct the work of Ortin-
sky. On May 12, 1912, with the approval of the Apostolic
Delegate Giovanni Bonzano (1911-1922), Ortinsky sus-
pended all these priests of their faculties, which ban re-
5
mained in effect until September 13, 1913.
 The closing years of Ortinsky’s administration, devoted who called here from the East. The first priest to come for
as they were to the re-establishment of peace among the that purpose was Father John Volansky.
Uniate communities, were far from quiet ones. On May 28, In 1887 Father John Volansky, from Shenandoah, Penn-
1913, Ortinsky was granted full jurisdictional powers over sylvania, on his visits to various parishes in other states,
the Uniates of America while, the following year, on Octo- visited Minneapolis. At that time there were about 80
ber 27, 1914, Rome granted a ten-year period of suspen- Russian persons. Not being able to receive permission for
sion of the Ea Semper directives. Thus, as one author has conducting the services in Catholic churches, Father Volan-
observed, “‘criticism against the bishop continued, but it sky conducted the first Divine Liturgy in the home of
was more subdued; however, the attacks upon the priests Paul Podany and George Homzik. The refusal to permit
who supported Ortinsky during the crisis were redoubled.” Uniates to have services in their churches and the cool re-
Political and national factionalism among the ¢lergy, as well ception of Archbishop Ireland affronted the Russian peo-
as the general trend toward Latinization which, despite ple — but at the same time served a purpose by which
Rome’s temporary intervention, still continued, served only they benefited, uniting the immigrants even more closely
to draw into ever greater relief the ills of the Union. It is together, compelling them to undertake the task of build-
estimated that, due to the promulgation and attempted en- ing their own separate church.
forcement of the Ea Semper decree, unmistakably betraying
Construction of the church building was started in 1887
as it did Rome’s true concern for the Eastern Church, over
and completed in March of the next year. Much effort to
90,000 Uniates returned to the Orthodox Church.
(Materials contributed by Fathers Vladimir Borichevsky and David this end was exerted by the first pioneer parishioners, Mr.
Lesko, and Mr. Keith Russin.) Homzik, Mr. Sivanich and Mr. Cook. Supervising the con-
struction of the first church building was Peter Dzubay,
Jr., and Stephen Reshetar, carpenters. Every parishioner
gave a helping hand one way or another, physically and
The Midwestern States with contributions. It was a wooden edifice and only large
Minneapolis, Minnesota enough to accommodate a small congregation.
1st St. Mary’s Church, Minneapolis, 1888-1904.
At the end of the 1880’s a fairsized group of Rusin im-
migrants settled in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The first to ar-
rive was George Homzik, who came in 1878, when the
city was still in its infancy. Others of the early arrivals
were Theodore Sivanich, Peter Kuchechka (Cook), George
Ihnat and Paul Podany. Working in the forests, factories
and saw-mills, these first immigrants purchased land bor-
dering on the city on Seventh Avenue Northeast close to
the Mississippi River, and built themselves homes and gar-
dens. They lived very close to one another and thus
formed their own little Russian community. For their spir-
itual needs they would go to the German and Polish Ro-
man Catholic priests. Father Jacob Pocholsky, a Polish
priest, tried every method and means to unite them with
his church.
Whatever might have been the desire of these early immi-
grants to secure material benefits and comforts, it never
obscured their deep religious convictions which solaced
them in the more trying periods of their lives. They were
willing to make sacrifices of any character but most willing
were they in making those sacrifices which would secure to
them the form of worship that accorded with their faith.
Their first concern after settling in Minneapolis was to
provide a place where they might worship. Not long after
their arrival in Minneapolis, they made plans to purchase
property on which to build a church. In 1887 a corner lot
on Fifth Street and Seventeenth Avenue Northeast, on
which the present church is located, was purchased. It was
purchased in the name of Theodore Sivanich, Vasily Sodd
and Peter Cook.
Years before services were started in this church, the
various Russian immigrants met regularly in private homes
for prayer. Occasional services were conducted by a priest

48
 The financial situation of this small newly organized
community was pitiful. Money was badly needed for the
construction. Collectors were sent out to solicit funds.
Peter Podany was sent to Pennsylvania for that purpose.
In their plans for the construction of a church edifice,
the Rusins of Minneapolis further organized a Russian
Brotherhood on June 3, 1888 — the Sts. Peter and Paul
Russian Orthodox Society, called a “United Brotherhood.”
It started with 19 members.
Among the early pioneer-founders and organizers were:
George Homzik, Theodore Sivanich, Peter Cook, Paul Mas-
ley, Gregory Semanchak, Elia Super, Gregory Tutmark,
Gregory Warhol, Paul Podany, Peter Podany, John Mlinar,
Peter Dzubay, Sr., Peter Dzubay, Jr., Stephen Reshetar,
Peter Warhol, Michael Potochnak, George Ihnat, Michael
Jalma, Peter Brinda, Sam Sivanich, Theodore Sodd, William
Tarasar and William Tanchin.
In the spring of 1889, Father John Volansky again visit-
ed Minneapolis and consecrated the church in honor of the
Blessed Virgin — St. Mary’s Russian Orthodox Greek Cath-
olic Church — which. name it carries until this day. During
the summer months Father Alexander Dzubay conducted
services in this new church. He advised the people to get a
permanent resident priest. This was difficult for the small
newly organized congregation. Nevertheless they took into
account the advice of Father Dzubay. They collected $7.00
from every family and $5.00 from single parishioners. The
money was sent to cover fare and traveling expenses for a
priest. Father John Zapotocky, a priest from the Presov
Diocese, was assigned to the Minneapolis parish. Upon his
arrival in America, he stopped in Kingston, Pennsylvania,
accepting the pastorate of that church. The Minneapolis
people were very disappointed and deeply hurt by this
action of the priest.
Shortly thereafter, a new priest was assigned to Minne-
apolis, Father Alexis Toth, also from the Presov Diocese.
On Thanksgiving Day, 1889, Father Toth conducted his first
services in the new church. The spirit of the small congrega-
tion attending the services accorded with the spirit of the
day. It was, in every respect, a day of Thanksgiving for this
small group. Father Alexis G. Toth was the first resident
pastor to officiate in an official capacity. He came to
Minneapolis from Austria-Hungary in 1889 and remained
with the congregation until 1893, when he accepted a call
to become pastor in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Upon his arrival in Minneapolis, Father Toth
... found a church, but empty. No vestments, no
sacred church vessels and other needed articles. I at
once began to solicit funds and contributions, begging
from strangers, non-Orthodox people and my own
parishioners. I wanted at least to provide the most
needed for the conducting of the divine services. At
that time there were about fourteen families and a
number of single persons — a total of 89 souls... In
the course of one year I solicited enough to purchase
five complete sets of church vestments to be used for
various feast days, a Holy Gospel, sacred vessels and
other implements. used for the preparation and ad-
ministration of the Holy Gifts to communicants . . .
All this cost $840.00.
Upon Father Toth’s arrival in Minneapolis, he visited the
Archbishop in St. Paul and presented his credentials as was
customary. Because of certain misunderstandings (cf. biog-
raphy of Father Toth), his audience with the Archbishop
ended badly. Upon arrival home Father Toth reported
everything to his faithful parishioners. Ardently, with a
painful heart he prayed God to enlighten him with wisdom,
understanding and give him strength to explain to his people
this most critical situation. He begged his faithful to be
patient.
His own parishioners helped him in this matter. Gather-
ing his parishioners together he explained to them the sor-
rowful existing situation. He announced that the only and
best thing for him to do under the circumstances is to leave
them. The majority of the parishioners answered him say-
ing: “‘No, we shall go to the Russian Orthodox bishop! Why
must we eternally bow to strange bishops?” Very well, said
Father Toth, — “But where do we find this Russian bishop?
Where does he live? And what is his name?”
“Some said he lived in Sitka, Alaska, others said in San
Francisco... myself, said Father Toth, — I knew absolutely
nothing. I only knew that in San Francisco there lived a
Russian Consul. Therefore, under the name of Andrew
Potochnak, I sent the following inquiry to the Russian Con-
sulate — ‘Is it true that a Russian Orthodox bishop lives in
San Francisco? If so, what is his name and where does he
live?’ Afier ten days, December 18, 1890, a letter arrived
addressed to Michael Potochnak, informing him that the
name of the Ruling Prelate was His Grace Bishop Vladimir
and that he lives at 1715 Powell Street North, San Francisco,”
Father Toth and the parishioners decided to send a dele-
gate to present the matter to Bishop Vladimir and ask for a
contribution toward installation of an iconostas — for as yet
there was no iconostas in the Minneapolis Church. The pur-
pose, however, was to find out if he really was an Orthodox
bishop, ordained according to the rites of the church and
not a staro-obriadets (Old-Believer) or a Russian sectarian-
heretic. Among other things the last supposition was really
the reason why the inquiry was not in the name of the
priest, but a layman. John Mlinar was selected to travel to
San Francisco to visit the Bishop. Mr. Mlinar, speaking only
the Ugro-Russian language, had difficulty convincing the
Bishop and his secretary as to what he really was, Uniate or
Orthodox. Nevertheless he greeted His Grace, told him of
his troubles and described the situation of the Minneapolis
parishioners and Father Toth.
His Grace, Bishop Vladimir wrote a letter to Father Toth
asking if he was Orthodox or Uniate? And if he was a Uni-
ate, does he not wish to join the Orthodox Church and be
assigned to the Diocese of Alaska? Igumen George Chudnov-
sky, attached to the cathedral, also wrote a letter to Father
Toth in which he advised that he personally come to San
Francisco and talk this matter over with His Grace. This, he
wrote, would be the best way.
49
 FATHER ALEXIS
Alexis Georgievich Toth, son of Reverend George and
Cecilia Toth, was born near Eperjes (now Presov), in Szepes
county of Slovakia on March 14, 1853, during the reign of
Franz Josef I, Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary.
Alexis Toth received his early education in the local prepara-
tory schools, after which he attended the Roman Catholic
Seminary of Esztergom for one year and the United Greek
Seminary of Ungvar for three years. He graduated from the
University of Presov with a degree in Theology.
Following in the footsteps of his father, who was the
dean of the United Greek Church in Szepes county, he was
ordained to the priesthood in 1878 by Bishop Nicholas
Toth, the United Greek Catholic Bishop of Presov, who was
under the jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic Metropolitan
of Esztergom. After ordination, Father Toth was an assist-
ant priest for a few months in Saros county. From there,
he became a curate in the United Greek Catholic Church in
Homrogd, Abauj county. Father Toth was nominated to be
chancellor to Bishop Nicholas Toth, managing the offices of
the bishop’s diocese in Presov as the administrator of the
bishop.
In 1881 the bishop appointed him director of the United
Greek Catholic Seminary of Presov and professor of Canon
Law and Church History; he continued in this position
under Bishop Nicholas’ successor, Bishop John Valyi, until
Reverend Alexander Dzubay from America petitioned the
bishop to send Father Toth to America. Father Dzubay
studied with Father Toth at the Seminary in Ungvar, Father
Toth being a fourth-year student when Father Dzubay was
a first-year student. Bishop John Valyi sent Father Toth to
America to act as a “‘missioner.”’ He arrived in the United
States on November 15, 1889.
Pastor in Minneapolis
On Thanksgiving Day, 1889, Father Toth conducted his
first services in the new St. Mary’s Church. He was the first
resident pastor to serve this church in an official capacity.
Father Toth’s arrival in America was during the era of
the “Americanist”’ controversies in Roman Catholicism. The
American Catholic hierarchy at the beginning of the twenti-
eth century was divided between the conservatives and the
“Americanists.” The chief protaganists of these controver-
sies were Archbishop John Ireland of St. Paul, Minnesota
(Americanist) and Archbishop Michael Corrigan of New
York (conservative). Archbishop Ireland was a strong pro-
ponent of the Americanization of the Catholic immigrant.
He wanted the Church to enter into the social and political
movements of the day, desiring a total assimilation of the
immigrants into the American culture. He had no real under-
standing of the deeper problems faced by the Eastern
Europeans, whose real desire was not to be assimilated but
to establish a community which would retain its European
character and with which they could, therefore, identify.
To Archbishop Ireland, Father Toth and his people repre-
sented a alien sect, who, unlike the Germans and Irish with
50
GEORGIEVICH TOTH
whom he was familiar, had no desire or capacity to fit into
his plan for Americanization.
When Father Toth arrived in Minneapolis, he went to
present his credentials to'Archbishop Ireland in St. Paul.
He describes the encounter as follows:
I was a Uniate when I came to America... ] knew
that there in America as a Uniate priest I was to obey
the Roman Catholic Bishop of the particular diocese
in which I happened to work. The Union demanded
this as well as the various Papal Bulls, Briefs and De-
cretals as there was no Uniate Bishop in this country.
When I came to Minneapolis, I was there a while,
when a Polish priest came up to me and said, “You
better come up with me. I introduce you to the
Bishop of Minneapolis, of St. Paul, Bishop Ireland.”
This Polish priest was called away to some sick andI
went up myself to see him. I had my priest’s clothes
on and I introduced myself and showed him my
papers...
Moreover, in my credentials the following instruc-
tion was clearly given: Dilectio tua debet, in cuius
territorio habetur locus destinationis suae. The place
of my appointment was Minneapolis, Minnesota, in
the province of Archbishop Ireland. As an obedient
Uniate I complied with the orders of my Bishop, who
at that time was John Valyi, and appeared before
Bishop Ireland December 19, 1889, kissed his hand
according to custom and presented my credentials,
failing, however, to kneel before him, which, as I
learned later, was my chief mistake. I remember that
no sooner did he read that I was a “Greek Catholic,”
his hands began to shake. It took him fifteen minutes
to read to the end after which he asked abruptly —
we conversed in Latin:
“Have you a wife?”
“No.”
“But you had one?”
“Yes, 1am a widower.”
At this he threw the paper on the table and loudly
exclaimed: “I have already written to Rome protest-
ing against this kind of priest being sent to me!”
“What kind of priest do you mean?”
“Your kind.”
“I am a Catholic priest of the Greek Rite. I am a
Uniate and was ordained by a regular Catholic bishop.”
“I do not consider that either you or this bishop of
yours are Catholic; besides, I do not need any Greek
Catholic priests here; a Polish priest in Minneapolis is
quite sufficient; the Greeks can also have him for their
priest.”
“But he belongs to the Latin Rite; besides our
people do not understand him and so they will hardly
 go to him; that was the reason they instituted a
church of their own.”
“They had no permission from me and I shall grant
you no jurisdiction to work here.”
Deeply hurt by the fanaticism of this representa-
tive of Papal Rome, I replied sharply: “In that case,I
know the rights of my church, I know the basis on
which the Union was established and shall act accord-
ingly.”
The Archbishop lost his temper. I lost mine just as
much. One word brought another, the thing had gone
so far that our conversation is not worth putting on
record.
This chaotic condition was the result of a lack of under-
standing on the part of all concerned. There were no pat-
terns or guidelines for unifying or centralizing the Uniate
Catholic Church in this new diaspora in which it now found
itself. The Roman Catholic Church was deeply involved in
settling its own problems of Americanization and therefore
the immigrants’ problems were indefinitely pigeon-holed.
Father Toth knew well that he could function as a priest
under the jurisdiction of his bishop in Europe, but being a
specialist in Canon Law, he also knew that his complete
independence vis-a-vis the American hierarchy was quite
irregular:
... two days after the meeting with Bishop Ireland,
the Polish priest, Jacob Pocholsky, called on me. He
spoke as if terror-stricken. “For God’s sake, your
Reverence, what have you done? The Archbishop
writes me I must have no intercourse with you. He
does not accept you as a regularly ordained priest and
I am under strict orders from him to announce this at
the altar, forbidding your people to be ministered to
by you or to take sacraments from you...”
This was my reply: “This is your concern. Do what
_ you think is best. I shall not surrender one step and
shall not be influenced by anything you and your
bishop can do.”
The Archbishop’s demands were made public. He
sent complaints to Rome and my flock began to hear
rumors which frightened them. The Archbishop, it
was said, was going to send away their priest in igno-
miny, etc. In the meantime, I received letters from
several of my fellow priests of the Uniate Rite, who
wrote that there were a good many of us who had
been treated by Latin Bishops and priests just as I had
been. I informed the Uniate Bishop in Eperjes of all
this, asking his instructions, but he never answered
me. Naturally so! As if a Uniate Bishop dared to
contradict a Latin Archbishop. I wrote a second and
third time, still without obtaining any reply. At last, I
received from Canon Dzubay the following instruc-
tion: ““For God’s sake, be patient and, if the Arch-
bishop doubts that you are a faithful Catholic, let him
know that you are willing to take your oath on it!”
After a while I received another letter from him,
proposing that I should write a detailed account of
JHE CINCINNATI BIBLE SEMINARY
LIBRARY.
the way the Archbishop received me and advising me
to write very carefully, as the letter was to be sent to
Rome. This I did, but later on the same Reverend
Dzubay informed me that the truth was too harshly
stated in my letter for it to be sent to Rome. How-
ever, some measures had been taken and Rome was
told that Latin Bishops must respect the Holy Union.
In general, the results of this long struggle and truly
tragic controversy are fairly well known. “I made up my
mind,” proclaimed Father Toth, “to do something whichI
carried in my heart a long time, for which my soul longed:
that is, to become Orthodox. But how was it to be done? I
had to be very cautious. The unfortunate Union, the source
of our decline and all our ills, had been part of our people
too long. We had already borne that yoke on our shoulders
for 250 years. I fervently prayed God to grant me the power
to make all this clear.to my unenlightened parishioners.”
Thus, on March 25, 1891: the Sunday of Orthodoxy,
Father Toth and his community of approximately 365
Ruthenian immigrants were formally accepted by Bishop
Vladimir (Sokolovsky) of San Francisco into the Russian
Orthodox Diocese of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands. On
July 14, 1892, the move was officially recognized and
sanctioned:
The Ruling All-Russian Holy Synod, becoming in-
formed of the conversion and re-uniting with the Holy
Orthodox Church of the Pastor and his faithful
parishioners who emigrated from the Carpathian
Mountains into America, namely 361 Russian Uniates
and their pastor, Father Alexy G. Toth, joyfully rais-
ing their prayers in thanks to the Lord God upon the
blessed occasion, imparts Orthodox pastoral. bene-
diction upon the Reverend Father Toth and his
parishioners, henceforth Orthodox Faithful.
+ Humble Isidor
Prime and Foremost Member of the Holy Synod,
Metropolitan of Novgorod and St. Petersburg.
Father Alexis Toth thus gained the distinction of being
the first Uniate Catholic priest in America to lead his people
to reunion with the Orthodox Church. But it should not be
thought that the activities of Father Toth ceased with his
regularization and development of the parochial situation
in Minneapolis. He was originally sent to America by the
Uniate Catholic Church to serve as a missionary to the
immigrants and it was within the Orthodox Church into
which he was eventually accepted that he carried this
charge to its fullest realization. Thus, in December 1892,
we find him in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, preaching to
the immigrants, attempting to enlighten them as to their
social and religious future in America and, in 1902, re-
ceiving the parish of St. John the Baptist in Mayfield,
Pennsylvania. Through his efforts many parishes of the
Unia were received into the Orthodox fold. He died on
May 7, 1909, having been elevated to the rank of Proto-
presbyter. He is buried at St. Tikhon’s Monastery, where
a special shrine has been constructed in his memory.
(Materials compiled from the thesis of Reith Russin, The Right
Reverend Alexis G. Toth, 1971, St. Vladimir’s Seminary.)
ay
at Re &
261.873
ie
aidiy

Upon the return of Mr. John Mlinar to Minneapolis,
Father Toth, following the advice of Igumen George, in the
early days of February, together with Paul Podany, the
church elder, and with the confidence and loyalty of his
flock, went to San Francisco.
The trip was not in vain. It resulted in the promise of the
Bishop to visit Minneapolis. His Grace, Bishop Vladimir,
kept his promise. He came to Minneapolis March 25, 1891,
the Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy and reunited 361
persons into the bosom of their forefather’s Holy Orthodox
Greek Catholic Church. With a thankful heart the priest and
people joyfully exclaimed: “Glory be to God for His great
mercy!”
When news of the reuniting of Father Toth and his
parishioners was made public, many commended his coura-
geous course of action. Others personally came to Minne-
apolis to congratulate him. Many remarked they would have
followed the same footsteps only conditions and family cir-
cumstances hindered their so doing at the time. Even so, by
1898, three other Uniate priests had returned to the Ortho-
dox Church: Victor Toth, Michael Balogh and Gregory
Hruska.
The good example and courageous action of Father Toth,
his successors and parishioners brought other Uniate com
munities into the fold of Orthodoxy: Streator, Illinois;
North Pittsburgh (Allegheny), Pennsylvania; Wilkes-Barre,
Pennsylvania; Osceola Mills, Pennsylvania; Bridgeport, Con-
necticut; Scranton, Pennsylvania; Old Forge, Pennsylvania;
Nn ie)
thi BES. & s
Father Toth blessing Easter baskets in Minneapolis
Passaic, New Jersey; Lopez and Catasaqua, Pennsylvania;
Philadelphia and Berwick, Pennsylvania; Yonkers, New
York; Edwardsville, Pennsylvania, and many other parishes.
By 1909, over 29,000 Uniates had rejoined Orthodoxy —
half of this number having done so through the zealous
efforts of Father Toth.
Nevertheless this joyful action of reuniting also brought
sadness, enmity, antagonism and even hatred from those
not approving Father Toth’s course of action. To make
things even more difficult and to the great sorrow of Father
Toth, the Holy Synod instructed Bishop Vladimir to return
to Russia. He was left without the moral and financial sup-
port so badly needed at a time like this. “The Archbishop of
the Presov Diocese ordered me to return home at once,” said
Father Toth. “I did not obey, refusing because I was now
Orthodox . . . | received no salary .. . I was terribly in need
. . . From Presov I received requests to leave Minneapolis
and temporarily accept a pastorship in some other parish in
America, then return and everything would be forgotten
and the action undertaken would not reflect upon the
future of my priestly career. I lived through very difficult
days. But regardless of the difficult situation and privations,
I did not rescind from my temporary thorny road. The Lord
gave me strength to overcome the difficulties of being
scorned and disdained as a slave of my past connections. All
this trouble with its many uncalled for offenses against me,
I was able with the help of God to overcome. Glory be to
God for His great mercy.”
 In October 1892, Father Toth and his faithful parish- Sunday School (organized 1903-1904) continued to operate
ioners, through the efforts and mediation of Bishop Nicho- concurrently. The parish school was held from 4 to 6
las, were accepted by the Holy Synod of the Russian Ortho- p.m. after public school classes daily, and the Sunday
dox Church into the fold of the Aleutian and Alaskan School from 12 to 1 p.m. after the Sunday Liturgy. The
Diocese. From that time on, the Minneapolis Orthodox parish school numbered 60 children, while there were 20 to
parish began to live a normal parish life. Steadily it grew in 30 children attending the Sunday School.
membership, developed and prospered spiritually and mate- Other notable priests who served the parish in the early
tially. Presently it is one of the largest parishes in the period, while the Seminary was in Minneapolis, were Father
Orthodox Church in America. Leonid Turkevich (Metropolitan Leonty), Father Alexander
In 1892, through the efforts of Father Toth, the church Kukulevsky, Father Vasily Vasilieff and Father Michael
accumulated enough funds to remodel the interior. An I}jinsky.
iconostas was erected. Four icons for the iconostas were
purchased from Lvov, namely: the Pantocrator, the Theoto-
kos, Archdeacon Stephen and Archangel Michael. Icons of
the twelve great feasts and the Prophets painted on wood
and cloth were donated by the Holy Synod of Russia. In
1894, by order of Bishop Nicholas, a new altar table
(prestol) was installed and consecrated on October 23 of
the same year.
In 1893, Father Toth left for Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania,
and was replaced for a brief period by Archimandrite Sebas-
tian Dabovich. A parish school of one class was organized
and the first teacher of religion was the next pastor, Father
John Malyarevsky, assisted by the teacher Paul Zaichenko,
who also taught singing. In 1897, the parish school was
organized into a Missionary School with other teachers
joining the faculty: Paul Kazanski, D.D., and Daniel Golubi-
atnikov, teachers; Gregory Warhol, steward and sexton.
Other principals were Archimandrite Anatoly Kamensky
(1900-1904), and Father Constantine Popoff, who was also
rector of the parish from 1899 to 1907. When the Mission-
ary School was transferred to Cleveland in 1906 and the
North American Ecclesiastical Seminary was established in
Minneapolis, the grammar school, evening classes and the
Father Leonid Turkevich blessing St. Mary’s Church bells, 1909

‘Nnws)
Wisconsin
PROBLEMS IN A SMALL, RURAL PARISH
Several years after the reception of the Minneapolis par-
DURING THE DEPRESSION
ish into the Orthodox Church, various smaller communities (From the Treasurer’s Records, Holy Trinity Church,
were organized in the farming regions outside the city. Most Clayton, Wisc.)
were established by settlers who first arrived in the late
1890’s and found jobs in Minneapolis or St. Paul. As soon as September 1932
they were able, they purchased land and returned to their
Balance from August 1932 $205.52
former occupation of farming. Such was the case in the
formation of the communities in Clayton, Wisconsin (1897), Income:
and Holdingford, Minnesota (1895 — also listed as North Candles $24.65
Prairie or Two Rivers). The 1897 Russian-American Ortho- Offerings 21.09
Messenger, June to September, advertised a new Russian Special services 6.00
colony “‘60 miles east of the cities of St. Paul and Minneap- Monthly dues collected 15.00
olis, State of Minnesota, a fine location, well supplied with Back dues for 1931 collected 8.00
good timber and pure water. . . The soil is rich, in great part Miscellaneous 2.00
black-mould; the land has a gently rolling surface and Total Income $76.74 76.74
abounds in railroad facilities connecting the place with great
industrial cities. The families now living there are well satis-
$282.26
fied in all their needs, and this fact speaks well of the local- Expenses:
ity. The price of land ranges from $6. to 7.00 per acre, on Oil eee)
installment and on very easy terms.” The ad continues to Wood 10.00
state that 40 acres of land had been donated for a Greco- Candle company LOS2
Russian Orthodox Church in Barron County, Wisconsin, Hardware store 1643
with the deed being held by Bishop Nicholas. In another Priest’s salary 43.50
issue, the building committee, composed of Ivan Ognitch, Reimburse parishioners 8.00
Ivan Mlinar, George Kupets and Peter Liguz, published an Total Expenses $84.49 84.49
appeal for funds towards the building of a church, a sketch Balance carried over to October 1932 $197.77
of which reveals an exceptionally large and ornate structure
that contrasts sharply with the building now existing on the
land. It was years later that a permanent priest was assigned
to the parish: Father Nikita Gress, who arrived in 1913,
eleven years after a church had been built. In the interim,
priests from Minneapolis serviced the small farming com-
munities in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and also Canada.
Parishioners with Father Gress, Clayton, Wisconsin, ca. 1923
eter ett

54
Sketch of proposed Russian Church in Clayton, Wisconsin, 1897
(below); and present church building (right).

Preliminary Ketch
of Prussian Church proposed
Zee a Garon Co. Wis-
seo V Cordella.Archt,
ES ee Mioneapolis Ian.

Mh rr Ty Hh

Ht iad
Haat

—_—

att, "
YY,

Cu

sel of Perspective View~

am/- 0”

Ur nN
 Russian Exhibit Area, Columbian Exposition, Chicago 1893.
Illinois
Chicago was the next center of Orthodox church life in
the Midwest, when St. Vladimir’s Church (later Holy Trinity
Cathedral) was officially established on May 5, 1892, by an
enrollment of parishioners. Prior to this Father Alexis Toth
had made periodic visits from Minneapolis to minister to
the people in Chicago. In 1892, Father Ambrose Vretta be-
gan to hold regular services in a rented house on Center
Street (now Racine) near Madison Avenue. In 1893, the
parish received new impetus when the Columbian Exposi-
tion was held in Chicago, for which the Russian Imperial
Government provided a large exhibit which included a full-
scale model of a Russian Church, large enough to hold
services in and complete with bells and all furnishings.
Bishop Nicholas spent the summer in Chicago, holding
services three times a week in the Exposition Chapel and
also serving at the church on Center Street every Sunday.
Many Americans made it a habit to visit the tiny tempo-
rary church in the two-story rented house. At his first serv-
ice in the chapel, Bishop Nicholas was assisted by the
pastor of the Chicago parish, Father Ambrose, while a
choir of Russian officers and exhibitors organized by Paul
Zaichenko sang the responses. General Shklarevich assisted
in the sanctuary as acolyte, Prince Cantacuzene read the
Epistle, and the Hours were read by Anton E. Kiutinsky,
secretary of the Russian Consul in Chicago, The Consul
himself, Baron von Schlippenbach, though a Lutheran,
was in attendance at every service in the chapel during the
bishop’s stay. The publicity drawn by the Exposition and
the visit of Bishop Nicholas and other dignitaries called
attention to the needs of the small parish, and in 1895
Father John Kochurov was named pastor. It was he who
organized the building of a new church for the communi-
ty. Meanwhile the chapel which had been built in Russia,
dismantled and brought to the Exposition, was moved
again: to Streator, Illinois, where another small commu-
nity was established to service the church on a regu-
lar basis. Similarly, a brotherhood was organized in Benild,
Illinois, and a congregation organized by Father Kuchurov.
The first priest was Father Michael Potochny. The forty
families from Austro-Hungary decided in the summer of
56
Church in Streator, Ilinois, built with the portal from
the Columbian Exposition.
1907 to erect a frame church. Construction was completed
rapidly, and Tsar Nicholas II sent gifts of a Gospel, banners
and a full set of liturgical books. Eight years later on July
28, 1915 — St. Vladimir’s Day — fire destroyed both the
church and the rectory. A new brick church was immediate-
ly rebuilt by the parishioners in 1916.
Streator, Illinois
A number of Slovaks — Catholic and Uniate — settled in
Streator, Illinois, in the late 1890’s. Knowing of the return
of Uniates to Orthodoxy in other parts of the country,
Father John Kuchurov began to learn their dialects in order
to do missionary work among them. An Orthodox commu-
nity was formed and Father Michael Potochny, who had
been the choir director for Father Toth in Minneapolis, was
assigned as the first pastor of the congregation.
Cleveland, Ohio
Another industrial city was to be the site of another
future center of Orthodox faithful. In the 1880's several
people from Galicia and Carpatho-Russia settled in Cleve-
land, among them Dimitry Matey, John Udics and Timothy
Mayhrich. Soon others came from the old country and from
the coal mines of Pennsylvania and settled in the Hay
Market area or on the South Side of Cleveland across the
river. They found work in the steel mills, with the railroads
and in other industries. Although they were first members
of the local Uniate parish, they formed the St. Nicholas
Society in 1896 and began to form an Orthodox parish.
Bishop Nicholas assigned Father John Nedzelnitsky of the
Allegheny parish to visit Cleveland and hold services. On
October 19, 1896, the bishop himself came to Cleveland
and consecrated the new wooden church. At the same time
he ordained Victor Stepanoff to the diaconate; two days
later in Allegheny, Father Stepanoff was ordained to the
priesthood and assigned as the first resident pastor of the
Cleveland church, which was named St. Theodosius after
the newly-canonized saint of Russia, whose canonization
had taken place the previous month on September 9, 1896,
Julian calendar.
In 1902, Father Jason R. Kappanadze was assigned to
St. Theodosius Church. He found 13 or 15 families on his
arrival, Galicians and Ugro-Rus. The people were very poor
and worked as laborers for 10 to 12 cents an hour, twelve
hours a day, seven days a week, in the steel mills and on the
railroads. Their financial means were very limited, but the
missionary fund furnished by the Russian Tsarist Govern-
ment subsidized the missionary priests in their subsistence.
There was a great deal of missionary and educational work
to be done, and Father Kappanadze worked tirelessly. Mr.
John Ferencz learned that the Augustinian Sisters wished to
sell the property of the St. Joseph’s Convent and he in-
Cornerstone laying of St. Theodosius
formed Father Kappanadze. Soon they were negotiating to
acquire the property. It was valued at $30,000 and there
were only 30 families. Though their individual and parish
resources were limited, the parish approved the purchase
when Mr. John Ferencz assumed a great personal risk and
mortgaged his own property to help matters along. In the
allotment of the land, two streets were cut through it and
were named St. Olga and St. Tikhon. The lots were sold
largely to the parishioners, and thus the mortgage debt of
the parish was diminished. The stone building housed the
church on the second floor, the school, and the priest’s resi-
dence. A great deal of time and effort was expended by
Father Kappanadze and the teachers to educate the children
of the parish. Because of Father’s skill as an educator, he
was asked to head a boy’s school called the ““Bursa.” The
boys, who came from all parts of the United States for Rus-
sian education, were housed on the third floor of the stone
building. Many of these young men were preparing to enter
the seminary at Minneapolis. During Father Kappanadze’s
pastorship, from 1902 to 1908, the church prospered. Like
most missionaries, however, Father yearned to return to his
homeland. He was succeeded by Father Vasily Vasilieff,
1908-1909, and Father John Chepeleff, 1909.
Cathedral, Cleveland, Ohio.
=
5 /
 In 1910, Father Basil S. Lisenkovsky was assigned to St.
Theodosius. The parish had grown so that the church on the
second floor of the stone building was overcrowded regu-
larly. At a parish assembly in May 1911, a resolution to
build a new church was adopted. The present edifice of St.
Theodosius Cathedral, one of the foremost Russian Ortho-
dox churches in America, was designed with features
adopted from the Church of Our Saviour Jesus Christ in
Moscow. Father Lisenkovsky furnished photographs to Mr.
Frederick C. Baird, a Cleveland architect, and he collab-
orated with Mr. Baird in designing this unique and beautiful
church. The cathedral is built in the shape of a cross, and is
surmounted by thirteen crosses and cupolas, representing
Jesus Christ and the twelve Apostles. The cornerstone was
laid on September 23, 1911. The church was consecrated
during 1912 by Bishop Alexander. Father Lisenkovsky re- Father Jason Kappanadze and family.
mained as pastor until 1921.
Following a one-year pastorship of Very Reverend
Alexander Kukulevsky, a number of parishioners hailed the FATHER JASON KAPPANADZE
return to the United States of Father Jason R. Kappanadze,
who was soon assigned to St. Theodosius to commence his Protopresbyter Jason R. Kappanadze was born in 1873
second chapter of a long and illustrious pastorship. The in Sviry, Georgia, Russia, where his father was the parish
parish enrollment was already at a peak, and following priest. He graduated from the Theological Seminary of
World War I, the United States Government limited immi- Tiflis, Georgia, in 1894. He soon left for Alaska and
gration by quota allocations. Moreover, the Soviet regime assisted the priest at the Cathedral in Sitka. While in Sitka,
forbade its subjects to leave Russia. Conservative guidance he married the parish priest’s daughter, Mary, and within a
by Father Kappanadze, therefore, was a material factor in few months was ordained to the priesthood. Father Kap-
liquidating the Cathedral mortgage, even though this peri- panadze was assigned to the parish in Osceola Mills, Penn-
od included the industrial depression of the 1930’s. sylvania, and later was transferred to St. Theodosius parish
in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1901. While in Cleveland, he worked
Exterior, St. Theodosius Cathedral, Cleveland, Ohio.
N
to educate the people and to establish the parish on a
stronger basis. Property, including an old convent, was pur-
a

chased and a school was established. While in Cleveland, he

helped to found parishes in Detroit, Akron and Lorain. In
1908, he returned to Georgia and served as assistant dean of
the Cathedral of Tiflis. However, following the Russian
Revolution, Father Kappanadze and his family returned to
the United States.
After serving parishes in South River and Manville, New
Jersey, Father Kappanadze returned to St. Theodosius in
Cleveland in 1922. He remained in Cleveland for the rest of
his life. Under Father Kappanadze, the parish achieved
financial stability. The church was decorated and a church
school was instituted in 1953. The Cathedral of St. Theo-
dosius was the scene of the 1934 and 1946 All-American
Sobors. During this time, Father Kappanadze was raised to
mitred archpriest and then to protopresbyter. His continu-
ing interest and support of all parishes in the Ohio Deanery
earned him the respect and admiration of young and old
alike, who looked to Father Jason as the spiritual father of
all Orthodox Christians in Ohio. In 1958 at the age of 85,
Father Kappanadze retired as parish priest, but was granted
the status of Pastor Emeritus of St. Theodosius Cathedral in
recognition of his distinguished service. Even in retirement,
he continued to serve the Church. While traveling to serve
the Liturgy at the Old Age Home of the St. John Brother-
hood in Hiram, Ohio, in 1962, Father Jason Kappanadze
and his wife, Mary, were fatally injured.
Buffalo, New York
Northeast of Cleveland, on Lake Erie, in the city of
Buffalo, New York, eight men of the Sts. Peter and Paul
Brotherhood gathered together on April 1, 1894, to collect
funds for the construction of a church. Father M. Hruska
began serving the needs of the people during that first year
as lots were purchased and plans made for a church building.
A church and a parish hall were completed in 1895 with
funds provided entirely by the brotherhood. On March 15,
1896, the brotherhood unanimously decided to petition for
entrance into the Orthodox fold. A petition was filed with
the Dean of the Eastern States, Father John Nedzelnitsky
of Allegheny. Until 1907 services were held once a month
on an alternating basis by three priests: Father Hruska,
Father Victor Stepanoff and Father John Kochuroy, until
Father Alexander Veniaminoff was assigned as the first The new St. Alexander Nevsky Church of Allegheny, now located
permanent rector in 1907. in the Pittsburgh suburb of Allison Park.

Pittsburgh and Central Pennsylvania

Allegheny — St. Alexander Nevsky

In the late 1880's, groups of Galicians and Ugro-Rusins
settled in the Pittsburgh area, seeking work in the steel mills
and other industries. The first parish to be organized was a
Uniate community in Duquesne (cf. Chapter IV), which led
to the development of other Uniate and Orthodox parishes
that quickly filled the area. The first group to organize an
Orthodox parish settled in the area of Pittsburgh known as
Allegheny. In 1891, the first services were conducted in a
rented hall by Father Victor Toth, brother of Father Alexis
Toth. By 1893, the congregation had grown so large that
new quarters were sought, and a former Protestant church
on Kerr Street (Ketchum) in the Woods Run section was
purchased. Bishop Nicholas, who consecrated the church in
1893, assisted the parish financially by contributing $1500
towards the purchase of the building. In 1894, Father Toth
was succeeded by Father Victor Popov (1894-1895) and
later by Hieromonk Innocent (1895), the future bishop of
Alaska. Finally, in 1895, Father John Nedzelnitsky came to
Allegheny, where he remained for eight years and was in-
strumental in helping to establish new parishes throughout
the region. St. Alexander Nevsky soon became known as
the “Mother Church” of the area and maintained a pan-
ethnic character. The parish membership at this time con-
sisted of 476 Ugro-Rusins, 162 Galicians, 603 Serbs, 150
Syro-Arabs, 29 Greeks, 2 Montenegrans, 1 American, |
Negro, | Moldavian, 4 Poles and 118 Russians. Services
were celebrated in Russian, Greek, Syrian and Serbian. It
was jokingly said that Father Nedzelnitsky was planning to
build a church in Allegheny wherein every religion would
have its own altar, but the basis for the saying was the real
desire on his part to include in his parish, besides Russians,
Orthodox people of other nationalities, thereby providing
a place where each could participate in the Liturgy in his
own tongue.
 FATHER JOHN NEDZELNITSKY

Father John Nedzelnitsky, the son of a priest, was born

in Odessa, Russia, on July 18, 1866. After graduating first
in his class from the Odessa Seminary, he received a scholar-
ship to attend the Kiev Theological Academy, completing
his studies in 1887. After his marriage, he was ordained to
the diaconate and later to the priesthood on March 20, 1887.
Father Nedzelnitsky worked diligently and was responsible
for the construction of numerous churches in southwestern
Russia. Working as a missionary priest without salary, he
brought whole settlements from sectarianism to Orthodoxy
through his sermons. Thousands of people participated in
the retreats that he organized at monasteries with miracle-
working icons. In Elizabethgrad, he built a church for the
society of sisters of the Red Cross, with all the bricks
donated by a local resident, Simeon Kosmoff, who told him,
“take as many as you want .. . just take a count.” The
iconostasis for the new church was built with funds donated
by Father John of Kronstadt. Father Nedzelnitsky went to
Kronstadt to receive the gift, where he celebrated the liturgy
with his benefactor.
His success and activity became known to Bishop Nicho-
las of the North American Diocese, who invited Father
Nedzelnitsky to America. While in America, his main work
was the organization of parishes. In Pennsylvania’s Alle-
gheny County, Father Nedzelnitsky organized six parishes
and brotherhood organizations for these parishes. At one
time, he was president of the Russian Mutual Aid Society.
He also served as an administrator for churches in Pennsy]l- The Mitred Archpriest John Nedzelnitsky.

vania, Ohio, Illinois and other Midwestern states. After World War I, the Russian Revolution and its aftermath,
being in America for eleven years, Father Nedzelnitsky de- Father Nedzelnitsky and his family returned to America in
cided to return to Russia in 1906 to rejoin his family. 1923.
Before leaving America, he was honored by numerous other
Father Nedzelnitsky once more resumed his service to
missionaries, among whom was Archbishop Tikhon. The the North American Diocese. After serving the Church in
missionaries of all nationalities who helped to establish the Lynn, Massachusetts, he was assigned to St. Mary’s parish in
Church in America recognized him as one of them and sent Minneapolis. Besides teaching and serving as a priest, Father
him gifts, including the Russian Fathers Toth, Hotovitzky, Nedzelnitsky was the author of a number of works on
Kuchurov, B. Turkevich, A. Nemolovsky (later Archbishop church history, a catechism and explanations of services.
Alexander), C. Popoff, T. Buketoff, J. Kappanadze, P. In 1934, Metropolitan Platon awarded him a mitre, donated
Kohanik, V. Kalnev and V. Alexandrov, and the Greek by the parish youth, for his long and distinguished service
missionaries Fathers Theoclytos and Farentinos. Serbian to the church. Father Nedzelnitsky observed his Golden
missionaries including Fathers Sebastian Dabovich, Philip Jubilee (Fiftieth Year) of ordination to the priesthood in
Sredanovich and Sava Voyvodich also sent him their re- 1937, while serving in Minneapolis, and was honored by the
spects. parish with Bishop Leonty of Chicago in attendance. On
Upon returning to Russia, he was assigned by Archbishop that occasion, Metropolitan Theophilus stated, ““The Ameri-
Dimitry of Odessa as an educator and missionary. Father can Orthodox Russian people stand on‘four corners. Bishop
Nedzelnitsky distinguished himself as a priest and a teacher Nicholas, Fathers Hotovitzky, Kochurov, and Nedzelnit-
of church history in many middle schools in his native Kiev. sky.”
His wife, Mary, shared in her husband’s work as a mission- In 1944, Father Nedzelnitsky retired from active parish
ary. He received many awards, including the Order of St. duties and moved to Chicago. He died on November 22,
Vladimir and a palitza from Grand Duchess Elizabeth 1946, at the age of eighty, after serving the Church as a
Feodorova, who later became a nun and was martyred dur- priest for fifty-nine years and the American Mission for
ing the Revolution. After great suffering in Russia during thirty-four years.

60
Central Pennsylvania
In 1889, a group of Russians settled in the area of Bell-
fonte, Pennsylvania, and soon petitioned for a priest to serv-
ice their needs. On May 20, 1890, Hieromonk Cyril Gulo-
vich arrived in Osceola Mills and celebrated the first Liturgy
in the home of Michael Fonslick. A Greek-Catholic parish
was organized and land purchased, on which a church was
erected in 1891. A dispute arose between those who consid-
ered themselves Russian Orthodox and those who consid-
ered themselves Greek-Catholic. Michael Moroz was sent to
Wilkes-Barre to contact Father Alexis Toth, who came to
Osceola Mills to intervene in the dispute. After it was settled
in favor of the Orthodox, Bishop Nicholas appointed
Father Victor Toth as the first Russian Orthodox pastor of
the parish. The certificate of admission to the parish by the
Holy Synod is dated May 6, 1893. Soon a parish was also
founded in nearby Philipsburg, which formed a Russian
Society in 1894 and established a church in 1895. Father
Constantine Popoff (1897-1899) and Father Jason Kappa-
nadze (1901-1902) were the early pastors of both the Osce-
ola Mills and Philipsburg parishes.

The Anthracite District — Eastern Pennsylvania
Mayfield, Pennsylvania
Two events, one in America and another in Europe, con-
spired to initiate the great wave of Rusin immigrants to the
United States. In the late 1860’s and throughout the 1870s
the labor situation in the anthracite coal region deteriorated
as the chaotic labor unrest caused by the changing economic
and social situation led to strikes in the coal mines. The
laborers, primarily Anglo-Saxons, Irish, English and Welsh,
attempted to organize the unions in order to gain higher
wages and better working conditions. The coal barons were
not inclined to settle with the workers, and began to search
for an alternative supply of raw labor. One source they dis-
covered was in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. There, too,
social and political unrest built on difficult economic condi-
tions made many of the minority groups of the multi-ethnic
empire of the Hapburgs search for alternatives. The Rusins
of the Carpathian mountains, the Lemkos, Galicians,
Bukovinians and others, were made by an uncertain fu-
ture, with the increasing threat of war, into excellent re-
cruits for the agents of the coal barons and the shipping
lines, for immigration to the “‘promised land,” America.
At first, the immigration was only a trickle. Before 1880,
there were 1,900 Slavs in the anthracite region. By 1890,
the number had reached 40,000 and, by 1900, it was
81,000. In the three-year period of 1905-1908, 200,000
poured into the anthracite region alone!
Mayfield to this day remains a small borough, whose
total population has never exceeded 2,500. Yet Mayfield, in
shia
Russian Orthodox Church, Osceola Mills, Pennsylvania.
many ways, is representative of the many towns which
sprang up in this period to absorb the great number of
immigrants from the Austro-Hungarian Empire. When the
first immigrants arrived in the last quarter of the nineteenth
century, the mining towns were growing overnight around
the mines in what is now called the Midvalley, which
stretches from Carbondale south to Dickson City. Many of
the towns that originated at that time have since vanished,
and today Simpson, Carbondale, Mayfield, Jermyn, Peck-
ville, Jessup, Olyphant, Dickson City and a few others are
all that have survived the total extinction of the mining
industry in the valley.
The first immigrants from Lemkovshchina in Austria-
Hungary arrived in Mayfield about 1878. The Midvalley at
that time was covered by almost endless forests, with only
an occasional homestead to house the first miners in the
area. The first Rusins came from the area of Gorlice and
Grybow, from the villages of Belyanka, Losye, Stavisha,
Brunari, Klemkovka, Snetitsya, Domnitsya, Visova, Pere-
grimka and others, located on the northern slopes and foot-
hills of the Carpathian mountains between the Eastern and
Western Beskids.
St. John the Baptist Church in Mayfield was in the proc-
ess of organizing during this earliest period (1870-1900) of
Greek Catholic expansion in the anthracite region. Father
John Volansky was visiting priest in the Lackawanna County
area at this time. He organized the Olyphant parish, the first
in Lackawanna County, which was the nearest parish to
Mayfield. Also, in this period, the Rusins of Mayfield ar-

61

St. Nicholas Church, Olyphant, Pa.
ranged for Father John to conduct the first religious services
in Mayfield in the local Baptist church, which they rented
for the occasion. As more Rusins arrived, plans to build a
church were initiated, led by the Brotherhood of St. John
the Baptist, which was organized in 1888. Also in this same
period, a “Cooperative Store” was organized, patterned
after stores that were organized in other Rusin communities
— in Olyphant and Minneapolis. These soon became the
source of much contention and misunderstanding. Neverthe-
less, one can only admire the enterprise of these immigrant
pioneers, such as Joseph Simeanovich and Alexis Shlanta,
the organizers of the cooperative store in Mayfield. In a
short time, the store, an ever-increasing source of contention
and misunderstanding in the community, was closed. The
community had more important concerns and interests, and
its energy was being sapped by the cooperative store until
it passed into private hands.
The first church was built by 1891. The community
wanted desperately to have their own house of worship.
They felt completely estranged from the unfamiliar services,
rites and language of the Latin church, which some attended.
The occasional service of Father John Volansky and, later
>
Father Theophan Obushkevich accelerated their plans for a
new church. It was built according to the style of churches
in Lemkovshchina, with a large four-sided cupola over a tall
bell tower at the front entrance of the church. The tower
was topped by a three-bar cross of the Galician style. The
62
first pastor and organizer of the church was Father
Theophan Obushkevich, who came to America at the age of
fifty years, having been a successful pastor in the area of
Grebow in Lemkovshchina. Father Theophan was a very
successful organizer, a Galician patriot and an accomplished
musician. He organized the first choir and parish band in
Lemkovshchina, which was known throughout Galicia. He
was the builder and pastor of the Greek Catholic church in
Olyphant but, as a result of a bitter dispute, he left that
parish to organize and build St. John the Baptist Church in
Mayfield. Although a Uniate priest all his life, except fora
brief period of one year (1916-1917) as an Orthodox priest,
he was an active worker for Orthodoxy. When the parish-
ioners of St. John’s expressed an interest in Orthodoxy, he
encouraged them. During his pastorate, he organized the
Mayfield Church Choir, which has continued throughout
the entire history of the parish. He organized a parish or-
chestra and established an excellent church school and a
library for the Society of Michael Kachkovsky. The parish-
ioners of St. John’s were well instructed in their religious
and cultural heritage under the leadership of the outstand-
ing Rusin pastors of this period. The Society operated their
library and reading room and also organized lectures. It pro-
duced and presented theatrical plays and conducted regular
choral and orchestral programs. Regular evening classes were
held for adults who did not have the opportunity to study
in the old country. The evening classes also offered courses
in the English language and American citizenship. Thus, in a
relatively short time, many recent immigrants were prepared
for naturalization. The parish had a membership of around
600 in its early years and grew to a membership of 1,290.
The Rusin communities were born in the midst of reli-
gious and ethnic strife. The original indifference of their
Latin brothers turned to animosity and often to open war-
fare against Greek Catholics. But their numbers increased
and organized communities began to spring up throughout
the anthracite region. The attitude of the hierarchy in par-
ticular changed noticeably. Attempts were made to convince
the Greek Catholic communities to sign their churches over
to the Roman Catholic bishops. The subject of property
ownership was a matter of great contention among the
Roman Catholics. Many of the national groups resisted loss
of the control of their properties, which they had acquired
on their own without assistance of church authorities. The
intensity of this dispute is testified to by many court trials
of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century through-
out Pennsylvania.
The parishioners of St. John’s resisted all efforts made to
have them accept a new charter for their parish, to sign it
over to the Ordinary. Father Theophan encouraged his
parishioners to resist. He refused personally to break his
vows as a Uniate priest, but promised to find a priest who
would take them into the Orthodox Church. In 1902, he
left the parish and Father John Olshevsky, his successor,
immediately petitioned Bishop Tikhon to receive him and
his parish into the Orthodox Church.
Alexis Shlanta, one of the leading parishioners who was
better versed in the laws of this country than most, arranged

After attending classes for United States citizensh ip under
in the church hall, the above members of the parish hall became
for a simple transition of the church property. The old
charter was sold for the minimal sum of one dollar, and a
new charter was acquired under the name of the Russian
Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of St. John the Baptist.
There was the addition of one new word, “Orthodox,”
which was not found in the original charter, even though
the Rusins always considered themselves “‘Pravoslavny.”
Since there was no opposition, the transfer of church
and parishioners occurred without any incident or court
trial. There were sixteen signatures on the new charter. The
formal reception of the parish, together with its pastor,
Father John Olshevsky, took place on November 21, 1902.
The service was conducted by Father Alexis Toth and
Father Alexander Hotovitsky according to the established
rite of the Orthodox Church. In the evening, the All-Night
Vigil was celebrated, and the parishioners of St. John’s
participated in an Orthodox celebration of the service for
the first time. The congregation knelt during the singing of
“Glory to God in the Highest” in which all participated.
After the Matins, the clergy heard the confession
faithful.
The congregation left for their homes concerned and
apprehensive because of the incidents that had happened in
other parishes at the time of their entrance into the Ortho-
dox Church. But Mayfield fortunately experienced no such
incident. It was a quiet night. The next day many visitors
arrived from the Orthodox parishes in the anthracite region.
*
the capable instruction of W. C. Long
naturalized citizens of the United States.
Representatives of many societies were present for the
historical event, and many arrived in full uniform. More
confessions were heard. There was a Blessing of Water and
the church was blessed. An Orthodox antimension was
placed on the altar.
The Divine Liturgy was begun by the Orthodox clergy.
Father John, fully vested, stood with the congregation out-
side the sanctuary until the time ofthe reading of the Gos-
pel. Having read the Gospel, Father Alexis Toth addressed
the congregation. In words full of emotion, he described
the triumph of reunion. He briefly sketched the history of
the Unia which was forced upon the Rusins. “Two hundred
and sixty years have passed since the appearance of the
Unia, and even now it remains as it was from its introduc-
tion. ..a deception!” The sermon was a long one, delivered
with great conviction. And when at its end, the parishioners
were asked, “Do you reject the papacy and its false teach-
ings?” They answered “Yes” with one voice. And when
asked, ““Do you promise to the end of your life to remain in
of the the Orthodox Faith?” they all answered “Yes!” with great
fervor.
All knelt as the prayer of absolution was read. A partici-
pant in this event (then a young boy), Peter Smey, remem-
bers this occasion as the time he and the people in the
church stayed on their knees for a very long time. When
they arose the formal announcement was made: “By the
will and blessing of the Holy Synod and the love of the
x
OS
Archpastor of the Church in America, you (the parishioners
of St. John’s Parish), together with your pastor, are received
into communion with the One, Holy, Catholic and Apos-
tolic Church.”
The visiting priests exchanged the kiss of peace with the
newly received Father John, who then joined the clergy at
the altar. The new Orthodox congregation all received the
Sacrament of Holy Communion, thus sealing their reunion
with the Holy Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church in
the Body and Blood of Christ. It was a long and glorious
day, one that was ever remembered by all who participated.
Archbishop Tikhon himself came to Mayfield a few
months later, on May 3, 1903. The parishioners of St. John’s
for the first time participated in a hierarchical celebration
of the Divine Liturgy.
As St. John’s parish had already been established for
several years, it had its own church, parish house and school
(both built in 1896), and fully supported its own priest and
choir director and teacher. Thus there was minimal concern
on the part of the Archbishop for financing the new parish.
There were several new brotherhoods and sisterhoods estab-
lished in the parish within a few years of its entrance into
the Orthodox Church. Hieromonk Arseny (Chavtsov) suc-
ceeded Father John as pastor. Under his dynamic spiritual
guidance the parish accepted a leading role in the establish-
ment of St. Tikhon’s Orphanage and Monastery in nearby
South Canaan. Several of the charter supporters of the
Monastery and most of the participants in the opening of
the Monastery and Orphanage were from St. John’s parish
in Mayfield.
First Church in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, 1892-1900
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania
In March of 1889, a group of immigrants from Austria- and in that faith attain salvation? Are you then ready
Hungary completed the building of a church on North Main to turn your properties over to the Orthodox Bishop
Street in Wilkes-Barre (now occupied by the St. Stanislaus of San Francisco and accept his spiritual guidance?
Kostka Parish). In vain they attempted to obtain several As Father Toth recounts: ‘““They all answered, “We do!’
priests from the old country and, in November 1891, finally Then the resolution to Bishop Nicholas of San Francisco
resolved to invite Father Alexis Toth of Minneapolis to be- was read and explained.To my question, “Do you under-
come pastor. The invitation left Father Toth perplexed and stand everything?’, they replied, ‘We understand!’ ‘Do you
in “deep meditation,” for he was familiar with the area and give your church, rectory, cemetery to the Orthodox
with the problems encountered by the priests and people Bishop, freely and without a constrained will?’ ‘We do!’ was
from Austria-Hungary who settled there. He also knew it the answer. Then I gave them an additional fifteen minutes
was to be the future seat of the Uniate bishop. Therefore, to consider, instructing them that if one person protests
he wrote a fourteen page letter to the committee in Wilkes- this action, I will leave, not even demanding thereimburse-
Barre, pointing out the ills of the Unia and instructing them ment of the $80.00 of my expenses. They understood that,
in the meaning of Orthodoxy. He asked them to reply, ask- should I leave, the act would be as if we never discussed it.
ing if they understood what they were doing and why they A quiet was in the room — not one word was spoken andI
were taking these measures. The reply by telegram stated: entered into another room.” When Father Toth returned
“We understand everything, only please come to us im- twenty minutes later, he repeated the same questions and
mediately!” again received affirmative answers. He instructed them to
Father Toth made the 1600 mile trip to Wilkes-Barre, write a request and protocol of these desires, which was
where he arrived on December 3, 1892. He met with the signed by the committee and the presidents of the two
membership on three separate occasions, further explaining brotherhoods. Then the chairman of the committee, Andrew
the Orthodox position and testing the firmness of their Pivovarnik, handed Father Toth the key to the church asa
decision. On December 5, he spoke to them the third time, symbol, stating, ““We give you our church and all our prop-
saying: erties, freely, willingly and with the consent of the whole
parish.” That day 400 signatures were affixed to the request
Do you wish to unite yourselves to the Orthodox and protocol; another 200 on Sunday. Father Toth returned

64
to Minneapolis on December 14, but was back in Wilkes-
Barre for the Christmas-Epiphany holidays with the bless-
ings of the Bishop. Bishop Nicholas consecrated the church
on June 29, 1893, assisted by Father Toth and the Hiero-
monks Andronik and Herakly, who were chaplains on the
Russian Imperial warships docked in New York. The crew-
men of the ship, under the direction of Lieutenant
Nazimoff, sang the responses. Father Toth was elevated to
the rank of Archpriest and appointed a vicar of the bishop
for the states of Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.
On March 19, 1894, a court suit was instituted by a small
group of Uniates who claimed that the members of the
church could not change their adherence without the unani-
mous consent of the membership. Although Father Toth
meticulously sought and obtained this unanimity, a small
minority recanted at the trial. The court proceedings reveal,
however, the lack of real understanding on the part of both
Uniates and Orthodox of their respective faiths. After six
years of litigation, the decision was awarded in favor of the
minority group, but the real result was a renewed effort and
enthusiasm on the part of the Orthodox to build anew and
to spread the word of Orthodoxy throughout the land. In
successive years, thousands of Uniates returned individually
and as parishes to the Orthodox fold. Two laymen who
assisted Father Toth in his missionary efforts were John
Pepa and John Pivovarnik; they became known as Tovtovi
Orli — “Toth’s Eagles.”
Other parishes in the area that were established as Ortho-
dox Churches at this time were Scranton, Old Forge (1890-
1891; received 1896), Shepton and Catasaqua (1899).
+ anew. A rectory was built in 1907, at which time also
Russian Orthodox Church, Scranton, Pennsylvania.
Catasaqua and the Lehigh Valley
The area around Allentown, Bethlehem and Catasaqua
was settled by immigrants from Russia, Poland, Czecho-
slovakia and Austro-Hungary around 1891, with plentiful
employment available to the new arrivals in the fabric
works, cement quarries, steel mills and the horseshoe fac-
tory. Fertile farm land was also available for those who had
been farmers in the old country. The baptism of Anna
Stegnach is recorded in the records of Holy Trinity Russian
Orthodox Church in Catasaqua in 1891, performed by the
priest-monk Alexander Nemolovsky and assisted by the
psalm-reader Andrew Tarasar. The same Stegnach family
recorded a second baptism, that of a son Jacob in 1895 and
Joseph in 1896. By 1894 attempts were being made to
organize a church and by 1896, monthly Divine Liturgies
were being celebrated in the Catasaqua Town Hall by
Father Alexis Toth, who traveled from Wilkes-Barre. On
July 1, 1898, the Diocese authorized the community to
build a church, and in 1900, Father Myron Volkay, a monk
from Zagorsk, was appointed as the parish priest. Having
little funds, the parish could not sustain a permanent priest,
and after one year the parish had to depend upon visiting
clergy to minister to their needs. From 1901 to 1903, the
church was practically destitute and work on the new
building proceeded slowly. Finally, as the time for the con-
secration of the church drew near, Father Alexander
Nemolovsky agreed to come to Catasaqua as the resident
pastor. The parish continued to have financial difficulties,
but through the diligent efforts of Father Nemolovsky, the
church was saved from bankruptcy and parish life began
Father Alexander was called to be the Bishop of Alaska and
was replaced in the parish by Father John Kedrovsky.
Father Kedrovsky also serviced the people of Lehighton,
who were in the process of organizing a parish with 28
families. This group grew to 60 persons and purchased the
public school in Slatington as a center for the community.
The next priest, Father Vladimir Znosko, remained for
two years as again the parish found itself in financial diffi-
culty and had to sign over the deeds and mortgages of the
church and rectory to Archbishop Platon in order to meet
its debts (even though 750 children and adults are recorded
in the parish register at this time). In June 1911, Father
John Olshevsky was appointed to Catasaqua and Slating-
ton and also instructed to service the community in
Williamstown. During this year, he recorded the parish as
serving the following: Russian — 700 males, 15 females;
Galicians — 9 males and 2 females; Carpatho-Russians —
300 males and 60 females; Serbs and other Slavs — 100
males and 5 females; Greeks — 100 males and 5 females;
Romanians — 100 males and 10 females, for a total of 1419
males and 120 females or 1539 persons, making the parish
very similar to that of St. Alexander Nevsky in Pittsburgh
in its earlier years.
Due to the mixture of national backgrounds and the
wide geographic area served by the parish, it was natural
that other parishes would be formed out of the membership
65

Consecration of the Greek-Russian Church, November 22, 1903,
Catasaqua, Pennsylvania.
of the Catasaqua parish, giving it the name of the “mother
parish” of the Lehigh Valley. In 1916, Father Vasily Blon-
sky brought about the formal sanction for the Syrian
Orthodox Church in Allentown, which petitioned Father
Joseph Elias of Wilkes-Barre to become their pastor. The
Syro-Arab church was chartered under Archbishop Evdokim
and items necessary for the celebration of the liturgy were
supplied by the Diocese. Father Blonsky began to service
other outlying areas: Phillipsburg, Oxford Furnace and High
Bridge in New Jersey; and the Greek families in Allentown
and Bethlehem. As a result of large unemployment in 1912
(a probable factor in the parish’s recurring financial diffi-
culties) many parishioners had also moved to Reading, thus
aiding in the development of that community.
A noteworthy contribution made by one of the parish-
ioners in recent years was that of Mrs. Martha Lewis. In
1959, she not only donated a safe to the church in which to
store valuable records, but also donated her talents and
energies to document, file and cross-reference all the birth,
marriage and death certificates which for years had been
stored in paper boxes in no order. In conjunction with this
tedious and meticulous effort, she documented many im-
portant historical events which are now safely preserved
in the church archives.
Church bells given by Tsar Nicholas I! to Holy
Bridgeport, Connecticut.
66
New England
Bridgeport, Connecticut
Orthodoxy first appeared in the territory of the Connec-
ticut Deanery in an established parish in the city of Bridge-
port, through the formation of the Holy Ghost Church in
1894. In 1892, a substantial group of Carpathian and Gali-
cian Russian Uniates in Bridgeport, under the leadership of
Michael Makara and Michael Stroyan, already began to
speak of leaving the Unia and returning to Orthodoxy under
the protection of the Orthodox bishop residing in San
Francisco. On August 7, 1894, an historic meeting took
place at which Father Alexis Toth was present. At this
meeting a resolution was passed by the 38 men present to
leave the Unia and form the Orthodox Brotherhood of Sts.
Peter and Paul. This brotherhood became the nucleus of the
future parish. Later in the same year, Bishop Nicholas of
San Francisco and Father Alexis Toth, under the guidance
of Mr. John Lucas, visited Bridgeport in order to meet
parishioners and get acquainted. After the visit, Bishop
Nicholas issued a pastoral letter to the people in Bridgeport
encouraging them in their return to “the faith of the
Apostles.” Seeing the workings of the Holy Spirit in the
formation of the Orthodox parish in Bridgeport, Bishop
Nicholas suggested an appropriate name for the new parish:
the Church of the Holy Spirit — or, as it is officially known,
Holy Ghost Church. This name was adopted and the newly-
constructed church edifice was dedicated on April 26, 1895,
by Father Alexis Toth. In 1896, as a gift to the parish and
in honor of his own coronation, Tsar Nicholas II of Russia
had six bells cast and sent to America for use in the church.
Four icons for the iconostas were also given. The bells were
so large that a new belltower had to be constructed in order
to house them. A special act of Congress was required to
import them into the ccuntry as a gift. By 1925 the parish
had nearly outgrown its original facilities. New property
was purchased on East Main Street. In 1936, the present
Holy Ghost Church was constructed and was formally con-
secrated on May 30, 1937, by Bishops Makary and Adam of
Boston and New York respectively. The parish has been
served faithfully by two long pastorates: those of Father
Alexander Veniaminoff (1914-1941) and Father John
Kivko (1947-1970). Colonel Luke Bakoota has served as
choirmaster and teacher since 1936.
Ghost Church,
 cs ili,

Original Three Saints Church, Ansonia.

Ansonia
The formation of the Three Saints Church in Ansonia, S

Connecticut, was almost simultaneous with that of the The day after the fire, Ansonia Church.
Holy Ghost Church in Bridgeport. On January 1, 1895,
Galicians from Austria-Hungary organized into the mutual
aid Brotherhood of St. Basil the Great, petitioning Bishop
Nicholas of San Francisco for his blessing toward their
establishing a local Orthodox parish. The blessing was
granted and, on May 1, 1895, 40 families rented a building
and Divine Services began. Later in the same year Bishop
Nicholas visited the parish and Father N. Vasilieff was as-
signed as the first pastor. These rented quarters were used
until 1899, when land was purchased and construction of a
church building commenced. Joseph Warcholik was one of
the key persons leading the new church construction. Archi-
mandrite Raphael Hawaweeny blessed the cornerstone of
the new church in 1900. In October of the same year,
Archimandrite Ptolemy Timchenko, who had been assigned
as pastor from Bridgeport, formally dedicated the church.
The parish continued to grow and, under the leadership of
Father Eugene Kryzanovsky, an “R” Club was founded in
1929 and the use of English introduced into the Divine
Services in the early 1930’s. By the early 1950’s complete
English Services were introduced by Father Jacob Grigorieff,
who enjoyed the church’s longest pastorate: 1939-1953.
In 1954 a fire destroyed the original church building. The
parish acted swiftly. By November 1954, groundbreaking
took place for the construction of the present church on
Clifton Avenue. The new edifice, again dedicated to the
Three Saints (Basil, Gregory and John Chrysostom), was
consecrated on June 17, 1956, by His Eminence, Metro-
politan Leonty. The Three Saints Church is currently the
largest parish in the Connecticut Deanery. The new Three Saints Church, 1956.

Canada
A massive immigration of Austrian Slavs into Canada be-
gan in 1890. Wearied by the burden of difficult economical
conditions — but mainly because of religious restrictions
and persecutions inflicted upon them by Catholic Austria-
Hungary — Bukovinians, Galicians and Carpatho-Russians
began searching for an escape from their difficult situation.
They found such an escape by immigrating to a strange land
which promised them political and religious freedom and
material security.
But the “promised land“ did not greet the immigrants
too warmly. The English, French, Swedes and the other
inhabitants, who either had been born in Canada or settled
earlier, could not reconcile themselves with the thought
that these dusty, road-ragged, peculiarly-dressed folk would
be considered their co-citizens! “Sheep’s skin,” “filthy
Galician,” “‘outcast of Europe” — these are some of the
epithets which were abundantly rained upon the heads of
the Slavs upon their arrival in Canada.
The Wilderness
At first, the physical nature and climate of Canada were
not welcoming to the newly-arrived. Forest, wilderness and
impenetrable woods were apportioned to the immigrants by
68
Province of Alberta. One of the first Russian Orthodox Churches
in Canada.
the local authorities. Intense frosts which killed newly-
planted seeds immediately and the lack of any means of
communication with towns and neighboring settlements
were Obstacles with which the new arrivals had to contend
in order to win the right to exist in the new homeland.
“In the 90’s of the last century, with the coming of
spring, the arrival of every train from the American east
coast brings hundreds of new immigrants into Edmonton.
Leaving their wives and children behind temporarily in
settlement houses, penniless and hence dependent solely on
the mercy of God, the fathers wander for hundreds of miles
into the North in search of a suitable parcel of land for set-
tling....° such is the description given by Father V.
Alexandrov.
Life in the New Land
The new arrivals were scattered among three provinces:
Manitoba, Assinoboya (now Saskatchewan) and Alberta.
They settled on farms five to ten miles from one another.
The immigrants received land, partial government aid, and
had to “build” and transform the received forest or prairie
into fertile earth. The arrivals staked out their plots and
went to work. Labor and toil did not frighten these people,
for one could only work on one’s own land in the hope that
it would reward the effort. The immigrants spent many
years on their plots in this way of life. A priest, traveling
through the province of Alberta in 1900, described it thus:
“At 10 in the evening we arrived at the home of a wealthy
and gracious Bukovinian, Stephen Shandro. As yet the man
had no house or hut, and I was led to a sort of pit covered
with earth. Bending low, I descended through a tiny door
down steps in a narrow passage which led to the house. But
as much as the ‘apartment’ was exteriorly uninviting, so
much it was redeemed by the warmth of the interior. My
eyes met a big Russian stove, newly and carefully white-
washed. The rest of the room, even the ‘jagged’ ceiling,
was completely covered with clean cotton carpets crafted
by the versatile Bukovinians. A lamp was hanging on the
wall, illuminating the cozy ‘budda,’ as the Bukovinians call
these ‘homes.’ Benches lined the walls, and these were also
covered with rugs. Two rows of ‘kalaches’ stood white and
beautiful on the table. The front corner contained a lighted
vigil lamp in front of the icons. At this point the lady — ac-
cording to the Russian custom — greeted us with the words:
‘We mercifully entreat our spiritual father to taste salt and
bread, and all which the Lord has sent to us.’ The ‘budda’
was completely ‘given’ for my use: a suitable tent was al-
ready erected for the Service to God, complete with a three-
barred cross and a new table.”
Gradually organizing their lives in the new land, these
Orthodox grew disheartened at not having their own
churches. This disheartening despair appeared especially on
Sundays and feast days, when the “old country” was in-
voluntarily remembered, together with its churches and
services. Even their neighbors, Protestants and Catholics,
looked with suspicion on these “atheists” who had appeared
in their land. All these factors forced the more energetic
and aggressive people to act in this direction. The first task
was the construction of their own cemeteries, since Protes-
tants and Catholics did not permit the Orthodox to bury
their dead in their cemeteries. The Orthodox were com-
pelled to bury their close ones on their farms. Soon they
began thinking of building churches or chapels. There was
certainly enough lumber! When they had time to spare from
their field chores, they worked at cutting enough trees to
supply the lumber necessary for the building of a church.
Seattle visited Alberta in 1897. Father M. Malyarevsky vis-
ited Manitoba and Assinoboya in September of the same
year. These visits must be considered as the birth of the
Orthodox Mission in Canada.
Galicians Return to Orthodoxy
A massive return of the Galician Uniates to Orthodoxy
began. In 1897, Father D. Kamnev and Cantor V. Alexan-
drov converted the entire settlement of 600 of Livia Stone
(Limestone) Lake (now known by the Russian name
Vostok). The first Divine Liturgy was celebrated in the
home of Theodore Nemirsky on July 12, 1897. Land was
blessed simultaneously for the church and cemetery. Three-
barred crosses were erected.
In May of the following year, the same missionary team
returned more than 600 souls to Orthodoxy, and this was
the foundation of the first Orthodox church in Canada, as
witnessed by this inscription on the cornerstone: “In the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
The first Orthodox Church in Canada is founded in the
name of the Holy Lifegiving Trinity, on June 4, in the year
of our Lord 1898, during the reign of the Emperor of All-
Russia Nicholas IJ and the Queen of Great Britain
Alexandra-Victoria, under the ruling of His Grace, Bishop
Nicholas.”
By this holy act, the need of the newly-joined children
of the Orthodox Church was met. They possessed their
own church. This action professed that they were duly
recognized children of the Holy Eastern Orthodox Church,
under the guidance of canonical pastors and the Bishop.
In the following years — 1899 and 1900 — missionary
priests continued to visit during the summer and autumn
months — from Seattle to Alberta, from Minneapolis to
Manitoba and Assinoboya. Of course, these periodic visits
could only help maintain the believers’ zeal for the Ortho-
dox faith and fulfill their needs: confession, communion,

The Canadian Government eagerly apportioned free

parcels of land, sometimes of sizeable proportions (100
acres or more), with the prescription that on the given plot
a church would be erected within a period of three years.

Bukovinians become Orthodox

Bukovinians in the province of Alberta turned to the
Bukovinian Metropolitan, requesting that a priest be as-
signed to them. The Metropolitan answered them: “We
are not able to send you a priest due to lack of funds, but
there is a Russian Orthodox Mission there which will as-
sign a priest to you, and if necessary, you should join that
Mission.”
From the other provinces at the same time (1894-1896)
requests began coming in to His Grace Bishop Nicholas,
who was then the head of the American Orthodox Mission. ReFY os. a 4 p> .

With the blessing of His Grace, Father Dimitri Kamnev of Russian Orthodox Church, Vostok, Canada.

69
burial, baptism and marriage. Life required pastors in spe-
cific localities. But there were no candidates for the priest-
hood who were willing to take this missionary load upon
their shoulders under such difficult living conditions. A
permanent priest was sent to Alberta only in the autumn of
1900.
Missionaries to Canada
We will center our attention on the efforts of the newly
arrived missionaries. The diary of Father V. Alexandrov of
Seattle provides us with the details of his missionary visits
to Canada while he was stili a cantor for Father D. Kamnev,
and as a priest from 1899. Later, we will present the report
of Father Alexandrov to His Grace Bishop Tikhon (the fu-
ture Patriarch of Moscow), the head of the American
Orthodox Mission. (cf. box, page 74-76)
To this “diary-report” we must add that Father V.
Alexandrov preached on Orthodoxy at each service, and
at many places gave talks on the Orthodox faith.
Alberta
On September 1, 1900, a new priest was appointed to
Alberta. His name was Father Jacob Korchinsky. He settled
in Edmonton. He bought a house in which he arranged a
chapel in the name of the martyr St. Barbara and also an
apartment for the priest. From here he visited all the Ortho-
dox living in the province. Father Korchinsky worked hard
at uniting Uniates with the Orthodox faith, building
churches and chapels in many places in Alberta. It is while
he was priest there that the first visit by a hierarch took
place. Bishop Tikhon came.
Manitoba and Assinoboya
In Manitoba and Assinoboya, the harvest was as rich as
in Alberta. Here a priest would come from Minneapolis once
or twice a year. Of course this was not enough for the nor-
mal development of parish life. Besides, the Orthodox were
less numerous here and lived in small groups. At his first
visit to the province in September 1897, Father
Malyarevsky found some 1500 Orthodox Bukovinians
scattered among a tremendous mass of Galician Uniates.
Moreover, in these provinces the Government was not
meeting the needs of the Orthodox as it did in Alberta.
The land was not vacant here and it was scarce for chapels
and cemeteries. The immigrants were poor; they had dif-
ficulties in taking care of their own land. Thus the mis-
sionary priest, Father Constantine Popov (of Minneapolis),
visiting these provinces in 1901, writes: “Up until now the
Bukovinians buried their dead each at his own farm. Now
they finally bought a cemetery of 5 acres of land for $50.
They plan to build a chapel there. All of those living in
Ounz River are ready to help in the building of this chap-
el. They are all recent immigrants from the old country
and are very poor. Each one has not more than five acres.
Only two of them have horses.
“On November 12 at 3 p.m., I went about six miles a-
way where some 10 Bukovinian families live. We spent the
night in the house of Father Krishki. On November 13 cel-
70
ebrated matins and Liturgy in the house of M. Gushuliak.
Some 20 people received the Sacrament of Confession. A
few women were reading and singing, for no man knew a
thing about the service. After the Liturgy, I baptized four,
chrismated two, and blessed the water. The new communi-
ties living here are as poor as those on Ounz River. No one
owns a horse; even cows are very scarce, and the land is
extremely limited ...”
In certain locations the Orthodox had to ask the Catho-
lic priests to perform sacraments, for many lost hope to see
in their lifetime an Orthodox priest. This is why, in the
notes of Father Popov, he frequently mentions how many
people he baptized and how many he chrismated. From
these notes we see that in the years 1897-1902, the Ortho-
dox priests visited many farms near the villages of Stuart-
born, Emerson, Winnipeg, Yorkton. Ounz River, Tetlak,
Krudur Lake, Julik, Bibel-guer. In each of these colonies
or villages there were some 30 or 40 Orthodox households
and in the colony of Bibel-guer, 150 to 200 families lived.
The roads were awful, especially in autumn. Father
Popov relates: “On April 11th at 9 o’clock in the morning
we left Yorkton. At first the road was decent, but the
farther we went from Yorkton the worse it became. At the
12th mile our carriage got stuck and the horses could not
move. They were quickly removed but the carriage had to
be left there. We had to take out all’ our belongings and
finally take apart the whole carriage, each wheel and part
separately.
“By that time some villages already had churches. Thus
in Stuartborn (today called Gardenton) there were already
two churches — St. Dimitrius and St. Michael’s. This was
the fifth time I was going to Stuartborn and the road was
quite familiar to me. For about five miles from Emerson
it is all forest, then for seven miles — fields, then again
forest for four miles. Farther on, the road borders land
where Galicians and Bukovinians settled. Closer to Emerson
— farms of Russians of German extraction and others. Only
after 16 miles Galician farms begin and Bukovinian ones
after the 20th mile . . . In spots, enormous fields of wheat,
oats and barley. But as you proceed farther away from
Emerson, land is less cultivated. Here and there a seeded
field, hay or a farmer’s vegetable garden, but on the whole
it is untouched land. A long time will pass and much work
St. Demetrius, Gardenton, Manitoba
will be needed before this land, cleared of stones, roots and
bushes, brings fruit to the colonists.
“Located in a radius of 10 miles are farms of Slavs. Here
are 300 families of Galicians and over 100 families of Buko-
vinians. They came here four years ago — many in the fall
at the beginning of November. It was cold. The Canadian
government brought the colonists to Stuartborn. This col-
ony had then a very wild area, covered with brush and
bushy woods. There were no roads at all. Only long poles
marked the limits of the ‘sections’ and ‘farms’ (a ‘farm’ is
% of a ‘section,’ ie. 160 acres). The settlers, left here on
their own, began to choose ‘farms’ for themselves and build
cabins. For lack of material and time (frost did not allow
much delay) they dug holes, covered them with whatever
they could, topped it with earth and so they lived all winter
in those ‘holes.’ As soon as warmer weather came, they
started building real living quarters.”
The Churches
“When the Bukovinians got acclimated, their first
thought was that of erecting a church. They began building
one, then another. Both churches are not fully completed
yet. Both are small and built in somewhat inconvenient
places.
“One church on the farm of Glovatzki was started in
1899, The roof is there but not the ceiling. Frames of win-
dows are not adjusted as they should be. Icons are few. The
other church, on the farm of P. Doubniak, built in 1901, is
three miles away. This church is a bit smaller than the first
but better planned. Inside, it is finished with boards; there
are both a roof and a ceiling. There is also an iconostas.
Icons are made on linen imported from Tchernovitz. The
icons are old and tarnished but of good execution. They
are topped with embroidered material, thanks to the spe-
cial eagerness of Bukovinian women. There are candle
holders, icon stands, a wooden cross for carrying out. All
this done by the Bukovinians themselves. By this church
there also is a big bell weighing 50 pounds. This bell, a
donation of the Bukovinian, V. Shidlovsky, was bought in
December 1899. Since 1900, it rings and gathers the
Stuartborn colony every Sunday and on every feast day.
“On July 7 at 5 p.m., went to church (the church is
within 5 minutes walk from the house of Doubniak).
Around the church some 50 Bukovinians are gathered.
Among them, the Galician, Saranchuk, who now carries on
the duties of psalm-reader in that parish. Before that was
the Bukovinian, Garabass, but he went away on a job.
“T began confessing, finished about 12 o’clock, when the
Holy Liturgy started. Barely half of all the faithful were
able to get inside the Church. In front stood the men in
long white linen shirts, wide colored belts and white pants.
Among the white shirts you could see coats and waist-coats
of those Bukovinians who had been for long periods of time
working for Germans and Englishmen and learned to dress
‘fashionably.’ In back of them stood the ‘wives.’ There,
among the old head dresses and head kerchiefs, two hats
stood out and among suntanned hands, two pair of gloves.
The owners of these were the daughters of a well-to-do
Galician.
“At the Liturgy, along with the Russian Emperor I re-
membered also the Austrian one and the English King.
After the reading of the Gospel, I warned them in a sermon
not to listen to the teachings of those contradicting the
Orthodox faith. Pointed out the Orthodox teachings on
holy scriptures and holy tradition . . . The warning was
prompted by the fact that a Russian Baptist missionary
often comes to Stuartborn from Emerson and propagates
his teaching. Among the Galicians he has already had some
success.
“Around 100 children and the same number of grown-
ups took communion. The men came forward first, then the
women. Age was respected very religiously. Often you
hear, ‘go on ahead, brother John,’ and the answer, ‘You go,
brother Kostia, you are older.’ One of the most known
characteristics of the Bukovinian is to ask forgiveness from
one another just before communion. One says to another:
‘I am asking you, brother N., for the first time.’ The other
answers, “God will forgive you’ — ‘And the second time.’
asks the first one. “And the second time’ — answers the one
who was asked forgiveness. And so three times.
“At the end of the Liturgy all approached the Cross.
Instead of the usual chant, they sang the touching chant
‘Holy Virgin, help us, Orthodox Christians.’ It was 2 o’clock
when the Liturgy ended, a few Moliebens were held — nine
children were baptized — at baptism Bukovinians have more
than two godparents, sometimes six of them.”
Rise of Sects
Such services, sermons and performances of small serv-
ices were taken care of by visiting priests in other colonies
and villages too. The Orthodox people, settling their lives in
a new country, were building churches and chapels. Priests
were needed, at least priests who would reside permanently
in that province. But back in 1902 those provinces of Mani-
toba and Assinoboya had no rectors of their own, which, of
course, strongly undermined the whole work of strengthen-
ing Orthodoxy in that area. The enemies of the Orthodox
Church, the Catholics, Protestants and various sects, were
profiting from this. At the same time there appeared a self-
appointed Metropolitan Seraphim, the typical personality
of future “Ukrainians self-ordained.” Taking advantage of
the lack of Orthodox clergy, “Metropolitan Seraphim” es-
tablished himself in Winnipeg and began to ordain to the
priesthood all those who could pay him a certain sum.
Father Popov describes his encounters with Seraphim’s
followers:
“There was little peace in Canada for the Orthodox
people at that time for a pretender-Metropolitan had ap-
peared, called Seraphim. He had already ordained twenty
persons. I had to visit the places in Canada where he had
been at work and show bitter antagonism against his newly
ordained priests and their followers. I had to explain the
illegality of their ordinations and had even to confiscate
their communion cloths. The Seraphim followers were far
from friendly to me; many times they threatened to ‘grind
71
my bones to powder.’ Once they hunted me with rifles, but are three Indian parishes: Khuno, Yakutat and Chilkoot,
by some intuition, I left the hut I was staying in two hours whose members were converted to Orthodoxy long ago, but
earlier than had been planned, and when the armed pursuers live far away from clergy and do not receive the sacraments
broke in at seven o’clock in the morning, I was already on every year). The figures contrast sharply with those of the
my way.” eleventh American census ‘Population Report,’ which
Such difficulities continued to plague the Canadian com- diminishes the number of Christians in Alaska and reports
munities, some leading eventually to jurisdictional divisions the Orthodox population at 10,335 in 1890, a discrepancy
and parish “splits.” In the next decades, communities that the Messenger states cannot be attributed merely to an
were organized in major cities and gradually some form of abrupt increase in population, but to inaccurate census
local diocesan administration established. (cf. Chapter figures which attempt to present the picture of a dying
VIII Canada) aboriginal population.
Archbishop Sylvester of Montreal In the fall of 1897, Bishop Nicholas made one of his
final pastoral visitations to his flock in America, making a
complete circuit from San Francisco to the Midwest, Penn-
sylvania, New York, Connecticut, and the Southwest. On
this visit, he also spent three days in Washington, D.C., pro-
testing the treatment of the native people in Alaska. The
following news notes from the September and November
issues of the Messenger (1897, No. 1 and No. 6) reveal the
Alaska extent of the growth and development of the Diocese as
well as some of the problems faced by the Church prior to
By 1896, the Orthodox population as registered by
the arrival of Bishop Tikhon on December 12, 1898.
priests in parish records totaled 15,064 persons, listed as
follows by nationalities and tribe:
Male Female Total Russian American Messenger, 1897
1. Russians 51 Bil 82
2. Creoles 965 1020 1985
News & Notes
3. Americans Hi 4 il
4. Japanese 1 - 1 In memory of the Enlightener of the Aleuts, Metropolitan Inno-
5. Aleutians 1581 1472 3053 centius, the one hundredth anniversary of whose birth was solemnly
celebrated by our Mission on the 26th of last August (7th of Sep-
6. Indians 605 624 1229
tember), His Grace the Right Reverend Nicholas, Bishop of Alaska
7. Kuskokwims 1049 1208 DEST) and Aleutian Islands, is undertaking a series of publications aiming
8. Kenaians 453 362 815 at the spiritual improvement and religious well-being of the Ortho-
9. Kvikhpakhs 430 345 (ES dox aborigines of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands. The text of the
10. Oglemuts 316 ot 567 Liturgy and of the Vespers and Vigils is being prepared for the press
in the Aleut dialect. It is also intended to print the Aleut church-
11. Magemuts 198 145 343 tunes, some of which are very touching: for instance that to which
12. Ingkalits (BF 723 1460 they sing “Holy God,” “Glory to God on High,” “Christ is Risen,”
13. Koltchans 299 304 603 and others. In the Kolosh dialect are being prepared for the press
14. Kuyukans 170 166 336 the Histories of the Old and New Testaments, and in the Kvikhpakh
dialect the Catechistical instructions. Such books are a great boon
15. Nagmuts 102 100 202 for those on whose behalf they are being prepared. We may remark
16. Maglemuts 154 115 269 here that prayers and hymns in all these dialects had already been
17. Nuvivaks 4 1 5) published in several pamphlets by the care and effort of the Right
18. Agletuts 197 161 353 Reverend Arch-pastor, and are of invaluable assistance as well to the
Orthodox missionaries in Alaska as for the aborigines themselves —
19. Kiatins 202 182 385 Aleuts, Koloshes, Kvikhpakhs, Kuskokwims, etc.
20. Miednofs 77 49 126
21. Greeks 6 1 7
Altogether 15,064 In two localities of Canada — at Lime Stone Lake, and at Rabbit
Hills, a community of Ruthenians residing there, and numbering no
The membership of the major parishes and regions was: less than 700, with the blessing of the Right Reverend Nicholas,
Unalaska — 970; Nushagak — 2929; Kuskokwim — 1484; Bishop of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands, left the Uniate Church
St. George Island — 88; St. Paul Island — 197; Juneau — 228; and joined the Orthodox Church. They are all natives of Galicia and
Bukovina. They had repeatedly and for a long time expressed their
Kodiak — 1118; Afognek — 652; Bielkovsky — 515; Kvikh- earnest wish to be received back into the bosom of the Orthodox
pakh — 4204; Sitka — 844; Kilisno — 376; Kenai — 1017; Mother Church; and now the Bishop, being unable to personally visit
and Nutchek — 452. The Messenger which recorded this Canada, because of his late long tour of inspection through the
data states that this represents the minimum of the Ortho- Orthodox churches of Alaska, has commissioned the Rector of the
Mission at Seattle, D. Kamnev, to perform the formal act of recep-
dox population and does not include Orthodox transients
tion of the communities in Canada. Thus it is that the Union’s in-
who come to Alaska for work — principally Russians, Slavs efficacy is shown more and more clearly every day by the hearty
and Greeks. It also excludes natives who are in areas where rejection of the allegiance to Rome, which was, several centuries ago,
there are no Orthodox churches, chapels or priests within forced on Russian men and women, doing violence to their
reach (i.e. the southern portion of the territory where there thoroughly Orthodox moral consciousness.

Te

NEWS AND NOTES
His Grace the Right Reverend Nicholas, Bishop of Alaska and the
Aleutian Islands, although only just returned from a long and most
fatiguing journey to Alaska and Aleutian Islands, is about to under-
take another journey through the United States. The Bishop’s pater-
nal care and anxiety for the welfare of his flock overcomes fatigue
and ill health. And so, our churches and parishes will have the happi-
ness, in this year also, to welcome the beloved guest and to receive
his personal advice and instructions for their guidance in puzzling or
difficult questions of practical pastoral and parish work. How sub-
stantially useful and beneficial these personal visitations are in their
effects on the Mission parishes must be plain to everybody: scattered
over an immense area, separated by enormous distances, and some-
times placed in most peculiar conditions of life, the Mission workers
are continually in need of authoritative counsel, of an encouraging
word — and our Bishop shows himself most responsive in meeting
such demands on him halfway.
But, in undertaking this present journey, he has an additional
and special object in view. He has just personally and on the spot
inspected our churches in Alaska and the Orthodox parishes attached
thereto — and this investigation has enabled him to verify the sad
tidings made public by us from time to time — and he has found
them true in every point. The Bishop’s warning word has more than
once been heard in Alaska remonstrating with American officers in
favor of the Orthodox population’s rights and their churches. Many
were the good results he achieved through his fearless speaking; still
the final outcome of his journey was a host of bitter impressions, es-
pecially as regards the arbitrary and unjustifiable proceedings of cer-
tain American officers in dealing with the Alaskan Orthodox
churches’ ownership of land. The most flagrant case of land-grabbing
which occurred on St. Michaels’ is known to our readers.The docu-
ment reprinted in the present number shows how well-founded our
indignation is. His Grace intends to visit Washington in the fall, there
personally to put the Federal Government in possession of the facts
connected with this particular affair as well as with the condition of
the Orthodox Mission in Alaska generally, and to enter his protest
against the violent, illegal doings there, demanding nothing more nor
less than a strict compliance with the articles of the treaty of 1867.
(See re-print in this very number). All the papers bearing on this
matter, together with an explanatory letter from His Grace to the
Russian Minister E.K. Kotzebue, have already been sent to the
Russian Imperial Legation in Washington. Let us hope that the Fed-
eral Government will pay due attention to His Grace’s most well-
founded protest.
The following is the route and time-table as laid out for His
| Grace’s impending journey through the States of North America:
September 25-th evening: leave S. Francisco for Minneapolis.
October 1-st Divine service at Minneapolis, and opening of the
Mission-School and Asylum
cs $-th Divine Service at Chicago
6-th Visit to Streator
e 7-th Divine service at Cleveland
ia 10-th Visit to Osceola-Mills and Phillipsburg
ve 11-th Divine service: Vespers and Vigil at Wilkes-Barre
12-th Divine service at Old Forge
a 13-th Visit to Scranton
oF 14-th Visit to Catasaqua
i 16-th and 17-th Visit to Shepton
19-th Divine service at Buffalo
z 21-st in the Russian church in New York
3 22-d and 23-d Visit to Bridgeport and Ansonia
26-th Divine service in the Syro-Arabian church in New
York
‘< 28-th, 29-th, 30-th Stay in Washington
November 8-th and 9-th Divine service at Galveston
2 13-th and 14-th Stay at Los Angeles
5 16-th Return to San Francisco
Russian American Messenger, 1897
Bishop Nicholas’ Complaint
(Washington Post, Sth Nov. 1897)
He Tells the President that his Church is Made to Suffer
Bishop Nicholas, of San Francisco, who is the head of
the Russian Church in North America, with special
charge over that body in Alaska and the Aleutian Islands,
is the guest of the Russian legation. His especial mission
to Washington is to place before the President a protest
against certain severities imposed upon the people of his
Church, and to ask for an investigation, and to also ask
that a survey be made of the Russian Church properties.
Yesterday morning Bishop Nicholas and Mr. de Wollant,
Charge d’Affaires of the Russian legation, called upon
the Secretary of State, and, later, were granted an audi-
ence with President McKinley, to whom the Bishop
stated his grievance.
One of the matters complained of was that the trad-
ing companies refuse to recognize the Church holydays,
and compel the Bishop’s people to work even on Sunday.
In regard to the request for the survey, he complained
that the trading companies are endeavoring to steal their
properties. When the Russian government sold Alaska to
the United States it withheld certain properties owned
by the Church, and it is these properties for which the
Bishop asks protection. President McKinley requested
the Bishop to submit a detailed report, giving him the
facts in the case, that he might submit it to Congress.
It was stated at the legation that a very unpleasant condi-
tion of affairs has been existing for some time between
the trading companies and the church, but the lack of
facilities for communication has made it impossible until
now to bring the matter before the President. The Bishop
feels satisfied with his visit, and will submit the report in
a few weeks.
As there is no Russian Church in Washington, Mr. de
Wollant, the Charge d’Affaires of the legation, has re-
quested the Bishop to solemnize the rites of the Church
in the parlors of the legation. The Bishop was assisted by
Priest Hotovitsky of the New York parish, Priest Proto-
popoff of Chicago and Priest Dabovich of San Francisco.
In the afternoon a luncheon was given at the legation
and next day Bishop continued his tour south.
Bishop Nicholas presented a striking appearance, clad
in full canonical robes of royal purple velvet, with high
head dress and flowing black veil, and with his broad
chest fairly covered with diamonds, pearls and other
precious stones of great value. The Bishop is the only
official representative — Bishop of the Russian Greek
Church in the Territory of the United States, and he at-
tracted much attention as he visited the various executive
departments to pay his respects to the Cabinet officers.
Journey to Canada:
Following the instructions of your Grace, I set out
from Seattle on the morning of May 24th (old style), on
a mission to the Northwest Territories of Canada. Be-
cause of the poor condition of the railways in this part
of the country, I arrived in Edmonton, Alberta, some
1000 miles north of Seattle, only on the evening of the
25th. From Edmonton one has to travel north in search
of new children for the church on horseback, since this
is the northernmost train terminus in North America.
In Edmonton I found very many Orthodox Bukovi-
nians, who welcomed me with joy, knowing me from
previous years. Many of them came from the northern
settlements, 100 miles or more from Edmonton, arrang-
ing transport and awaiting arrivals of their brothers —
Bukovinian and Galician — coming to settle here from
the old country. They wandered into this far country by
all kinds of misfortunes.
The following day, on May 26th, paid some calls on
the local authorities and on the government’s state agent,
Mr. R. Routen, who asked me to convey to your Grace
the importance of the earliest possible recognition in the
Canadian State Legislature of the Orthodox Church as a
corporation. “If this is not done in the immediate future,
then your Orthodox Church is threatened with the loss
of those very substantial lands which are allotted to and
registered as a gift to the Orthodox Church in Canada.
The papers granting possession of the lands to the Church
cannot be given by the Estate Department until the said
Church has become a corporation. For two years now,
the Orthodox Church has been at work in the territory
assigned to me, but I have heard of no act of Parliament
recognizing the Orthodox Church in Canada as an insti-
tution. It is also of immediate importance to. have here,
without delay, an Orthodox priest who would perma-
nently reside in the province of Alberta.”
In view of this statement of Mr. R. Routen, I set out
to see the state attorney, Mr. McDonald, asking him to
refer this matter at once to the Parliament in Ottawa. I
informed him that your Grace had already written there
concerning this matter, but received no reply. Mr.
McDonald immediately wrote to the Parliament and
should inform your Grace concerning the present state
of affairs.
A Church in Vostok
After this, I left Edmonton and on the afternoon of
the next day, May 27th, on Trinity Saturday, I arrived
at the “Vostok” colony, where the main mission was at
the hut of Theodore Nemirsky. The ride for over sixty
wild roadless miles is extremely tiring. As we drove to
the church under construction, however, half a mile be-
fore reaching the homestead I began to rejoice. The
74
A Priest’s Diary
V. Alexandrov
building had progressed considerably in comparison with
the previous year. The basic shape of the church is al-
ready visible. The altar and the large round central cupola
are installed, and since the building is on a hill, it can be
seen for ten miles. In my thoughts, I turned to the Lord
to help these poor people complete their church, which
seems to be so good and beautiful.
Having been informed beforehand of my arrival, a
large crowd of several hundred people had already come
together for the vigil of the feast, especially women and
children from the most distant farms. I immediately
baptized 13 infants. Later, at eight o’clock, I served the
vigil and then addressed the people. I heard confessions
until midnight, but could not satisfy even half of those
who wanted to confess, since many more had arrived.
From the sheer exhaustion of that day, I could not sleep
that night.
Over 2,000 Participate
28 May. Trinity Sunday. At 5:30 a.m. I began to hear
confessions until 11:00 o’clock. After blessing water and
sprinkling the prepared place with holy water, I began
the Divine Liturgy. I celebrated in an open place next to
the new church where next to a large cross, a new table
had been set up covered with rugs and linen. There were
many people to sing and they sang the melodies of the
old country. After the Gospel, I spoke to the people on
the origin of the feast (Acts 2). There were more than
400 communicants. After the Liturgy, there was a Ves-
pers service. The services, which had been attended by at
least 2,000 people, came to an end at around four in the
afternoon. After a short rest, I baptized 25 children.
From eight in the evening until midnight, I heard more
than 150 confessions.
29 May. Day of the Holy Spirit. Began confessions at
five in the morning, continued until ten. There were up
to 500 communicants. After the service, I baptized
children and served weddings. I served vespers and
matins, after which I talked to a delegation from the
North-Western Bukovinian settlement, with whom I
agreed to serve as of the first of June.
30 May. In the morning I blessed water, then heard
confessions and celebrated the Liturgy in the house of
Nemirsky (because of poor weather). There were approx-
imately 100 communicants, I baptized children, served
funerals and sealed the tombs of those who had died in
the course of the year (26 in the Vostok colony), served
vespers and matins and heard confessions.
31 May. Heard confessions and celebrated the Liturgy.
There were up to 80 communicants. I performed one
wedding, baptized children, buried and sealed three more
 (4%
The Igumen Ignatius Falkovsky, head of the Mission in the Saskatchewan and Manitoba regions.
tombs. In the evening, the group which was to take me
to the Northern Bukovinian settlement, 20 miles from
Vostok, arrived. I took K. Nemirsky with me as a cantor.
The journey was terrible! We arrived at the house of Ivan
Tishpan only at eleven at night, although it only begins
to get dark at this time and gets light again at two in the
morning.
Over 3,000
On the first day of June, at four in the morning, with
beautiful weather, I began to serve matins. Following
this, I blessed water and sprinkled the land set aside for a
cemetery and chapel. From 5:30 until 11:30, I heard
confessions and then began the Liturgy. There were
about 3,000 people and more than 200 communicants.
After the Liturgy, I baptized 13 children.
At five in the morning, I was fetched to go to the
“TIgnick” cemetery, twenty miles further east. Wasting no
time and saying farewell to the local Orthodox, we set
out, arriving at our destination at ten o’clock in the eve-
ning, to the hospitable and well-to-do Bukovinian,
Stephen Shandro.
On June 2, at 4 o’clock in the morning, I began
matins, after which confessions started which lasted until
11 o’clock. Following them — blessing of the water and
sprinkling with Holy Water the new cemetery and the
spot designated for the church. Holy Liturgy — attended
by about 600 people — 380 people took communion, in-
cluding children. The service ended at 3 p.m., after which
funeral prayers were said over a few dead, their caskets
closed and buried. After a short meal, I baptized 19
infants.
The Bukovinian Community
On June 3rd, in the morning I confessed and gave
reserved holy sacrament to four sick people. At 6 a.m. I
was surrounded by well-wishers bidding me happy jour-
ney. Many of them had stayed there from the previous
day, wanting to see me off. I left on horses sent for me
by the Bukovinian Colony, some 15-20 miles to the west
near ““Shkrada,” where I arrived at 3 p.m.
The place for the cemetery, near which a church is
planned, was blessed here last year. Lumber is all pre-
pared for its building according to a plan sent from the
North American Ecclesiastical headquarters. A tent was
put up, since there was nothing around in any way suit-
able for a service. Having blessed the water and sprinkled
the spot with holy water. I began confessing the people.
There were 200 and more arriving. They were bringing
stacks of food, planning to spend the night here, as some
homes were 10 miles and more away. At 7:30 in the
evening I began the vigil and then confessed again. Right
there we spent the night under open skies, the shepherd
with the sheep. Yet I could not sleep because of the
bloodthirsty mosquitoes, crying children and all kinds of
noises.
~~ WN
Six Hours of Confession
On June 4th at 4 o’clock in the morning, again I be-
gan to confess and confessed until 10 o’clock. There
were more than 600 people. We blessed the place pre-
pared for the church. Some 400 people received com-
munion. I also baptized 12 children and buried 32 coffins
of those who died during the year.
Then I held a vespers service and an akathis to St.
Nicholas. We held an assembly devoted to the question:
how to raise money for the building of the church. After
long discussions and some guessing, which is quite popu-
lar among the people here, they accepted the decision
which I suggested: that each landowner after he finishes
his work gives the church about $10. I also advised them
to prepare about 10 acres of land for the church itself so
as to use the profits for the building of the church. At 8
in the evening I bid farewell to the people of this village
and went to the colony of Victoria, some 12 miles to the
West. I arrived at 10 o’clock in the morning, in the house
of a Galician, Simon Marianitch.
On June Sth at 4 a.m., we went to the place prepared
for the cemetery and the chapel. There a tent was ready
with a three-barred cross, decorated with beautiful field
flowers and a table. The place prepared for worship was
surrounded by beautiful trees and covered with grass and
flowers. Some 200 people were waiting for me here.
Having, after matins, blessed the new cemetery and the
spot prepared for the chapel, I began confessing. About
300 people, with children, received the Holy Sacrament.
I baptized 4 infants. Late at night, returned to the
Vostok colony.
A Thunderstorm
Here men from the colony of Beaver Creek were wait-
ing for me. That colony is 20 miles to the south. There
was no rest during the night for we had a tremendous
thunderstorm such as I did not experience in all my life.
Thunder and lightning lasted for more than two hours,
provoking panics, not only among the people, but also
among the animals which, having surrounded the house,
were crying and shouting each one in its own way. At
dawn the housemaster informed me that wolves and
bears also came at night and during the thunderstorm
killed several animals. We had compassion for the man
but couldn’t help. I am told that such thunderstorms are
quite frequent in summer. Very early in the morning I
left the colony of Vostok and went to the colony of
Beaver Creek, where I arrived at 11 a.m. I was met with
great joy by nearly all members of this Orthodox com-
munity. In the afternoon I buried the servant of God,
Jacob Lopushinsky. He was a true Orthodox man and a
great Russian patriot. He was among the first, who to-
gether with another patriot, John Sachman, inspired his
brother Uniates to leave the Unia and to be reunited
with Orthodoxy. For my stay there and for worship, I
was given a big and clean house, that of Mr. Kinosh.
Having blessed the water and sprinkled with holy
76
water that place, I served a Vigil and then confessed. On
June 7 I confessed again and after that celebrated the
Divine Liturgy — more than 100 people received the
sacrament. I baptized four infants. I inspected the church
building which was already started. It is planned in a
Russian style and it is quite large. Many, many times
these people will regret the death of Jacob Lopushinsky,
for he was a good constructor, a good builder and he had
promised to build the church free of charge. Now the
community must supply not only the material but also
pay the constructor.
Back at Edmonton
_Around 5 o’clock in the evening, I left these good
people for Edmonton to visit from there the colony of
Rabbit Hills, some 20 miles to the south. I arrived in
Edmonton in the evening of the next day. Here I visited
Mr. R. Routon, whom I was happy to find completely
recovered and again in his Department of the Dominion
Land Office. I asked him to donate 40 acres of land for
the cemeteries which I had blessed and he promised to
take this petition in consideration, and to present it to
the Department of Interior in Ottawa.
On June 10th in the morning, I confessed and then
the colony of Rabbit Hills, where I arrived in the eve-
ning at the house of Mr. F. Fura. Many people who
knew of my coming were there waiting for me. Having
blessed the water and sprinkled with it the new house
of Mr. Fura, I held a vigil and all sang, and quite well,
after which I began confessing.
On June 11th, in the morning, I confessed and then
we held a Divine Liturgy — 12 men were reunited to
Orthodoxy, 80 received the sacraments. I baptized four
children — then we had vespers and akathist and then
talked on the state and church affairs. Meanwhile, the
people sent by the local Uniate community asked me to
bless their new chapel but I, having no instructions from
your Eminence, very politely declined this and told them
that first of all they must be reunited with Orthodoxy as
a community and must send to your Eminence all docu-
ments pertaining to their land and to their chapel, and
that also there should be no debts on this property.
A Quarrel
On June 12th, I inspected the land prepared for the
church, on which there is a quarrel between the Ortho-
dox and the Uniates. I analyzed this whole matter and
understood that the Uniates want half of that land and
that half will make it impossible for the Orthodox to
reach their land without crossing somebody else’s prop-
erty. I informed the Government of this and added the
plans which explain how, in my opinion, the land should
be divided if this decision will be taken into considera-
tion and how the 40 acres should be divided between the
Orthodox and the Uniates. On June 13th, I left Rabbit
Hills for home and arrived there, thanks to God, on
June 16 in the evening.
 EDUCATIONAL
Alaska
Until the early 1900's, the primary educational activity
of the Church was to be found in Alaska. The first schools
were organized by the fur companies and by the mission-
aries and priests who served the early colonies. We know
that Father Herman taught the children in a school in
Kodiak that was supported by Baranov. Father Veniaminov
organized a school in Unalaska that included about a hun-
dred boys and girls. He later moved fo Sitka, where he im-
proved the quality of education in the company school and,
after being elevated to the episcopacy, established a Mission-
ary Seminary. Bishop Innocent’s concern for education can
be seen in his effort to provide school texts in the venacular
whenever possible for the villages in his diocese.
By 1861, “‘public” education in Alaska had expanded to
include some 50 colonial schools, a college and two scien-
tific institutes; the Church, in a government report of 1860,
had 17 schools and three or four orphanages. In 1887,
twenty years after the purchase of Alaska, the territorial
governor bitterly commented that the Russian Church was
spending more in Alaska on schooling annually than the
U.S. was spending for the education of whites and natives
in the entire territory (a total of $40,000 at that time). A
report published in the April 15/18, 1900, Russian-A merican
Orthodox Messenger lists a total of 43 schools in 41 local-
ities: 2 missionary schools (Sitka and Unalaska), 11 parochi-
al schools, and 30 primary schools — with 787 pupils and ap-
proximately 45 teachers. This general educational work was
supplemented by Saturday and Sunday schools, by popular
lectures and sermons in the churches. The report also men-
tions the authorization of Bishop Tikhon to print the bibli-
cal history by Rev. Vladimir Donskoy in the Indian dialect
to aid the educational work among the native people. A
1901 report mentions the publication of another translation
of Bishop Innocent’s The Way to the Kingdom of Heaven,
translated by S. I. Kostromitinoff. Great attention was also
given to the education of young women and to the need for
a boarding school for girls in Kodiak the project was sup-
ported by the Russian Missionary Society.
Seminary Education
In 1900, a school for training future pastors was still
functioning in Sitka as the Innocentian Missionary School.
The two year course of study included biblical history, cat-
echism, liturgics, Church history, Church practice, English
language and literature, universal history and the history of
the United States, geography, arithmetic, penmanship, and
singing from written or printed music. In a 1901 report
which mentions the visit of Bishop Tikhon to the school,
the decision was made to allow the best scholars of the
school to attend the Government Teachers’ Seminary (pre-
sumably, college) in San Jose, with the condition that they
should in time repay for the tuition of the Missionary and
the Government schools by becoming teachers at the dispos-
al of authorities in the districts with an Orthodox popula-
ACTIVITY 1860-1900
tion. In the current year (1901), two boys were prepared
for this work.
San Francisco
When Bishop John (Mitropolsky) transferred the Dioce-
san administration and cathedral to San Francisco, he also
transferred the Missionary School. No information is known
to exist on the school in San Francisco, though we do know
that a school was re-established at a later date again in Sitka.
However upon the arrival of Archbishop Vladimir in 1888
with eighteen student workers and five colleagues from the
Kholm Seminary, a school for readers and choir directors
was established in San Francisco. Twenty-four students
were enrolled in 1888, according to a record book which
was found recently. Presumably the photo on page 30 is
that of the students and teachers of this school.
Minneapolis
Bishop Nicholas (1891-1898) closed the pastoral school
in San Francisco but soon organized a Missionary School in
Minneapolis. Upon his first visit to the city, he spoke of the
need for parochial schools and religious instruction in every
parish. He continually repeated: “The parochial school is
the foundation upon which is built the present and future
Orthodox Christian Church.” After careful deliberation
about the right candidate, he appointed Professor Paul
Zaichenko to assist Father Toth in organizing a parish
school. Two years later, on a second visit, Bishop Nicholas
visited the school and examined the students. Following
the Divine Liturgy and a formal reception, he announced
his pleasure at the results of the examination and promised
to establish a Missionary School in Minneapolis. Four
months later, a three-story brick building was erected and
became the Minneapolis Missionary School (1897), and the
school was soon filled by students from many cities and
states.
Through the efforts and recommendations of Bishop
Nicholas, scholarships were established for study in Russian
Theological Seminaries for those students who were select-
ed for special theological training. Those who were selected
from the Minneapolis School for further study were: Peter
P. Dzubay, Alexander Veniaminoff, and Paul Chubaroff,
St. Petersburg Theological Seminary; Peter G. Kohanik,
Theological Seminary of Tavrida-Simferopol; and Nicholas
Mitropolsky, Don Theological Seminary in Noncherkesk.
The Minneapolis Missionary School existed until July 1,
1905, when it was reorganized into the North American
Ecclesiastical Seminary, although a Missionary School was
then opened in Cleveland, Ohio. At its close, the missionary
school roster numbered 122 students. It had been an ac-
credited educational institution under the supervision of the
Minneapolis School Board as well as an official institution
of the Church.
 104
‘oosiInues14 “888L UI URS
le4payzed s,doysig ye ay}
Jea1Hojoays,Aseulwiaspayea0) Jo ay}
s}uapn}ys uoNne yoo10} ay}
nsiBay
Ra eas : A

GROIN
ce s

SOS)
inde

oS

CS
AE
oe
ee.
.
2g

Y
3
&
oy Yer pe os
ae HOR 2 fe: somennn
: ting : 3 Zy
le i Wp RUS ye y)¥
: Ae Z :
OT. Aa 1” oe oy yj “if
the AP WEY Of
KR
ae c oe an Sina 277 7 CII) fF ff
PEL YEO VW ITY py Y- @ Zp
2207ee ( Bp ttl tt YP 8 the ye ftp
Cw y yap! bp a ae
ay PRM ORI of, rly?kee gy: isy
PEP? AE IA RA VAPIEN OY ODD4 ee
ee y a
MItIA% 1
ARIF PID 2 if ap
by 7“
LOO FEE OO XO Y- WO PIVEDW b gt Po / Spt 7G LE It p7 ity
C7
ay o. PUANpw LIEDLf fy VII 4g oe
BPs
ree
: the 2de tl by 4 * 7
C De pp PFOL /¢ Mpeg
: de
pg) a O
FS 4 : ure.Ws Af Ae PIPE ae if * ue
fp 8 ihAP IRE Pag PLATS 2 y
OL ight COPeo CP WITS fs
¢
AP #e2 hie i inp.
<2
err,
Maree 7a +
7 cea a
ae: a Z
Woes 4,

il ti
a
en fal ?
ee ea y x 4

SSS
ye

78
 LIFE IN THE MISSIONARY SCHOOL
A brief description of life in 1903 in the Missionary
School in Minneapolis, written by Father Alexander
Kukulevsky in 1937.
The school was a small stone building; across the road
arose a little wooden church and vicarage, and around
them for blocks stretched the homes of Russian people.
A real Russian center!
Father Anatoly received me kindly and explained the
school situation. Besides him there was an assistant
teacher, A. Veniaminoff (now archpriest), Father Con-
stantine Popoff, director of the household, P. Zaichenko,
choir master and instructor of singing, and an English
teacher. The comparatively small number of pupils had
been collected from all parts of America, Wisconsin, Con-
necticut, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and New York. One had
come from distant California. The bedrooms were on the
second floor, together with the senior teacher’s lodging;
the classrooms were on the ground floor, and the dining
room and kitchen in the basement.
The Daily Program
The daily program was not hard, but studies were taken
seriously. At seven o’clock in the morning the bell rang
and the students raced for the washroom, each trying to
reach it first, as it was small and would hold only a few at
a time. Then prayers were said in the assembly room, fol-
lowed by breakfast. Coffee with milk and bread was the
usual menu at breakfast, except on fast days when tea,
bread, and plum butter was served. This plum butter was
very good; whole containers were eaten up eagerly. Lunch
at noon consisted of soup, vegetable soup on fast days, a
meat or fish course and tea. Sometimes dessert was served.
A short while after breakfast lessons were begun. Ex-
cept for a period for lunch they continued until three
o‘clock in the afternoon. Lessons were taken seriously,
and strict discipline wasin order but not pedantic.
There were three hours of the students’ own recreation.
Some went outside to play the inevitable baseball or foot-
ball, others went for walks, some read books in the class-
rooms; from the violins of the music lovers came the
eternal ‘‘do, re, me, re, do,” with feet beating time so
vigorously that the building shook in its foundation.
After three hours of recreation, students prepared their
lessons for the next day, until supper time. Then followed
evening prayers, a half-hour intermission, and the lights of
the school were extinguished. Only the glimmer of the
lamp before the icon illuminated the childrens’ bedrooms.
The whole house sunk into peaceful slumber, after a hard
day’s work and the activity of healthy youngsters.
Former Missionary School and Seminary Building, Minneapolis.
There were no lessons on Saturday. It was house clean-
ing day. The students armed themselves with mops,
brooms, and dusters and under the supervision of senior
pupils, brought the schoolhouse to order.
Taking into consideration the importance of physical
development, we encouraged gym and healthy sports. I
was in constant contact with the students, first as senior
teacher and afterwards as inspector. It was therefore not
difficult for me to direct the recreational activities. I ob-
tained some boxing gloves and very soon bruises and
scratches could be seen on the happy and flushed faces of
the students. We also had dumbbells and other simple
gymnastic equipment. In winter we flooded the school
yard. Not only the students, but the inspector himself
used the home-made skating rink.
Father Anatoly was interested in photography and
passed this interest on to the students. Almost everyone
had a camera, and the washroom on holidays was turned
into a darkroom for the developing and printing of films.
This interest in photography remained with some students
all their lives.
On Sundays and festivals, after the church service, all
the students left to visit relatives, friends, and acquain-
tances. Those guilty of some misdemeanor had to remain
at school. For evening lessons, everybody had to be back
at their places.
The whole school went away during the summer vaca-
tion, except for three to five students, whose homes
were. too far away. They had absolute freedom, in their
games, sports, fishing, etc., but they were still under the
watchful eyes of the inspector. The state of Minnesota has
a wonderfully healthy climate; unlike the humid summers
of the east coast, the Minnesota summer is dry, the winter
is very cold but healthy. Often in the wintertime we had
to suffer discomfort on account of economy in fuel and a
desire to leave a balance at the end of the year. But the
discomfort was nothing more than cold finger tips and
blue noses, the innocent victims of economy.
Father Alexander Kukulevsky
79
 ARCHIMANDRITE ANATOLY
A personal reflection of Archimandrite Anatoly
Kamenski, written by Professor Paul Zaichenko,
his colleague at the Minneapolis Missionary School.
Archimandrite Anatoly was the mainspring of the Mis-
sionary School. He is remembered well by many of my
contemporaries. In the history of the Orthodox Mission in
America, his name is never forgotten. As a golden-voiced
preacher, and a highly educated cleric, he won undying
fame.
Archimandrite Anatoly was a man of the purest morals.
He was an academician and a doctor of divinity. Gifted
naturally for his calling with the gift of words, of wisdom,
and the ability to influence people, he became a wonderful
teacher. His pupils entered his room with awe and listened
to him with reverence and rapt attention. He, in turn, was
most kind and considerate to them. He never lost control
of his temper, never raised his voice in anger, and was
always serene, never punished them, and was loved by one
and all. His soul was a font of patience and benevolence.
Through his ability and authority, he gathered around
him all the educated men of the missionary school; he
gave them intelligent advice, and directed the course of
education. Under his guidance, teaching was successful
and order exemplary. He was devoted to the school, and
in the course of his life gave much in its interest. The
pupils revered him deeply, and looked upon him as on a
higher being. Everybody respected his authority, but felt
close to him spiritually. He was a born educator, and
directed all his efforts to the preparation of the future
missionaries. The important service he rendered the
mission cannot be estimated.
Outside the classroom, he loved to talk with his pupils.
He conversed pleasantly and instructively. He lent them
books from his private library; organized theatricals in the
recreation hall of the missionary school; and in the summer
time, would accompany them on their excursions and try
to make their vacations pleasant.
As an administrator, he inquired into every particular
of school life. Nothing could escape his eye. He loved the
teachers, and was concerned for their welfare. He spared
neither himself nor his money in their interests. He seemed
to feel that he was the chosen vessel from which the future
missionaries were nourished. He wrought good for the sake
of goodness, and his kindness reflected on those he came
in contact with. Truly he was a lamp before the sanctuary
of virtue. His whole life of service was imbued with love
and beauty. If only there were more such men on this
earth! Archimandrite Anatoly played an important part in
the development of the Minneapolis Missionary School
and placed it on a high standard. He understood all its
problems and knew that its development demanded a great
deal of self-sacrifice and labor. The hopes and expectations
of its founder, Bishop Nicholas, had been granted, and the
desired results obtained, largely through the efforts of
Archimandrite Anatoly.

1896 r.

,, Russian Orthodox
American Heborawetia
7 he ,ve SROD LO? "will be bi - ling aul
opie.
POT
Russian and English. : will be INSU-
ed (ith the 13-th and - 27 -th of each month.
Terms of Subscription:
yeur iia rox, : S500

Single numbers, Oravhapiise NN. ibd

i Baixoni Wh I-ro n [S-re ancaa
t
Karo whe alla.

N i-fh. Per 325 SECOND AVENUE Fong / Compass. ee

Vol. 1, Number 1, Russian Orthodox American Messenger.

80
 TRANSLATIONS AND PUBLICATIONS
The literary developments in the Church prior to 1900
contributed greatly to its missionary expansion. Early news-
papers and magazines such as The Slavonian (1870) on the
West Coast and the Oriental Church Magazine (1878) on the
East Coast reached Orthodox and non-Orthodox people a-
like, acquainting them with developments in the Mission as
well as helping them adapt to the American situation. The
first issue of The Slavonian, published in San Francisco,
speaks of the successful attempt to form a literary society
and to proceed with the establishment of a church. The
newspaper itself, which was published semi-monthly in
three languages, had as one of its stated purposes the dis-
semination of information regarding all aspects of life and,
FROM THE EDITORS OF THE
RUSSIAN-AMERICAN ORTHODOX MESSENGER
OUR FIRST ANNIVERSARY
September 1897
Just one year ago, while demonstrating the necessity
for our Mission of owning a press organ, printing out the
needs and demands which such an organ would have to
meet and, setting forth the programme it would have to
fill — a programme the various points of which should
grow out of life itself — we did not conceal from ourselves
how extremely complicated that programme would prove
to be, or how, even under the most favorable conditions,
it would be possible to carry it out only very gradually.
Nor do we conceal this from ourselves or our readers now.
Our first anniversary constitutes no landmark in our
work. The programme of the “American Orthodox
Messenger” remains the same for the year which is just
commencing, as well as the task which the paper has set
itself: to labor henceforth as heretofore for the good of
the cause of Orthodoxy generally and that of the Ortho-
dox American Mission in particular.
To respond to everything that goes on in our mission,
be it of a pleasing or of a saddening nature — to defend
our Mission’s interests — to keep track of the events which
take place in our own Church at home in our native
country — to make American readers acquainted with it,
at the same time supplying them with sound theological
reading matter — these and other similar considerations
shall guide editors in the choice of articles for the paper
in the coming year, as they did in the year that has just
expired.
Towards the end of the first year we succeeded in
nearly doubling the original size of the paper. Great im-
provements have been made in the condition of our print-
ing office, and we are confident that the paper will con-
tinue to grow, not merely in size, but in the variety of the
reading matter we shall offer to our readers.
We again take the liberty, as we did last year, to appeal
to the sympathies of such persons as may be willing to
assist us with contributions and in other ways.
in particular, information about the countries and traditions
of the lands from which the people came and the land —
the United States — in which they now reside. As the ed-
itors state:
The English part will contain useful and interesting
information upon Russia, the Slavonian countries,
and Greece, regarded in a political, religious, com-
mercial and social aspect. The Russian part will, for
the benefit of our Russian readers here and abroad,
be mainly devoted to a description of the United
States, (California in particular), its institutions, so-
cial life, commerce, political and religious associa-
tions, etc.; and the Slavonian (Serbian) part will con-
tain correspondences from those countries.
The Oriental Church Magazine, published in New York by
Father Nicholas Bjerring, featured articles on Russia, Greece,
and the texts of several liturgical services in English transla-
tion.
The major developments that were to give support to the
life of the Mission came in a brief four year period. The
first, which began in September 1896, is the publication of
the Russian-American Orthodox Messenger (the Russian
title is simply The American Orthodox Messenger). Pub-
lished in two languages, the Messenger was the first official
periodical issued by the Church. In addition to reports of
parish life, episcopal visitations, and the like, the semi-
monthly magazine included a great number of educational
articles in English and Russian, e.g. Jnstruction in God’s
Law, by Archpriest P. Smirnoff (especially extracting the
sections on the Eucharist); ““Lectures on the Holy Sacra-
ments” by Bishop Germogen of Pskov; the Life of Bishop
(Metropolitan) Innocent, Apostle of Alaska, etc. The first
editor of the Messenger was Father Alexander Hotovitzky,
who served as editor for nearly 18 years. He was succeeded
by Father Leonid Turkevich (later Metropolitan Leonty)
who continued in that position for 16 years (1914-1930).
During the next few years, a great number of translations
of service books and instructional material appeared in Eng-
lish Nicholas V. Orloff, the psalm-reader attached to- the
church of the Russian Legation in London, translated and
published the Horologion (1897), the General Menaion
(1899), the Ferial Menaion (1900) and later, the Oktoechos.
Father Sebastian Dabovich, while serving in the Consistory
office of Bishop Nicholas, wrote and published three books
in English: Lives of the Saints (Lectures and Sermons —
1898), Ritual, Services and Sacraments (1898), and Preach-
ing in the Russian Church (1900) — the latter being pre-
pared during Tikhon’s administration and the profits of
which were to be used for the erection of a new cathedral
in San Francisco. Other translations being advertised and
circulated among the faithful were: My Life in Christ —
extracts from the Diary of John Iliyitch Sergieff (John of
Kronstadt), translated in 1897 by Erastus Goulaeff, and A
Manual of the Orthodox Church’s Divine Services by Arch-
priest D. Sokoloff, translated in 1889 by Mme. Z. A.
Ragozin. Both books were distributed through the Con-
sistory in San Francisco. Thus, prior to 1900, nearly all the
basic services were available in English, plus manuals and
instructional materials on the teachings of the Orthodox
Church.
8]
 i
Gee

B 1s = 2) joe = khon
CHAPTER III
Archbishop Tikhon & the
North American Diocese
1898 - 1907
Bishop Tikhon (Bellavin), at the age of 33 one of the
youngest hierarchs of the Russian Church, arrived in New
York to take up his responsibilities as ruling bishop of the
vast diocese of the Aleutians and Alaska on December 12,
1898. He had departed from St. Petersburg by train on
November 17; his train journey took him through Berlin
(where he visited the Russian Embassy church) and Paris
(where he celebrated the Vigil of the Entrance of the The-
otokos into the Temple in the local Russian Church of St.
Alexander Nevsky) to Le Havre, where he boarded the liner
“Champagne” on December 3. Since port regulations pre-
scribed a brief quarantine for the ship upon arrival in New
York harbor, the welcoming committee was able to perform
its task only on the following day. On December 13 Bishop
Tikhon was greeted on board ship by the Russian Consul
General V. A. Teplov, the Archimandrite Raphael and the
Priest Ephraim of the Arab Orthodox community in New
York, and representatives of the Russian community in the
city. Two welcoming speeches were made (by the Consul
General and the representative of a Russian cultural society),
a bouquet was presented to the bishop and, while greetings
and introductions were in progress, a parishioner of the
Arabic church in New York read a poem of greeting in
Arabic, of which a translation was made for the bishop on
the spot by Archimandrite Raphael.
At the Russian church in New York the rector, Father
Alexander Hotovitzky, greeted the new diocesan bishop on
behalf of the diocese and its flock after a brief service of
thanksgiving. Bishop Tikhon responded by stating that his
personal prayer, as he entered his diocese, was “Thy King-
dom come,” and that missionary work is precisely work for
the coming of the Kingdom. After the bishop’s remarks,
Archimandrite Raphael delivered a formal welcoming speech.
Since the sentiments expressed by Archimandrite Raphael
are of some interest to students of the interrelations of the
various Orthodox ethnic groups in North America, its text
is given here in full:
Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord.
All twenty thousand members of the Syro-Arab
colony living in New York and elsewhere in North
America together with me greet Your Grace, our new
spiritual Father and Archpastor, on the occasion of
your safe arrival. We are so bold as to ask Your Grace
for one thing only — that you will continue to give to
us, the Orthodox Syro-Arabs living within the bound-
aries of your diocese, the same maternal love, the
same paternal care, the same archpastoral attention,
that was given to us by your most gracious predeces-
sor. And we, on our part, remembering the words of
the Apostle, “obey your leaders and submit to them,
for they are keeping watch over your souls” (He-
brews 13:17), not only promise to the Holy Synod
and to Your Grace our full obedience and our filial
submission to all your paternal commands and arch-
pastoral directions, but we also fully deliver ourselves
over to your archpastoral care and blessings.
May our Lord Jesus Christ, through the prayers of
the holy Nicholas of Myra in Lycia and Tikhon of
Zadonsk, help Your Grace in this your new archpas-
toral ministry for the benefit of the Orthodox Church
and the flowering of the Orthodox Faith in this New
World. Amen.
The rest of the day was spent in the usual introductions
and social routine. A vigil was celebrated in the Russian
Church of St. Nicholas that evening, and Liturgy the next
morning. On December 15 Bishop Tikhon celebrated the
Liturgy in the Syro-Arab Church of St. Nicholas, where
Father Raphael was the rector. Part of the service was in
Arabic. Father Raphael’s sermon included the following
thought about the nature and extent of Bishop Tikhon’s
task: “He has been sent here to tend the flock of Christ —
Russians, Slavs, Syro-Arabs and Greeks — which is scattered
across the entire North American continent.”
These first days of Bishop Tikhon in the American dio-
cese show at a glance the outlines of his pastoral task. (1)
The missionary diocese was enormous in size, encompassing
the United States, the territory of Alaska and Canada. Con-
stant travel would be necessary for the bishop in order for
him to keep abreast of developments in the widely-sepa-
rated and diverse communities. (2) The diocese encompas-
sed diverse nationalities (Russians, Serbs, Galicians and other
Slavs; Greeks, Arabs, Creoles, Indians, Aleuts and Eskimos).
Some of the Orthodox were from Orthodox countries (Rus-
(Continued page 85)
83
 PATRIARCH TIKHON
April 7, 1975, marked the fiftieth anniversary of the
death of Patriarch Tikhon.
Basil Bellavin, the man who entered the history of the
Church as the courageous and steadfast Patriarch Tikhon,
was born in the family of a priest on January 19, 1865.
Born and raised near Pskov, he studied at the Seminary in
Pskov and continued his theological training at the St.
Petersburg Theological Academy. Completing his studies
at the Academy in 1888, he received an appointment as
instructor at the Pskov Seminary. After monastic tonsure
with the name of Tikhon in 1892, he served on the facul-
ties and administrations of the seminaries in Kholm and
Kazan.
In October 1897 the 32-year-old archimandrite was
consecrated Bishop of Lublin, auxiliary to the Archbishop
of Kholm and Warsaw. Although he served in this capacity
less than a year, the evidence shows that his flock loved
him deeply and that his ministry to the Orthodox in his
care as well as to those who had fallen away from Ortho-
doxy into the Unia was fruitful.
Bishop Tikhon was appointed to the diocese of the
Aleutians and Alaska in September 1898. On December
12 he was already in New York, and on December 23 he
entered his cathedral church in San Francisco, California.
As the only Orthodox bishop of the North American
continent, Tikhon was at the head of a multi-lingual and
multi-national missionary diocese. He ministered to Arabs
and Greeks, Galicians and Carpatho-Russians, Russians
and Serbs, Eskimos and Aleuts, Indians and Americans.
His flock worshiped in Greek and Arabic, Slavonic and
English, and in the languages of the Alaskan natives.
Bishop Tikhon undertook regular and extensive jour-
neys throughout the North American continent. The
diocesan journal of those years provides a regular chronicle
of his continuous and arduous travels to Alaska and the
Aleutians, Canada and all parts of the United States. In the
course of his travels and contacts, Bishop Tikhon came to
understand that the North American mission was not a
permanent extension of the Church of Russia, but was
intended to be the local Church in America. All his efforts
were directed towards providing this young and developing
local Church with everything it required to be independent
and self-sustaining. In the years 1903-1907 important
progress was made. Two auxiliary bishops were conse-
crated — Bishop Innocent of Alaska and Bishop Raphael
of Brooklyn. A seminary was established in Minneapolis
for the training of priests, missionaries and teachers. A
monastic foundation was begun at South Canaan, Penn-
sylvania. The First All-American Council of the North
American Church was convened in Mayfield, Pennsylvania,
on March 7, 1907.
The labors of the missionary bishop were recognized
by the Church of Russia. In 1905 Bishop Tikhon was
honored with the title of archbishop; early in 1907, he
was transferred to the ancient Russian see of Iaroslav.
84
Bishop Tikhon (center) and his two Auxiliaries:
Innocent (left) and Raphael (right).
In Russia, Archbishop Tikhon occupied successively
the sees of Iaroslav (1907-1914) and Vilno (1914-1917),
and in June 1917 he was elected Metropolitan of Moscow
by the Moscow diocesan assembly. The election took
place after the abdication of Emperor Nicholas I]. When
the Church Council of 1917-1918 began its proceedings,
Metropolitan Tikhon was elected its presiding bishop. The
Bolshevik coup and the fires of the Civil War were com-
pleting the devastation of a Russia already undermined by
the World War. The Council concluded that the office of
Patriarch, vacant since the Church reforms of Peter the
Great, had to be filled once again to ensure a strong
Church government. Three candidates were nominated by
the Council: Archbishop Anthony (Khrapovitzky), Arch-
bishop Arseny (Stadnitzky) and Metropolitan Tikhon. The
Patriarch was chosen by lot. On November 18, 1917, in
the Church of Christ the Savior in Moscow, before the
Icon of our Lady of Vladimir, a monk lifted from a chalice
the lot indicating that the new Patriarch of Moscow and
All Russia was Tikhon.
From the time of his elevation to the patriarchal throne
to the time of his death, Patriarch Tikhon defended the
Church and the people of Russia against terror and
political abuse and manipulation of every variety. He de-
nounced governmental terror. He spoke out against the
hatred towards God and neighbor proclaimed by the
Bolsheviks as the last word in the history of humanity.
All the same, he appealed for obedience to legitimate
decrees of the Soviet state — that is, to decrees not com-
pelling violations of piety or faith. He rejected the political
declarations of emigre churchmen on the subject of the
restoration of the monarchy. He was unbending before the
threats and plots of the leaders of the “Living Church”
schism.
In all aspects of his pastoral image, Patriarch Tikhon
was the embodiment of exceptional meekness and humil-
ity, strength and perserverance, clarity and simplicity of
vision. When he died, much of what he had worked for,
both in America and Russia, had been engulfed by the
tides of chaos and divisiveness. But time has shown that
God’s blessing preserves and multiplies the seed which is
planted in faithfulness and hope and charity.
sia, Greece, Serbia), Others from lands within the Ottoman
or Austro-Hungarian Empires; some were part of the re-
cently-initiated movement of Uniates back into the Ortho-
dox Church, others were the fruit of the oldest Orthodox
missionary endeavor in the North American continent (Alas-
ka and the Aleutians). The bishop of such a varied flock
would require generosity, flexibility and imagination. (3)
Bishop Tikhon soon visited three major American cities
(New York, Chicago and San Francisco); in all three, his
flock was not worshipping in proper churches, but was us-
ing houses adapted to worship, as in New York and in Chi-
cago, or built in combination with housing and office space,
as in San Francisco. Immediate attention would have to be
given to building programs in New York and Chicago.
While the arrival of Bishop Tikhon in New York was his
entry into his diocese, his final destination within the dio-
cese was the cathedral in San Francisco, a continent away.
On December 16 he departed from Pennsylvania Station for
the West. A brief stop-over in Washington, D.C., was fol-
lowed by stops in Allegheny, Pennsylvania, and Chicago,
Illinois. In Allegheny the Vigil and Liturgy of the Feast of
St. Nicholas were celebrated with great solemnity in one of
the larger churches of the diocese. At the Liturgy over 1,000
persons were present. In addition to the rector of the
Allegheny parish, Father John Nedzenitsky, the priests
from Cleveland and Osceola, Fathers Stepanoff and Popov,
also took part in the festivities. Thus many of the priests
veloped in the three building projects and frequently pro-
vides information about the various efforts to raise the nec-
essary funds. For example, the missionary journeys of Arch-
imandrite Raphael, described in his own reports to the Mes-
senger, were in part undertaken in order to solicit funds for
the nees of the New York Syrian church.
All this work and effort led to the desired results. On
May 22, 1901, Bishop Tikhon laid the cornerstone of St.
Nicholas Church on the site at 97th Street between Madison
and Fifth Avenues. The New York Times reported on the
next day that the ceremony was the first of its kind ever to
be performed in New York. More than a year later, in No-
vember 1902, both the Syrian and the Russian parishes in
New York moved into proper houses of worship. For the
Syrian congregation it proved more practicable to buy an
existing church in Brooklyn and remodel it for Orthodox
use; the Syrian St. Nicholas Church in Brooklyn was con-
secrated in the presence of prominent guests — Count
Cassini (the Russian Ambassador), Bishop Grafton of Fond-
du-Lac (Episcopal), and Mayor Seth Low of New York
City among them. In Chicago the construction of Holy
Trinity Church took almost exactly a year; it was begun in
April 1902 and completed by March 1903. (Continued page 91)
St. Nicholas Syrian Cathedral, Brooklyn, N.Y.
oe ie re oe He me

of the Eastern states had the opportunity to meet their

new bishop. Although the Chicago stop-over was extremely
short, Bishop Tikhon managed to see the church and to
give to the faithful who had gathered to see him his bless-
ings and even a sermon.
Almost two weeks after entering his diocese, Bishop
Tikhon finally reached San Francisco. On December 23,
1898, he was met at the station by Hieromonk Sebastian
Dabovich of the San Francisco cathedral, Hiermonk John
Shamie of the Galveston, Texas, mission, and representa-
tives of the various nationalities of the cathedral parish —
Russian, Serbian, Greek and Arab. At the entrance of the
cathedral, Bishop Tikhon was met by Archimandrite The-
oklytos (with the cross) and Father Theodore Pashkovsky
(with holy water). As Bishop Tikhon entered the temple,
his predecessor as diocesan, Bishop Nicholas, came out
through the royal doors to greet him and to hand him the
staff of Bishop (later Metropolitan) Innocent (Veniaminov),
the illuminator of the Aleutians.
It is evident that Bishop Tikhon was struck by the in-
adequate church structures in New York and Chicago. Al-
ready on his first return trip to these cities in May and June
of 1899 he was working with local committees on plans for
real houses of worship. On May 12, 1899, he inspected the
site at Haddon and Leavitt in Chicago and approved it as the
place where Holy Trinity Church should be erected. In June
he was at work in New York on the details of a similar proj-
ect of church construction. The New York Orthodox com-
munities (Russian and Syrian) were both in temporary
quarters. The diocesan journal for the years 1899-1902 re-
peatedly refers to the various problems and snags that de-
 HOLY TRINITY CATHEDRAL

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

By direction of Bishop Tikhon, plans were made during

this period for the construction of Holy Trinity Cathedral
in Chicago. The supervision of the project was given to
Father John Kuchurov, who helped organize several parishes
in Illinois. The new church, which was built in the midst of
a prairie (a block from the present Division Street on
Leavitt Avenue), was financed partly by donations from
Tsar Nicholas II and wealthy Chicagoans. Charles R. Crane,
American Minister to China, and Harold McCormick con-
tributed funds for an iconostas of rare beauty that was im-
ported from Russia. The Church itself was designed by
Louis Sullivan, who has been called the “Father of Modern
Architecture.” Sullivan corresponded at length with Bishop
Tikhon on the plans for the new structure. On the day of
the laying of the cornerstone, a small choir from Minne-
apolis came by train with Professor Paul Zaichenko to assist
the small congregation of St. Vladimir’s Church (which
became Holy Trinity) in celebrating the occasion.

86
Interior and exterior views of Holy Trinity Cathe-
dral, Chicago, IIlinois. Designed by Louis Sullivan,
whose original sketch is shown below.
 ST. NICHOLAS CATHEDRAL
NEW YORK CITY

88
 St, Nicholas Cathedral on 97th Street, New York City.
Cornerstone-laying ceremonies celebrated by Bishop
: Tikhon, May 22, 1901.
 INAUGURAL
BY THE RIGHT REV. TIKHON, BISHOP OF ALASKA
Russian Orthodox American Messenger,
At this my first coming among you, beloved brethren,I
bring to mind the words once uttered by the’ Lord through
the lips of the Prophet Hosea: “And I will say to them
which were not my people “Thou art my people,’ and to her
which was not my beloved “Thou art my beloved,” (2:23).
These words were spoken of pagans and meant that when
many in Israel, the people chosen of God, did not know
Christ, then the Lord made Himself manifest to them that
asked not after Him (Romans 10:20; Isaiah 65:1), and
called pagans into His Church.
By the ineffable mercy of God, the pagans that people
the remote regions of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands have
been called into the Church of Christ; they have been taught
and illumined with the light of the faith of Christ through
the agency of the monks of Valaam, who were the first to
sow among them the seed of the Gospel. The holy work was
taken up after them and continued by their successors, the
pastors and archpastors of the Aleutian Islands, more espe-
cially by the archpriest John Veniaminov (later Innocent,
Metropolitan of Moscow), and by my predecessor, the Right
Rev. Nicholas, “a man strong in word and deed.” And now
by the will of God, I, albeit unworthy, am called to this
apostolic ministry, “and I will say to them which were not
my people “Thou art my people,’ and to her that was not
my beloved ‘Thou art my beloved.” Until this day we have,
you and I, been strangers to one another and did not know
one another. From this day forth the Lord Himself estab-
lishes a close bond of union between us, places us into the
mutual relation of bishop to flock and flock to bishop. In
the writings of the Fathers this relation is likened to the
conjugal relation — the bishop being as the bridegroom and
the flock as the bride. And as a husband bears his wife such
love that he, for her sake, leaves father and mother and
cleaves unto her, becomes as of one kin and lives one life
with her, even such love must a bishop bear to his flock.
And as a wife is obedient to her husband, for he is her head
and her protector, even so a flock must be obedient to its
bishop. Understanding thus the relation of a bishop to his
flock and being betrothed to the Aleutian flock, I left my
beloved native land, my aged mother, my friends, all near
and dear to my heart and made my way to a far distant
land, to you, men to me unknown, in order that you might
henceforth become “my people and my beloved.” From
this day on, to you and to your welfare, I direct my
thoughts and my care; my strength and my faculities I
dedicate to ministering to you. With love I come to you,
brethren; I pray, receive me with love also. My love will
find its expression in caring for you, in serving you; you are
to show yours in obeying me, trusting me, cooperating
with me.
90
ADDRESS
AND THE ALEUTIAN ISLANDS
Vol. 3, No. 2, January 1899 :
The request for co-operation I address more particularly
to my more immediate collaborators, the pastors of the
Aleutian church. I come to this country for the first time,
knowing it but little, while you have labored here long be-
fore my coming. Many among you have become familiar
with the country, several were born in it. I trust that in this
my ‘ministry you will do me valuable service by your knowl-
edge of this country and its people, by your experience;
that you will be, really and truly, my co-laborers of sound
judgment and counsel.
It is not only from the pastors that I request assistance
and co-operation, but from my entire beloved flock. The
holy Apostle Paul wisely likens the Church of Christ to a
body, and “the body is not one member, but many”
(I Corinthians 12:15); and as all members have not the same
office (Romans 12:4), but each has its own: the eye one,
the hand another, and every member is necessary and can-
not do without the others — and as all the members have
the same care one for the other and there is no schism in
the body (I Corinthians 12:21, 25, 26) — even so, brethren,
“you are the body of Christ and members in particular”
(I Corinthians 12:27), ‘‘and to every one of you is given
grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ” (Ephe-
sians 4:7) “‘for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of
the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ”
(Ephesians 4:12). Therefore do you, with true love, grow
up into Him Who is the Head, even Christ “from Whom the
whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that
which every joint supplies, according to the effectual work-
ing in the measure of every part, makes increase of the body
unto the edifying of itself in love” (Ephesians 4:15-16).
Again, St. John Chrysostom says: “Do not lay all the
burden upon us, the clergy; you yourselves can do much;
you know one another better than we do...” Therefore,
brethren, do you also edify one another: “warn them that
are unruly, comfort the feeble-minded, support the weak,
be patient toward all. See that none render evil for evil unto
any man, but ever follow that which is good, both among
yourselves, and to all men” (I Thessalonians 5:15-16). “But
the God of all grace, Who has called us unto His eternal
glory by Christ Jesus, after that you have suffered a while,
make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you. To Him
be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen” (I Peter 5:
10-11).

Bishop Tikhon, 1898, before his arrival in America.
Pastoral Journeys
It is impossible to detail the events and circumstancey
of each of the pastoral journeys undertaken by Bishop
Tikhon. The Messenger provides a month-by-month chron-
icle of his continuous and arduous travel to Alaska and the
Aleutians, Canada and all parts of the United States. The
journeys were not merely ceremonial in character. Invari-
ably, the bishop worked wherever he stopped for a parish
visit; there were parish records to check, building projects
to supervise, school children to examine, clergy and com-
mittees to meet, letters and paperwork (sent after the bish-
op from the diocesan offices) to catch up with. His travels
took Bishop Tikhon to the most varied communities. It is
well-known that many Uniates were reconciled to the Or-
thodox Church in the years that the diocese of North Amer-
ica was ruled by Bishops Nicholas and Tikhon. Many of the
parishes springing up in the Eastern states were composed
of former Uniates, and the bishop was responsible for see-
ing to it that these communities were integrated into the
Orthodox Church. Aspects of this return of Uniates to Or-
thodoxy certainly require further study. Here there will be
opportunity only to suggest another, less obvious aspect of
the mission’s early development, namely, the multi-lingual,
multi-national quality of the mission’s life.
First, it must be noted that Syrian and Serbian
munities were fully within the pastoral care of Bishop
Tikhon. He frequently celebrated in the Syrian church in
New York; as we have seen, he was intimately involved in
its difficult struggle to acquire adequate facilities; and final-
ly he consecrated the Syrian St. Nicholas Church in Brook-
lyn. Archimandrite Raphael reported to Bishop Tikhon on
his missionary journeys, undertaken from time to time in
search of Orthodox Arabs.
The Serbian communities also were Bishop Tikhon’s re-
sponsibility. Thus Serbian parishes in Steelton and McKees-
port, Pennsylvania, were in frequent contact with the dio-
cesan hierarch. The St. Sava Church in Jackson, California,
consecrated by Bishop Nicholas, was visited by Bishop
Tikhon as a matter of course. (At the Divine Liturgy cele-
brated by Bishop Tikhon at Jackson in September 1899
Father Sebastian used some English, we are told, for the
sake of American visitors.) The creation of the Serbian mis-
sion and the appointment of Archimandrite Sebastian to be
its head indicate how direct was the pastoral responsibility
of the diocesan hierarch for the Serbian Orthodox.
The situation of the Greek communities in America dur-
ing Tikhon’s tenure as bishop has been summarized as fol-
lows by A. Doumouras: “The parishes in the western part
of the United States were by and large an integral part of
the Russian diocese until the early- 1900’s. Scattered par-
ishes throughout the United States limited themselves to
seeking occasional assistance from the Russian bishop re-
siding in the Americas.” (St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarter-
ly Vol. 11 [1967] p. 189) Thus in 1900, during one of his
visits to Chicago, Bishop Tikhon was approached by the
rector and lay leaders of the local Greek church, who re-
quested that he celebrate the Divine Liturgy at their church
on a Sunday when his schedule allowed. Accordingly, when
Bishop Tikhon was next in Chicago in April 1901, after he
celebrated Vigil at the small and uncomfortable Russian
church on Saturday, April 27, he went to the Greek church
— large and beautiful — for the following morning’s Divine
Liturgy. The congregation numbered some 400 persons on
this occasion. The bishop celebrated entirely in Greek. The
commemorations that morning included the Holy Synod of
the Church of Russia, Bishop Tikhon and thé locum tenens
of the Ecumenical Throne, Metropolitan Nathanael. After
Liturgy the rector, Archimandrite Dorotheos, entertained
Bishop Tikhon at lunch. Father Dorotheos thanked the bish-
op for celebrating in the Greek church. Bishop Tikhon in
turn expressed his delight at the opportunity — his first in
North America — to celebrate the Liturgy in the Greek
language, the tongue of the Greek Church which was the
mother of the Russian Church. The account, written by
Father John Nedzelnitsky (who presumably participated in
the event), ends by drawing the moral that “‘the closer the
unity among the Orthodox of various nationalities, the
stronger will the Orthodox be in this land.”
But there were also some unfortunate examples of na-
tionalistic separatism. On Good Friday 1904, Bishop Tikhon
visited the Holy Trinity Greek parish in New York City and
claimed his rights as a diocesan bishop. This created fears,
com- expressed by the Greek press in New York, that parish prop-
erty would fall under the supervision of both the Russian
bishop and the Russian consul. In 1905, the parish obtained
a separate private state incorporation under the name of
9]
“Hellenic,” since the Russian mission had previously been
>

incorporated as the “Greek Orthodox Church.”

Not only were there separate communities of Orthodox
Russians, Greeks, Arabs and Serbs in the North American
mission, but mixed communities were also to be found. In
the spring of 1901 Bishop Tikhon set out from San
Francisco to visit midwestern and eastern parishes and mis-
sions. His first visit on that particular journey was to Gal-
veston, Texas. Archimandrite Theoklytos Triantafilidis, the
rector of the Church of Sts. Constantine and Helen in Gal-
veston, met Bishop Tikhon in Houston. This was Bishop
Tikhon’s second visit to Galveston; the first had been made
two years before. In the interim a hurricane had destroyed
large parts of Galveston, killing more than ten thousand per-
sons. The Orthodox church in the town had also been dam-
aged. The damage had been repaired and some improve-
ments had even been made under the energetic and selfless
leadership of Archimandrite Theoklytos. Bishop Tikon cel-
ebrated Vigil on Saturday evening; on Sunday morning, be-
fore Liturgy, the Church was consecrated. At the Liturgy
Bishop Tikhon’s sermon was translated into Greek by the
rector, indicating that part of the congregation was Greek-
speaking.
On August 24, 1901, Bishop Tikhon arrived in Seattle,
Washington for a four-day visit; during this visit the St.
Spiridon Church was to be consecrated. The account of the
consecration relates that the singing at the consecration it- Bishop Tikhon on a pastoral visit to Colonie, N.Y.
self, as well as that at the Divine Liturgy, was done by the
cantor, the priest’s wife and a choir of schoolgirls in Slavon- petitioned the Holy Synod to change the mission’s designa-
ic, Greek and English. At the end of the Liturgy the rector, tion to “Diocese of the Aleutians and North America,” and
Father Vladimir Alexandrov, preached in English, appealing to call the diocesan administration “North American”’ rath-
for continued efforts to beautify the church. The descrip- er than “Alaskan.” The Holy Synod found the reasons for
tion of this visit to Seattle by Bishop Tikhon comments on the request to be weighty and transmitted the request to the
the “‘cosmopolitan” nature of the parish, which was com- Emperor for his approval. The Emperor’s ratification of
posed of Russians, Greeks, Arabs, Slavs, Galicians, Ameri- the change was transmitted to Bishop Tikhon by the Holy
cans and even gypsies. In Seattle proper there were some Synod in a document dated February 7/20, 1900.
300 Orthodox, we are told, while in “Greater Seattle” there
were to be found some 600. Religious instruction was given We find first mention of the desirability of transferring
to children in English. the diocesan see to New York and of creating a vicariate
within the diocese in the March 14/28, 1902, issue of the
Reorganization diocesan Messenger. A regular feature of the publication in
those years was the description of Bishop Tikhon’s latest
Bishop Tikhon’s extensive pastoral journeys led him to pastoral journey. On this occasion, the chronicle of the bish-
the conclusion that a reorganization of the diocesan struc- op’s visits to New York, Bridgeport and Ansonia, Connect-
ture was necessary. Three factors entered into the final icut, is preceded by a long “digression” into the whole phi-
equation: 1) the concentration of parishes and faithful in losophy and direction, as well as the practical realities, of
the eastern states; 2) the continental distances between the the North American mission. The author of the article
diocesan center in San Francisco and the extremities of the (which is unsigned) divides the mission into two distinct
diocese in Alaska and the Eastern seaboard; 3) the presence parts. One is the result of the labors of the first mission-
of ethnic groups requiring special attention and leadership. aries in the Aleutians and Alaska. The other is located in
The bishop’s responses to these circumstances were grad- the eastern states and is the product of a very recent devel-
ually worked out and embodied in a series of reforms. opment involving immigration and reconciliation to Ortho-
The first step in the reorganization undertaken by Bish- doxy of large numbers of Uniates. Since the bishop finds it
op Tikhon was his request to the Holy Synod for a change necessary to spend several months of each year in the East,
in the name of the diocese. As a sign of the mission’s roots temporary quarters have been made available to him at the
in Alaska, the diocesan bishop was called bishop of the Chicago and New York churches. Both churches have build-
Aleutians and Alaska, although his see, since 1868, was lo- ing projects under way which include proper accommoda-
cated in San Francisco. Less than a year after his arrival in tions for the ruling hierarch’s “seasonal” visits. The article
North America, on November 16, 1899, Bishop Tikhon concludes that the most sensible way to solve the mission’s

a
problems would be to transfer the see to the East and to
erect a vicariate for the West.
The next news of proposed reorganization and insti-
tutional development is given in September and October of
1903. Earlier that year, in June, Bishop Tikhon had return-
ed to Russia for a three-month vacation. While there, he was
summoned to St. Petersburg to take part in the session of
the Holy Synod. Evidently, Bishop Tikhon’s work in St.
Petersburg allowed certain plans and projects to mature,
both in his own mind and in the minds of the members of
the Holy Synod. The September 15/28, 1903, issue of the
Messenger carried a letter from Bishop Tikhon on the sub-
ject of a North American seminary. | In response to con-
siderable anxiety expressed by priests and lay people about
the long absence of Bishop Tikhon, the editors of the Mes-
senger, on October 1/14, 1903, provided the journal’s read-
ers with information that the bishop was exerting his efforts
at the Holy Synod in behalf of the diocese by working (per-
haps lobbying would be the correct term) for the creation
of a vicariate, the transfer of the diocesan see to New York,
the organization of a seminary in America and the selection
of priests for the mission. The editors also stated that they
could give no promises about the eventual return of the
bishop to America.
On December 12, 1903, Emperor Nicholas II confirmed
the decision of the Holy Synod establishing a vicariate of
Alaska in the North American diocese; the auxiliary bishop
was to be Innocent (Pustynsky). Some care was shown in
the selection of the auxiliary. Bishop-elect Innocent had
been a member of the North American mission in 1893-
1895 under Bishop Nicholas, who tonsured him monk and
ordained him deacon and priest in the San Francisco cathe-
dral in September and October of 1894. His American ex-
perience included a missionary journey to Alaska with Bish-
op Nicholas in the summer of 1894, as well as work in Phil-
lipsburg, Osceola and Allegheny. Bishop Tikhon was one of
the participating bishops in the formal rite of election of
Archimandrite Innocent to the bishopric on December 25,
1903; he was also one of the consecrating bishops at the
Liturgy on December 27 at the Cathedral of Our Lady of
Kazan in St. Petersburg. It was Bishop Tikhon, as diocesan,
who gave his auxiliary the pastoral staff and delivered the
customary address at the end of the Liturgy to the newly-
consecrated hierarch.
Bishop Tikhon returned to New York on January 24,
1904. Clearly his stay in Russia has been a successful one for
the diocese he ruled. His new auxiliary was to arrive within
weeks. The period between the return of Bishop Tikhon
and the arrival of Bishop Innocent was punctuated by more
good news. In a document dated February 4/17, 1904, the
Holy Synod informed Bishop Tikhon that the proposal to
raise Archimandrite Raphael (Hawaweeny) to Bishop of
Brooklyn, second auxiliary to the ruling bishop, had been
confirmed on February 1/14. It remained for Bishop Tikhon
and Bishop Innocent to perform the solemn rite of election
in New York. Bishop Innocent arrived on March 8. On
March 11 the proclamation of Archimandrite Raphael as
Bishop of Brooklyn took place in the Russian St. Nicholas
Cathedral after the Vigil. We are told by the Messenger that
the church was filled to capacity. At the conclusion of the
Vigil, Bishops Tikhon and Innocent ascended the cathedra.
Archimandrite Raphael was questioned as to the Orthodoxy
of his faith in the customary fashion. Bishops Tikhon and
Innocent sang the service by themselves, as the rubrics pre-
scribe. The bishop-elect made his address of acceptance.
The consecration took place on the following day at the
Syrian St. Nicholas Church in Brooklyn. Upon the ascen-
sion of the cathedra by the consecrating bishops, Archi-
mandrite Raphael recided the Creed partly in Slavonic and
partly in Arabic. The Liturgy of St. Basil the Great com-
menced, and at the appointed time, after the Thrice-Holy,
the consecration took place.
The Messenger of March 15/28, 1904, carried a full-page
portrait of each of the three bishops of the Diocese of the
Aleutians and North America. With the consecration of
Bishop Innocent for Alaska there were, for the first time,
two bishops in the North American mission. This develop-
ment, significant enough in itself, led immediately to the
first consecration of an Orthodox bishop on American soil.
Although these events were the result of much work and
careful planning by Bishop Tikhon, they were nevertheless
prophetic events; they anticipated the steady development
of a complex and yet coordinated church body in which di-
versity would be generously welcomed and unity would be
scrupulously maintained. The Bishop of Alaska was to rule
a territorial vicariate, one in which most of the believers
were descendants of those first evangelized by Russian mis-
sionaries — Aleuts, Eskimos and Tlingit Indians, as well as
Creoles (Alaska-born whites). The Bishop of Brooklyn, on
the other hand, was to minister to Arab parishes, wherever
they might be in the diocese.
The next step in this careful program of flexible growth
was the establishment, in March 1905, of a Serbian mission
with Father Sebastian (Dabovich) as its dean. On October
13, 1905, Father Sebastian was raised to the rank of archi-
mandrite in Chicago; the diocesan, on handing the pastoral
staff to Archimandrite Sebastian, charged him to be firm
but gentle with his flock.
In recognition of his status as a diocesan with two auxil-
iary bishops, Bishop Tikhon was honored with the title of
archbishop on May 19, 1905S.
A document written by Archbishop Tikhon in December
1905 reveals the maturity and clarity of his prophetic vision
for the Orthodox Church in America. In response to a ques-
tionnaire sent to all diocesan bishops of the Russian Church
by the Holy Synod as part of the preparation for the long-
awaited Council of the Church of Russia, | Archbishop
Tikhon outlined his ideas on the structure of the Orthodox
mission in North America. He proposed that the diocese
should become an exarchate of the Russian Church — but
an exarchate possessing great autonomy. He suggested, par-
enthetically, that the question of autocephaly might be
considered. It seemed clear to him that the process begun
in 1903 and 1904 with the consecrations of Bishops In-
nocent and Raphael ought to be continued. The newly-
established Serbian mission he proposed to make into a
vicariate centered in Chicago. The Greek communities, he
wrote, should be organized along the same lines as the
Syrian and Serbian missions and should also be headed by a
bishop. He saw the need for autonomy and independence
in matters affecting only the internal life or structure of
each national diocese or vicariate, and also the necessity for
a common mind, expressed through decisions of the bish-
ops meeting in council under the presidency of the arch-
bishop, in matters of common and general concern.
What was the attitude of the various autocephalous
churches to the North American mission of the Church of
Russia? Not enough evidence is available to allow an anal-
ysis of this question. In the time of Archbishop Tikhon’s
ministry in America, however, two events took place which
indicate some awareness on the part of the Churches of
Antioch and Constantinople of the American situation.
The most important of these events was the correspon-
dence between Patriarch Meletios of Antioch and Bishop
Tikhon at the time of the consecration of Bishop Raphael.
On two occasions prior to his consecration by Bishops
Tikhon and Innocent, Archimandrite Raphael had been
urged by the Patriarchate of Antioch to accept election as
bishop of sees within the Patriarchate. Both times Archi-
mandrite Raphael declined on the grounds that much still
BISHOP INNOCENT (PUSTYNSKY)
Yerny (
94
remained to be accomplished in America. After Bishop
Raphael was consecrated Bishop of Brooklyn, Patriarch
Meletios wrote to Bishop Tikhon commending him and the
Church of Russia for the election and consecration of Bish-
op Raphael for the pastoral supervision of the Syro-Arab
Orthodox in America. Bishop Tikhon responded by ask-
ing the Patriarch’s continued counsel and guidance in the
difficult mission entrusted to Bishop Raphael. Although
Bishop Raphael received his episcopal consecration outside
the boundaries of the see of Antioch and by the authority
of the Church of Russia, his love and reverence for the
Church which was his Mother did not thereby decrease.
Bishop Tikhon also expressed the hope that the consecra-
tion of Bishop Raphael, the first such event in America,
would be followed by many more celebrations of this glori-
ous mystery on American soil.
In 1902 the pastor of the Seattle parish, Father Vladimir
Alexandrov, received a letter of thanks from Patriarch
Joachim HI of Constantinople for his zealous missionary
work among Greek people as well as among other Orthodox
in America. The Patriarch expressed his gratitude to the
priest and sent his blessings both to the pastor and to the
flock of the Seattle community.
aU lo ¢da (Continued page 97)
Bishop Innocent, Bishop of Alaska and first vicar-bishop
to Archbishop Tikhon, was born Alexander Dimitrievich
Pustynsky in 1869 in the Nelagda Province. Educated at
the Kiev Theological Academy, he later received a Master
of Theology Degree from the Moscow Theological Acad-
emy for advanced studies and a thesis entitled: Pastoral
Theology in Russia to the Middle of the Nineteenth
Century. After receiving the Masters Degree, he became
assistant inspector at the Moscow Academy. In 1893, the
future bishop left for America and was made a reader in
San Francisco. On September 14, 1894, he was tonsured a4
monk with the name of Innocent and ordained to the
diaconate. Father Innocent was ordained to the priesthood
on September 25, 1894. He served parishes in Osceola
Mills and Allegheny, Pennsylvania, before returning to
Russia. While in Russia, he served as a censor of religious
books and was raised to the rank of archimandrite.
When Archbishop Tikhon proposed the expansion of
the American Mission, Father Innocent was selected to be
Bishop of Alaska. On December 14, 1903, he was conse-
crated as a bishop and soon left for America. Shortly after
his arrival in New York in March 1904, he participated in
the election and consecration of Bishop Raphael. Bishop
Innocent traveled extensively in Alaska and many of his
descriptions were published in the Russian-American
Orthodox Messenger. He administered the North American
diocese from the departure of Archbishop Tikhon to the
arrival of the new Archbishop, Platon, in 1907. He re-
turned to Russia in 1909 as bishop of Yakutsk and later
.participated in the All-Russian Sobor of 1917-1918. After
a brief involvement in the “Living Church,” Innocent was
received back into the Church and assigned as Bishop of
Vernensk and Tashkent in 1924. Later he was transferred
to Kharkov and elevated to metropolitan.
 BISHOP RAPHAEL (HAWAWEENY)

Bishop Raphael (Hawaweeny), the first Orthodox bishop

consecrated in America, was born in Damascus, Syria, on
November 8, 1860. He received his first theological training
at the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s Theological School at Halki
in the Princes Islands. Prior to entering the Kiev Theological
Academy in Imperial Russia, he was ordained to the diacon-
ate. Upon completion of his studies in 1894, Father Raphael
was appointed professor of Arabic Language and Literature
at the Kazan Theological Academy by the Holy Synod of
the Russian Orthodox Church.
During this time, the Syro-Arabic community in the
United States was growing at an increasing rate. A Syrian
Orthodox Benevolent Society was organized in New York
City in 1895 and the president, Dr. Ibrahim Arbeely, con-
tacted Father Raphael about coming to the United States.
Father Raphael met with Bishop Nicholas in St. Petersburg
and, after being ordained to the priesthood and being ele-
vated to the rank of archimandrite, he and two other Syro-
Archimandrite Raphael before his consecration.
Arabs (John Shamie, also of the Kazan Academy, and
Constantine Abou Adal) came to the United States with
Bishop Nicholas to serve the Syro-Arabic community.
Archimandrite Raphael was placed in charge of the en- rite of the election of Archimandrite Raphael as Bishop of
tire Syrian mission. He was assigned to New York City and Brooklyn was performed by Bishops Tikhon and Innocent
organized the parish which later became St. Nicholas Cathe- at St. Nicholas Cathedral after the Vigil. The consecration
dral in Brooklyn. He supervised the development of other took place the next day at the Syrian St. Nicholas Church
Syrian communities, traveling widely through the United in Brooklyn, with Bishop Raphael making his confession of
States in 1896 to organize parishes. By 1898, Father faith both in Slavonic and Arabic.
Raphael published a large Arabic Service Book for use in his Following his consecration, Bishop Raphael continued
churches. Later in the same year, he was to be the ranking his work among the Syrian Orthodox in the United States
representative of the American Mission to greet Bishop and also helped Archbishop Tikhon and his successors to
Tikhon, the new diocesan bishop. At the Liturgy, on administer the North American Mission. Bishop Raphael
December 15, 1898, he spoke of Tikhon’s mission in his presided at the clergy conference held in Old Forge, Penn-
sermon. ‘‘He has been sent here to tend the flock of Christ sylvania, on August 2, 1905, in the absence of Archbishop
— Russians, Slavs, Syro-Arabs, and Greeks — which is scat- Tikhon. It was this meeting which prepared the agenda for
tered across the entire North American continent.” the Council held in Mayfield, Pennsylvania, on February 20,
News of Father Raphael’s work reached his homeland 1907. He also consecrated the grounds of the new St.
and twice in 1901 the Holy Synod of the Church of Anti- Tikhon’s Monastery and Orphanage. He founded the maga-
och elected him to be a bishop in Syria. Each time he de- zine, Al-Kalemat, in 1905 as a means of communicating
clined by saying that his work in America was not yet with his flock. Bishop Raphael issued a number of edicts to
finished. Bishop Tikhon also recognized his qualities and help his people understand the complex religious situation
wanted Raphael to be one of his vicar-bishops in the re- in America. After twenty years of service in America, Bishop
organized diocese. In 1903, Tikhon went to Russia and Raphael died on February 27, 1915, and was buried by
asked the Holy Synod to approve his plan for the election Bishop Alexander, who was administering the diocese in the
of Father Raphael as vicar-bishop. They approved Raphael’s absence of the new Archbishop Evdokim. At the time of
election and also consecrated Bishop Innocent (Pustynsky) his death, there were thirty Syrian Orthodox parishes in the
as Tikhon’s vicar for Alaska. On March 11, 1904, the solemn United States, with 25,000 faithful.
 ARCHIMANDRITE SEBASTIAN (DABOVICH)
Born in San Francisco in 1863, while the Civil War was
still raging in the East, Father Sebastian Dabovich was the
first American-born Orthodox priest. His parents, who were
Serbian immigrants from Sassovae and operated a store in
San Francisco, gave him the name of Jovan (John) at birth.
From his early youth he was devoted to the Church and
spent much of his time at the cathedral. After graduation
from high school, he served the parish as a reader and
teacher. In 1884, he was assigned to assist at the Sitka
cathedral. Shortly after this, Jovan was sent to Russia to
prepare for the life of a missionary priest. Upon completion
of three years of studies at the St. Petersburg and Kiev
Theological Academies, it is most likely that he was ton-
sured a monk, with the new name of Sebastian, and or-
dained a deacon in St. Petersburg in 1887.
Returning to San Francisco, he served as a deacon at the
cathedral and taught in the newly established pastoral
school. On August 16, 1892, Father Sebastian was ordained
to the priesthood by Bishop Nicholas and assigned to be a
missionary in California and Washington. In 1893, he re-
placed Father Alexis Toth as parish priest in Minneapolis
for a few months and taught at the Missionary School.
Paul Zaichenko, who directed the church choir and taught
music in the school, later remembered him.
Father Sebastian Dabovich succeeded Father A.
Toth as parish priest. He was a quiet and pensive
monk, always considerate, conscientious, modest.
He performed his duties sincerely, and taught the
Bible class of the parish school with enthusiasm. He
was a tireless and unselfish worker, a humble and a
just man before his Lord. He was one of the most
worthy workers in the Mission.
I knew him back in San Francisco. At that time he
sang in the Cathedral choir of which I was a choir-
master. His aim was his betterment in religious life.
As in San Francisco, so too in Minneapolis, he was
the example of virtuous living; he always considered
it his duty to avoid an evil step. Leading a quiet mon-
astic life, he found great happiness in reading religious
books and in teaching students the Holy Bible. He
loved children and was always considerate of his
parishioners. Notwithstanding his short stay in Minne-
apolis, he was loved by his flock. He was a bright
torch of love, kindness, and sincerity. (Golden Jubi-
lee Album, St. Mary’s R.O. Church, Minneapolis,
1937, p. 44)
The next year, Father Sebastian returned to California
and established the first Serbian Orthodox church in Amer-
ica, in Jackson, California, which was dedicated to St. Sava,
patron saint of the Serbian Church. In 1896, he was re-
appointed to serve at the cathedral in San Francisco. In
addition he continued with his duties at the Jackson mis-
sion. Archbishop Tikhon recognized his abilities and made
Father Sebastian part of the North American Mission Ad-
96
Group of early missionaries: Seated left to right — Father
Dmitri Kauenev, Abbot Innokenty (Pustynsky), Father Alexis
Toth, Deacon Vladimir Alexandrov, Abbot Sebastian Dahovich.
Standing: General Scliarevich, a Russian engineer.
ministration. During this period, he also found time to write
a book entitled The Ritual, Services, and Sacraments of the
Holy Orthodox Church. Father Sebastian wrote this book
to inform the children of immigrants and help others who
were searching for Orthodoxy. In 1902, Father Sebastian
carried his mission to Alaska and was made Dean of the
Sitka Deanery.
With the development of other Serbian parishes in the
United States, Archbishop Tikhon felt that it was necessary
to organize these parishes and the person that he chose for
this purpose was Father Sebastian Dabovich. On August 17,
1905, he was relieved of his administrative duties for the
North American Diocese and placed in charge of the Serbian
Mission in America. At that time he was also raised to the
rank of archimandrite. The Serbian Mission was centered in
Chicago, where Father Sebastian was parish priest at Holy
Resurrection Serbian Orthodox Church, which he organized
in 1904. He continued to guide the Serbian Mission until he
requested a release to continue missionary work in July of
1910:
When the seminary was opened in Tenafly, New Jersey,
in 1913, Father Sebastian was one of the instructors. He
had a long record of teaching in church schools. He was also
involved in many conferences and discussions with the non-
Orthodox. In all of these meetings, he was sympathetic and
understanding, but firmly convinced that he must reveal the
Orthodox Church as the one, true Church of Christ.
Although Archimandrite Sebastian was obviously a can-
didate for the episcopate in America, he also felt a calling to
serve the church in his ancestral Serbia. He served as a chap-
lain to the Serbian Army in the Balkan Wars and the First
World War. In 1916, he requested a release from the Amer-
ican Mission to serve in Serbia. After brief visits to the
United States in 1915 and 1917, he spent the rest of his life
working for the Church in Yugoslavia. He died on Novem-
ber 30, 1940, and was buried in the Monastery of Zicha by
his friend and father confessor, Bishop Nicholai (Velimiro-
vich.)
Institutions
As the bishop of a missionary diocese encompassing an
entire continent and a multi-national flock, Tikhon had to
think about the creation of institutions that would help
make the Church in America self-sufficient. During his stay
in Russia in 1903 he began the process of study and prepa-
ration that would lead to the creation of a seminary for the
diocese. There was an obvious need for such a school. The
conditions in which pastoral work was to be done in North
America were vastly different from the conditions in the
“old country.’ Most of those who served the mission as
priests came from abroad and had received their training
abroad. This dependence on outside dssistance was not de-
sirable in the long run for the diocese. In the academic year
1905-1906 the Missionary School in Minneapolis, Minne-
sota, was transformed into a seminary. In 1906 Father
Leonid Turkevich, the future Metropolitan Leonty, was
brought to Minneapolis by Archbishop Tikhon to lead the
seminary’s development. The seminary, moved in 1913 to
Tenafly, New Jersey, produced two generations of priests
for the Church in America before it was closed in 1923.
Another institution needed by an increasingly self-suf-
ficient local Church was a monastery. From time to time
the Messenger devoted some attention to this question. At
the forefront of the discussions was Hieromonk Arseny
(Chavtsov), who advanced various arguments, spiritual and
practical, in favor of the establishment of a monastic com-
munity in the North American mission. In June 1905 Arch-
bishop Tikhon gave Hieromonk Arseny his blessing to begin
the creation of a monastery on land donated for that pur-
pose near South Canaan, Pennsylvania. By the time Arch-
bishop Tikhon was transferred to Iaroslav the essential
structures at St. Tikhon’s Monastery had been erected and
consecrated, and the community had five members.
Language
It is clear from the record that the Orthodox mission in
North America was quite flexible in the question of language
used in worship and teaching. What we are provided in the
Messenger in the way of a chronicle of the pastoral travels
of Archbishop Tikhon shows that he was the chief celebrant
at services held in a mixture of languages, sometimes as
many as three (Greek, Slavonic and English). By the end of
Archbishop Tikhon’s term as diocesan, the North American
mission included a Syrian mission of nine communities and
a Serbian mission of nine communities. We have already
seen that some parishes were indeed multi-national, requir-
ing two or three languages liturgically. English was an ac-
cepted vehicle for worship and teaching in the mission.
Perhaps the most visible and lasting evidence of the early
need for English in the mission is the Service Book “‘com-
piled, translated and arranged” (as the subtitle tells us) by
Florence Isabel Hapgood. Orthodox priests and lay people
in America owe an incalculable debt of gratitude to this
Protestant Episcopal lady and to all those who helped bring
her project to completion. Isabel Hapgood conceived the
notion of making a compilation and translation of Ortho-
dox services at the time that the Russian parish was started
in New York. Her idea met with the enthusiastic response of
Bishop Nicholas. Almost eleven years were given by her to
the task. When the work was being brought to its conclu-
sion, it seemed next to impossible to raise the funds that
were required to print the volume. Archbishop Tikhon final-
ly was successful in obtaining a grant of $1,000 from the
Holy Synod; half of this sum was paid to the translator for
her manuscript. This was a miserable payment, but even so
it left too little money to permit sending the book to the
printer. But help came from an unexpected source. In 1905
Russia and Japan, under the sponsorship of President Theo-
dore Roosevelt, held negotiations at Portsmouth, New
Hampshire, which led to the end of the Russo-Japanese War.
The chief negotiator on the Russian side was Sergei Witte.
Intercession was made to him “through channels” for ad-
ditional funds from the Imperial Government for the print-
ing of the Service Book. Count Witte provided another
grant of $2,000. This grant finally made it possible to pro-
duce the book. The remainder of the sum necessary was ob-
tained from St. Nicholas Cathedral, New York, in the form
of a loan. The volume was recommended by Archbishop
Tikhon to parish libraries. The cost was $4.00 per volume;
parishes purchasing more than 10 copies got a 25% discount.
There is evidence scattered throughout the Messenger
that English was in use liturgically, and not only education-
ally. We are told, for example, that Bishop Innocent cele-
brated two liturgies in English in the San Francisco cathe-
dral in November 1904, and that he celebrated a thanksgiv-
ing service in English on Thanksgiving Day, November 24,
1904. Regularly scheduled English Vesper services were held
on Sunday evenings in the New York Cathedral, and Eng-
lish was also used during the liturgies. The Church in Min-
neapolis, especially during the years when the North Ameri-
can Seminary was located there (1905-1912) conducted
services regularly in English. By this time, English transla-
tions of all the major services, plus the Menaia for great
feasts and for common ranks of saints, and the Octoechos
(book of eight tones) were available for use.
The Messenger itself contained articles in both Russian
and English up to 1902. Beginning in 1902 the journal was
in Russian, but a monthly English supplement was pro-
vided. (The full title of the Messenger in Russian was A meri-
can Orthodox Messenger; in English it was rendered Rus-
sian Orthodox American Messenger. )
The Council
So natural, direct and simple was the process leading up
to the convening of the Council of 1907 that its boldness
can easily remain unnoticed. For centuries the Orthodox
Church — whether in the Orthodox Russian Empire or in
the heterodox Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires —
had been deprived of the possibility of ordering its life and
mission according to its own norms and for its own pur-
poses. Everywhere it had been used as the tool of the state;
everywhere the prevailing conditions of state administration
had imposed their spirit on the administration of the
Church. Two examples, will give a clear picture of what was
Q7
occurring. In the Ottoman Empire every office had to be
purchased, including the office of Patriarch of Constanti-
nople. In order to increase their income from this source, it
was in the interest of the Sultans to change patriarchs fre-
quently. Thus, of 159 patriarchs in 500 years of Ottoman
tule, 21 died in office of anatural death, 6 were murdered,
27 abdicated, 105 were arbitrarily removed. In Russia,
Emperor Peter the Great deprived the Church of its head,
the Patriarch, replacing him with a Holy Synod appointed
by the Emperor and functioning as a department of the
state. Thus, for some two hundred years, the Church of
Russia was administered as a bureaucracy and by a bureauc-
racy. Certainly, the real and external life of the Church — in
its sacraments, saints and martyrs — was never extinguished.
But its creativity in meeting the challenges and surmounting
the obstacles of history was either atrophied or in danger of
atrophy. Within the Russian Church, however, there were
signs in the nineteenth century that the status quo was not
acceptable to all, that the welfare of the Church and the
success of its mission required changes. One of the funda-
mental changes envisioned was the liberation of the Church
from its bureaucratic bonds and the creation of a conciliar
and truly Orthodox style of Church government.
From the beginning of hisAmerican ministry, Archbishop
Tikhon gathered together his diocesan clergy whenever pos-
sible for discussion of the problems in the mission’s life.
One of the first signs that he desired more than mere dis-
cussion is found in the official record of the clergy confer-
ence held in Cleveland, Ohio, on June 2, 1905, and printed
verbatim in the Messenger. The archbishop said to the par-
ticipants of the conference that he considered regular meet-
ings of the diocesan clergy to be desirable for discussion and
conciliar resolution of questions affecting the mission’s life
and activities: he specified that one of the important ques-
tions to be considered was the active involvement of lay
people in the upbuilding of church and parish life in Ameri-
ca. This proposal was greeted with enthusiasm. It was re-
solved to convene a clergy conference in Old Forge, Penn-
sylvania, on August 2, 1905, to settle on an agenda for the
proposed Council. A committee consisting of Father Alex-
ander Hotovitzky, Hieromonk Arseny and Father Benedict
Turkevich was appointed to work out the preliminary de-
tails and arrangements for the Council.
In the following issue of the Messenger the significance
of the decision reached in Cleveland is analyzed in a com-
mentary on the official minutes of the meeting. The “con-
ciliar consciousness” shown by this commentary is deep
and clear. It is explained that in the ‘“‘old country” the in-
volvement of the government in church affairs turned the
living church organism into a state bureaucracy. In America
the church is left to its own devices. This means, in practice,
that the church has to return to its “‘conciliar”’ nature, to
become again a living organism. Clergy and laity have a com-
mon responsibility for the life of the church. The Cleveland
conference is the first step towards the official recognition
and acceptance of this unavoidable reality of ecclesiastical
life in America. What is more the very changes being
“forced” upon the church by the American situation are
98
bringing the church closer to truly canonical and ecclesias-
tical norms.
The clergy conference with the mandate to prepare an
agenda for the Council was held in Old Forge on August 2
as planned. After Liturgy the meeting was opened with the
singing of “Today the grace of the Holy Spirit has gather-
ed us together.” Inthe absence of Archbishop Tikhon, Bish-
op Raphael presided. The conference endorsed the propos-
al to convene a Council of clergy and laity in New York af-
ter the transfer of the diocesan see from San Francisco was
completed. The main task of the Council was to be the de-
velopment of a statute for the church. Some time was spent
at the Old Forge meeting on a discussion of the election of
deans; strong support was given to the principle that deans
should be elected by secret ballot. In addition, the Old
Forge conference requested that the new monastery in
South Canaan should be named after St. Tikhon of
Zadonsk.
Practical difficulties delayed the Council. In 1906 the
Messenger contained a number of articles and commentar-
ies on the great need for a Council, on the agenda and the
election of delegates. Financial considerations played a maj-
or role in the Council’s postponement. The travel expenses
of the clergy and laity participating in the Council would be
difficult to cover out of parish or diocesan funds. This ques-
tion was discussed in the pages of the Messenger under two
headings: (1) parishes and entire areas would be left with-
out any clergy for some two weeks at least; (2) the financial
burden fell unevenly on parishes, since some were across
the continent and others only across the Hudson River from
the projected Council site, New York. 1906 came and went
and a resolution of the conundrum was nowhere in sight.
The notification of the Council’s convocation was finally
printed in the Messenger issue of January 1/14, 1907. It
was issued by the Pre-Conciliar Committee appointed by
Archbishop Tikhon. The Council was to be held in May-
field, Pennsylvania, February 20, 1907 (Old Style), and was
to include, as delegates, the priests of all parishes in the
United States, as well as one lay delegate from each parish.
The decisions of the Council, upon confirmation of the
diocesan hierarch, were to be mandatory for all parishes,
whether they were represented at the Council or not.
One month after the official notice of the date and place
of the Council was given, an “‘unofficial” report was passed
on to its readers by the Messenger, _ the alarming news was
that Archbishop Tikhon was to be transferred to Iaroslav,
Russia. The next issue reported officially that the transfer
had occurred, and that Bishop Innocent was temporarily
assigned to administer the affairs of the diocese; his name
was henceforth to be mentioned in the services.
The sudden transfer of Archbishop Tikhon clearly jeop-
ardized the Council. The Pre-Conciliar Committee was in
doubt about convening the meeting since the transfer of
Archbishop Tikhon was effective February 7, and he was at
once deprived of the rights of diocesan bishop. The Ecclesi-
astical Consistory addressed an inquiry to Bishop Innocent
on the matter; the reply came back that the Council must
take place and that all instructions were to be obtained
from Archbishop Tikhon. Still, the Council’s decisions
would require the ratification of the next diocesan bishop
before they could acquire their full force.
Another circumstance which would hamper the Council
was a change in the agenda of the Convention of the Russian
Orthodox Mutual Aid Society. The Council’s date and loca-
tion had been tied to the date and location of the Mutual
Aid Society’s Convention in order to ease the financial
strain which the travel expenses of the delegates placed on
the parishes. Convening the Council and the Convention in
the same place and during the same week permitted the
selection of the same delegates to both meetings. The Con-
vention was scheduled to end by Wednesday; it was plan-
ned, therefore, to devote the latter part of the week com-
pletely to the work of the Council. As it turned out, changes
had to be made in the Convention’s agenda because it be-
came necessary to make a full revision of the Society’s Stat-
utes. The Convention required all week to complete its
work. The Council was finally able to have only three eve-
ning sessions and a morning session to accomplish its mis-
sion.
A prayer service in St. John the Baptist Church, May-
field, on March 5 at 1:00 P.M. marked the opening of the
Council. After Archbishop Tikhon greeted the delegates,
the Council proceeded to elect a chairman. Father Alex-
ander Hotovitzky was elected with 25 votes. As he was un-
able to assume his duties (due to his responsibilities at the
Mutual Aid Society’s Convention?), the man with the next
highest number of votes (13), Father Leonid Turkevich, was
appointed chairman by Archbishop Tikhon, Father
Hotovitzky became Council secretary.
At the first session held that evening, Archbishop Tikhon
proposed “How to Expand the Mission” as the theme of
the Council. He outlined his thoughts on the matter by sug-
gesting that ways must be sought to use productively the
mission’s resources, in preparation for independent, unsub-
sidized existence and expansion. The first item on the
agenda was incorporation. The diocese as a whole was not
incorporated; individual parishes were. It was decided not
to begin with the mission’s incorporation but with the de-
velopment of a Statute governing the goals, activities and
administration of the mission as well as the interrelations
and responsibilities of pastor and flock. It was thought that
such a Statute would be valid and authoritative in the eyes
of the civil authorities even in the absence of a charter of
incorporation. This session also decided to settle on “Rus-
sian Orthodox Greek Catholic” as the name of the mission.
In connection with discussion of the name, stress was placed
the universality of Orthodoxy; the Council went on record
with a definition of the North American mission as the
“Holy Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church” embrac-
ing all nationalities and languages.
The second session on the following evening dealt with
the financial problems of the diocese. There were two
sources of funds: the Holy Synod of Russia ana the faithful
of the local church. The Council attempted to make pro-
vision for the equitable collection and disbursement of
funds. (The disbursement problem was primarily the prob-
lem of fixing criteria for providing assistance to parishes in
the mission.) This issue proved to be complicated and was
referred to a committee for study; the recommendations of
the committee were presented at the third session on Thurs-
day. These recommendations were found to be inadequate
and superficial. The Council was compelled to create a spe-
cial committee to draw up a better financial proposal as
well as to draft a proposed Statute in time for the next
Council. The Council simultaneously went on record in fa-
vor of regular and frequent Councils for the constant super-
vision and review of the internal administration of the
American Church.
Questions of liturgical usage were on the agenda for the
last session on Friday. What provoked this discussion was
the existence of variations in the performance of rites and
services among the parishes of the mission. Judging from
comments on this issue made from time to time in the Mes-
senger, some of the mission’s priests were anxious for uni-
formity and regularity in this matter. The Council, however,
wholeheartedly agreed with the opinion of Archbishop
Tikhon that the existence of these differences was entirely
natural since the Orthodox in America came from different
areas and countries, and that the priest should explain to
parishioners the difference between the essential and the
secondary, between dogma and ritual. Insofar as the dif-
ferences in question do not harm the essence of the faith,
they can be tolerated.
Farewell Address
On Thursday, March 7, between sessions of the Mutual
Aid Society’s Convention, Archbishop Tikhon invited all
the clergymen to a farewell luncheon. His words to his
priests and co-workers convey the sobriety and humility of
his pastoral method:
“Fathers and brothers!
“This is our farewell meal, but the sadness of parting
with my flock is assuaged by this opportunity to see almost
all of my co-workers in the States.
‘“‘And so I shall take advantage of this meeting to thank
you for our common work. We acted and worked together.
In some matters I initiated things, inspired you, and you in
turn went out to bring my ideas to life; in other matters, on
the contrary, you suggested the thought to me — and | am
not ashamed to admit this — and I found the ways and
means to realize your idea in practice. |appealedto you for
common work from the very beginning, in my first address
to you in the cathedral of San Francisco, and my appeal
was not made in vain; if something has been accomplished
here, it was not I alone who accomplished it, but we to-
gether. It is self-evident that the Lord God helped us. Many
times I have told you that the more I study the history of
the Orthodox Church in this land, the more convinced I be-
come that our task here is God’s task, that God Himself
helps us. Precisely when it appears that everything is just
about to collapse, our Orthodox Russian mission, instead of
dying, rises up in new strength and brilliance.
“T recall how deep was my dismay at the news of my
appointment to America. It was not that I was saddened so
99
much at parting with my Kholm flock, with whom I had
“Thus let me depart in peace, fathers and brothers, to
established close bonds and to whom, it seems, I was of
the place where the characteristics I have manifested here
some use; I was not so grieved at the thought of going to
might still be useful, and allow me to express the hope that
a far country, leaving at home an old and sick mother;
your work here will prosper and that you will abide here in
rather, | was oppressed by the consciousness that I was
not suitable for the work I was being sent to do here, joy.”
that I was not at all acquainted with the task. And so?
Farewell Sermon
‘No one but God,’ or ‘Who if not God!’
Sunday March 17, 1907, was chosen as the day for for-
“He it is Who helped me through more than eight years
mal farewell ceremonies. This was done so that the farewells
of service, which has not only earned praise from people,
could be made on Forgiveness Sunday, on the eve of the be-
but which has also been somehow profitable for our work
ginning of Great Lent. Thus the refrain “Forgive me’ in
here. And now | am inclined to think that my appointment
Archbishop Tikhon’s sermon on that day refers both to For-
came about not so much by the decision of men as by the
giveness Sunday and to his leavetaking:
plan of God, and that it was timely for this flock.
“.. Orthodox people must care for the dissemination of
“From the very beginning I allowed great initiative to
the Orthodox faith among the heterodox. Christ the Savior
my co-workers. Just so long as the work got done, the ques-
said that men lighting a lamp do not put it under a bushel,
tion of who initiated it, I or someone else, did not seem im-
but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house (Mat-
portant to me. And the results of this soon became appar-
ent: the number of parishes increased, new churches were thew 5:15). The light of Orthodoxy also is not lit for a
built, the number of parishioners grew, new institutions small circle of people. No, the Orthodox faith is catholic; it
were established. On the other hand, I cannot be accused of remembers the commandment of its Founder: ‘Go into all
impetuousness and impatience. On the contrary, when some the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation.
thought that a given project should be dropped, or strong Make disciples of all nations’ (Mark 16:15, Matthew 28:19).
disciplinary measures taken, I did not depart from meekness It is our obligation to share our spiritual treasures, our truth,
our light and our joy with those who do not have these
and patience, preferring to wait because of a fear of quench-
gifts. And this duty lies not only on pastors and mission-
ing a smoldering wick or breaking a bruised reed: who
aries, but also on lay people, for the Church of Christ, in
knows how many persons and projects were preserved in
the wise comparison of St. Paul, is a body, and in the life of
this way .... But in order not to praise myself, it is better
the body every member takes part.
for me to speak now about my infirmities.
“For each of us the dissemination of the Christian faith
“You know that there is no complete perfection in this
must be a favorite task, close to our hearts and precious to
world, that often our very virtues and perfections border
us; in this task each member of the Church must take an
on imperfection and weakness. It is not by accident that
active part — some by personal missionary effort, some by
genius and mental illness are said to be closely related. So it
monetary support and service to the ‘needs of the saints,’
is with me: that which represented a virtue and was of value
and some by prayer to the Lord that He might ‘establish
for the diocese, especially in the beginning, little by little
and increase His Church’ and that He might ‘teach the word
became harmful and brought harm in its wake. As it has
of truth’ to those who do not know Christ, might ‘reveal to
been said, I allowed my co-workers wide initiative and inde-
them the gospel of righteousness, unite them to His Holy,
pendence. But tell me, don’t you on occasion hear voices
Catholic, and Apostolic Church.’
in your own midst saying, justly and soundly, that “far too
much is permitted here,’ and that ‘some things ought to be “. . .Forgive me fathers and brothers of this holy temple;
curtailed’ (which is sometimes done, but after the fact). Or, you are close to me not only spiritually, but also through
for example, does not my patience sometimes turn into per- our common prayers, labors and life! Forgive me also others
missiveness? Or, for example, sometimes I boast that I have of my flock, scattered over the vastness of this land! For-
ropes for nerves, that | am comparatively cool when faced give me all who are in the deserts and mountains, and work-
with totally unforseen misfortunes, that I do not lose my ing in the subterranean pits of the earth, and living on is-
bearings on their account and am never surprised by them. lands far off upon the sea!
But after all, this is close to apathy and stony insensibility. “Forgive me my cathedral church. You are precious and
This is not virtue, but evil and vice, from which we ask God dear to me. During my ministry as bishop you were created,
to deliver us. during my ministry you were beautified, and during my
ministry you were made a cathedral. It may be that to
“And so it occurs to me that what has been beneficial
those who have seen the magnificent and enormous cathe-
for some time, what I was sent here to accomplish, has
drals in Russia you seem small and poor; you do not sparkle
changed and is no longer needed, that you need now some-
with gold and silver and precious stones as do those tem-
thing else, another worker with another direction and char-
ples. But for Orthodox Russians who suffered long without
acter. It is in this thought that I find the major justification
a temple you are a precious treasure... .
for the transfer of bishops from one diocese to another, and
not at all in the desire for greater comfort, peace, honors “Forgive me also this country! For some of us you are
and other earthly gifts, which is attributed — not always the fatherland, the homeland, to others you have provided
justly — to bishops at the time of their transfer. a refuge, work and prosperity, and yet others have received

100
on your free soil the liberty to confess the true faith. Of old
God spoke through the prophet: ‘Seek the welfare of the
city where I have sent you, and pray to the Lord on its be-
half, for in its welfare you will find your welfare’ (Jeremiah
29:7).
“So we also pray to the Lord that He will send to this
country abundance of the fruits of the earth, healthful sea-
sons, seasonable showers and winds, and that He will deliver
it from earthquake, flood, fire, the sword, invasion of ene-
mies and civil war.
“May this land be blessed, as well as this city and tem-
ple, and may on all of you abide the blessing of the Lord,
through His grace and love for mankind, always, now and
ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.”
Archbishop Tikhon’s last Divine Liturgy in America was
celebrated at St. Nicholas Cathedral on March 24, 1907, the
Triumph of Orthodoxy. The diocese presented him with a
Hierarchical Service Book on this day. In the inscription he
was asked to remember his American flock at every eucha-
ristic sacrifice he would offer in the years to come. That
evening, the Triumph of Orthodoxy Vespers in St. Nicholas
Cathedral was celebrated in English. On Tuesday, March 26,
over twenty priests gathered at the Cathedral in the morn-
ing to say their farewells. At 10:00 A.M. a prayer service
asking God to protect the Archbishop during his journey
was celebrated by Bishop Innocent. After giving his bless-
ings to all who were there, Archbishop Tikhon set out from
his cathedral. The passenger ship “Kronprinz Wilhelm” of Patriarch Tikhon 1865-1925
the Bremen Line departed with him at 1:00 P.M.
clergy and laity to promote conciliar government of the
Conclusion Church.
There can be no doubt that Archbishop Tikhon saw the In all aspects of his archpastoral work, Archbishop
North American mission not as a permanent extension of Tikhon was the embodiment of exceptional meekness, per-
the Church of Russia but as the local Church in America. severance and clarity of vision. What he created did not al-
All his efforts were directed towards providing this local ways survive intact in the years to come. At times the tide
Church with everything it would require to be independent of chaos and divisiveness was so strong that important ele-
and self-sustaining. It is in this light that the reforms and ments of his work seemed to be destroyed completely. But
improvements undertaken by Archbishop Tikhon, especial- time has shown that on all essential points Archbishop
ly in the years 1903-1907, must be seen. The list of major Tikhon, in his years as bishop of the Church in North Amer-
achievements is impressive: (1) the creation of largely au- ica, saw the important problems clearly, defined them cor-
tonomous vicariates; (2) the establishment of a seminary rectly and proposed the right solutions.
and a monastery; (3) the creation of a Council composed of Father Leonid Kishkovsky

PROCLAMATION: THE YEAR OF PATRIARCH TIKHON

In a joint session of the Holy Svnod and the Metropolitan Council of the Orthodox Church in
America held in October 1974, it was resolved to proclaim 1975 as “The Year of Patriarch
Tikhon”’ in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of his death. All parishes are enjoined to
acquaint the faithful with the life and deeds of the late Patriarch and his particular contribution
to the development of the Orthodox Church in America.

101
 CHURCH
St. Tikhon’s Monastery
In the early 1900’s, shortly after the reception of the
Mayfield parish into the Diocese, Hieromonk Arseny
(Chavtsov), the second pastor of the parish (1904-1906),
initiated efforts for the founding of a monastery in North
America. Citing various spiritual and practical arguments,
he proposed that part of the monastery’s function would
be to serve as a “mother house” for the monastics among
the clergy of the Mission. In the history of the North
American Diocese, much of the initial work in the creation
of parishes and missions had been done by monks. It was
the contention of Arseny that monks coming to America to
do missionary work needed a monastery in which to be
“acclimatized”’ to the American situation and to which they
would return periodically for renewal and revitalization.
Bishop Raphael at the dedication of St. Tikhon’s Orphanage and Monastery, July 31, 1905.
INSTITUTIONS
On May 15, 1905, in Cleveland, Ohio, at the 6th Con-
vention of the Russian Orthodox Catholic Mutual Aid
Society, the idea was proposed to establish a monastery and
the challenge given to the young and energetic monk Arseny
to investigate the possibilities. In June, just a few weeks
later, Archbishop Tikhon came from New York to Mayfield
to inspect a site in nearby Wayne County for the proposed
monastery and an orphanage. Traveling by horse and car-
riage from Mayfield to the Wagner farm, the Archbishop
was impressed by the beauty of the area and gave his whole-
hearted approval and personal financial support for the pur-
chase of the Wagner farm for the sum of $2580. Later ina
clergy conference held in Old Forge, Pennsylvania, on
August 2, 1905, the request was made by the assembly to
LY:
name the new monastery in South Canaan after St. Tikhon
of Zadonsk, the patron saint of Archbishop Tikhon. Archi-
mandrite Arseny, the founder and builder of the monastery,
was henceforth named abbot of the new community, which
by 1906 consisted of five monks. The monastery was dedi-
cated on July 31 by the recently consecrated Bishop,
Raphael of Brooklyn, who performed the rites on behalf of
Archbishop Tikhon.
The first pilgrimage to the monastery on the day of its
dedication, July 31, 1905, was made on foot from Mayfield,
a distance of more than ten miles. The festivities began
actually two days prior to the dedication, with the arrival
of the bishop at the Mayfield parish. A witness to the event
provides a description: On Saturday, the twenty-ninth of
July, Bishop Raphael was met at the station by Father
Arseny and his parishioners. The parish orchestra played
stirring Russian music when the train pulled into the station.
Four brotherhoods in full parade dress, each one led by a
captain wearing full uniform with swords at their sides,
officially greeted the hierarch. The uniformed men lined
both sides of the passage from the train to the carriage as an
honor guard. The captains, with swords drawn, stood at the
carriage and escorted Bishop Raphael, Father Arseny and
Father Elias Klopotovsky, who had accompanied the bishop
from Scranton. The carriage traveled from the station to the
church along the main street, which was lined with Russians
from Mayfield and the rest of the valley. Bishop Raphael
gave his archpastoral blessing to the gathering continuously
as the procession moved to the church. The procession was
met at the church by the school chiidren in their Sunday
best, and the parishioners, carrying banners and cross,
waited at the church entrance. It seemed that the population
of the entire valley had gathered at St. John’s parish for an
unprecedented festive occasion. The bishop was greeted by
Father Alexander Bogoslavsky with the cross, and having
been vested in his mantia, he entered into the church, which
was lavishly decorated, brightly illumined by candles and
overflowing with a standing congregation which sang the
Hymn to the Theotokos. After venerating the icons, Bishop
Raphael listened to the official greeting of the pastor, which
began: ““Your Grace, fortunate is the flock in Mayfield to
greet you joyously this day of your arrival in our midst. We
have not yet recovered from the feelings of joy we experi-
enced at the recent visit of our first hierarch, Archbishop
Tikhon, and now the Lord has given us this opportunity to
receive and greet with proper festivity Your Grace, and
once again to see a hierarch and to hear the celebration of
the hierarchical service. You have come to us as the first
hierarch of the Syro-Arabian Church in America, in order
to share with the Russian people the joy of the opening of
the Orphanage and the establishment of the Holy Com-
INUMNY: 2
Bishop Raphael’s response, delivered in Russian, was full
of gratitude and joy for the opportunity granted him so
soon in his episcopal rank, to be the representative of Arch-
bishop Tikhon at such a great moment in the life of the
Orthodox Church in America, to “bless the ground on
which shall be built a holy monastery, which land was ac-
guired by your efforts, which deserve the greatest praise,
and the generous donations of your devout parishioners.”
The next day, Sunday, the bishop celebrated Divine Liturgy,
with Father Arseny assisting. Father Arseny preached on
the theme of the Paralytic, and spoke of the great Christian
spirit of charity which prompted the organization of the
new orphanage and monastery.
On Sunday, July 30, the bishop and Father Arseny left
Mayfield at 3:00 P.M. by horse and carriage to go to the
site of the monastery. After a three-hour journey he was
greeted by the nun Mary, who was in charge of the orphan-
age, and by the orphans at the farm house which had been
converted for their use. In the tiny chapel of the orphanage,
the bishop gave the blessing for the celebration of the first
evening vigil service, which was attended by the bishop and
clergy, the members and staff of the orphanage, some local
Orthodox farmers and a few non-Orthodox people who
lived in the area. Hieromonk Arseny gives his personal im-
pressions of this moment.
The bishop entered the modest little church,
made a reverence before the icons and took his place
in the tiny sanctuary. The bishop gave me the blessing
to begin the service. Standing before the Holy Throne
with the censer in my hand I exclaimed: “‘Arise!”” My
heart trembled as the result of the indescribable joy
that seized it... to whom, I thought, is this my call
“Arise” directed? To the forest, to the trees, I answer-
ed in my mind, to the animals of the forest and to the
feathered birds, inhabitants of the nature which sur-
rounds us; that they from this day forward together
with all the people and the future inhabitants of this
holy habitation might offer up songs of “Glory to the
Holy, Consubstantial and undivided Trinity.” Just
then I trembled again when my lips uttered for the
first time instead of the usual “for this temple” the
words “for this holy habitation.” This service was in
memory of St. Tikhon of Zadonsk. At the Litiya, His
Grace blessed the five loaves of bread, the wheat,
wine, and oil.
The next day matins was celebrated at 8:00 A.M. for the
first pilgrims to arrive from Mayfield. Immediately follow-
ing, the Rite for the Blessing of a New Home was celebrated
for the blessing of the orphanage. The Divine Liturgy was
celebrated in the open on the spot where the first building
of the new monastery was to be constructed (the location
of the present monastery church). In addition to the bishop
and Father Arseny, the celebrants included Fathers Alexan-
der Hotovitzky, Elias Klopotovsky, Elias Zotikoff and
Alexander Bogoslavsky. More than 100 pilgrims participated
in the first service.
In December the partially constructed monastery build-
ing, containing the new chapel, was dedicated by Arch-
bishop Tikhon. On May 30, 1906, the building was blessed
and Archbishop Tikhon stated in his address:
Glory and thanksgiving to God. Our dream today
is fulfilled as we celebrate today the opening of St.
Tikhon’s Monastery, with the blessing of the first
monastery church.
Father Vladimir Borichevsky
103
 ST. TIKHON’S MONASTERY 1905—1906

Blessing of grounds by Bishop Raphael, July 31, 1905.

Dedication of the Monastery by Bishop Tikhon, Innocent

and Raphael, May 30, 1906.

104
 -
aig
if

Original monastery building and chapel, dedicated May 30, 1906.

Dedication day procession led by Father Leonid Turkevich.

inal arch leading to the Monastery.

 Va adi ae
Monastery brotherhood breaks ground and plants the Cro ss on the site of the
future Church of the Dormition.

CHURCH OF THE DORMITION

ST. TIKHON’S MONASTERY

The Church of the Dormition (right) was the second Chapel to be

built at St. Tikhon’s Monastery. After this building burned, the
services were held in the Monastery building chapel. Later, a new
chapel was erected with the new quarters for the monks and the
old monastery building was converted into the present church,

106
 Andrew Lvovich Chavtsov, the future Bishop Arseny,
was born on March 10, 1866, in the Kharkov Eparchy.
Following graduation from the Kharkov Theological Semi-
nary in 1887, he was ordained to the diaconate and priest-
hood. After serving as a priest for thirteen years, he received
monastic tonsure with the name Arseny and was appointed
Igumen of the Kuriansk Monastery in 1900. Upon arrival in
the United States in 1902, Father Arseny served in various
parishes but dreamed of establishing a monastery in the New
World. With the help and blessing of Archbishop Tikhon, he
built St. Tikhon’s Monastery in South Canaan, Pennsylvania,
in 1905 and was placed in charge of the new monastery.
Later in the same year, the grounds of the monastery were
consecrated by Bishop Raphael in the absence of Arch-
bishop Tikhon.
Soon after the establishment of the monastery, Father
Arseny was called away for other work. In 1908, he was
appointed rural dean and administrator of the Canadian
parishes by Archbishop Platon. Father Arseny returned to
Russia and was not able to return until after the Russian
Civil War, when he was evacuated to Yugoslavia. Elected
Bishop of Winnipeg by the bishops in America under the
leadership of Metropolitan Platon, Father Arseny was con-
secrated to the episcopate in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, in 1926.
After service as a bishop in America, he retired to St.
Tikhon’s Monastery in 1937. With the re-establishment of
seminaries in North America, Bishop Arseny established the
Pastoral School at St. Tikhon’s. For his work, Bishop
Arseny was raised to the rank of Archbishop in 1939. He
Hiermonk Arseny
died in retirement on October 4, 1945.

Brotherhood of St. Tikhon’s Monastery 1907

107
The North American Ecclesiastical Seminary
In 1903, an article published in New York reported on
the crowded conditions of the Missionary School and indi-
cated a further need for the establishment of a Theological
Seminary. The article noted that “during the past few years
the number of students registered for study at the Minneap-
olis Missionary School increased so rapidly that it became
necessary to refuse admittance to many applicants. A great
need has been created for the enlargement of the present
school edifice and teaching personnel. There is immediate
need for additional larger classrooms, dormitories, sleeping
and study rooms, text books, recreational space, equipment
and other facilities. But then again, another important
situation presents itself. Many spiritual fathers and lay
leaders of the Church have expressed a strong desire for the Members of the Seminary Commission: Seated are Fathers
establishment in the United States of a higher institution of Constantine Popoff, John Nedzelnitsky and Jason Kappanadze
learning — an advanced ecclesiastical school for the prepara- and an unidentified layman.
tion of students aspiring to the Holy Orders of priesthood, pose their newly acquired two-story stone and brick build-
namely a theological seminary.” ing — a former monastery edifice purchased from the
Roman Catholic Church — and moreover, expressed willing-
During the previous year, in 1902, at a meeting in New
York of the clergy of the eastern states, it was declared
ness to contribute an additional $1555.00.
unanimously that the establishment of a seminary in the Consequently Archbishop Tikhon created a Seminary
Diocese was not only desirable, but essential, indispensible Commission to analyze the situation and work out prelim-
and most urgent for the progress and growth of the Ortho- inary details for the establishment of a seminary. The Com-
dox Church in America. It further stated that the Cleveland mission consisted of Archpriest John Nedzelnitsky, Rever-
parishioners expressed readiness to surrender for this pur- end Alexander Nemolovsky, Reverend Constantine Popoff,

yy 77

American Theological Seminary in Min neapolis 1905-1906. Standing: Alexander Kukulevsky, instructor. Seated: John Semanitsky, Peter
Varlashkin, Benjamin Basalyga, Alexander Varlashkin, Joseph Stefanko, Andrew Kohanik, J. Krishka, John Reshetar, Michael Fekula, John
Gratson, M.. Pazdrey.

108
Reverend Jason Kappanadze and teacher Alexander Kuku-
levsky. The following important questions served as a guide-
line for their work:
1) What type of an educational institution will this
future seminary represent? Will it consist only of theologi-
cal classes? Would it accept only graduates of the public
and parochial church schools? Or would it represent some-
thing more tangible, solid, real — possibly one conforming
to the type of a church teachers college?
2) Where will the seminary be located? In Minneapolis,
Cleveland, or some other city? In such case, must the
Minneapolis Missionary School be abandoned as a prepara-
tory school for entry into the seminary? Or should it be
transferred to some other city?
3) Approximately how many instructors would be need-
ed to complete the teaching personnel? Other needed
personnel?
4) What means, monetary and otherwise, would be
necessary to promote and maintain the institution in proper
dignity and honorable scholastic standard? Other questions
pertaining to same?
The commission being instructed was given the “‘go-
ahead” signal on this important matter and was to report its
findings to the Archbishop and his council.
Following a very favorable report by the commission,
Archbishop Tikhon founded the first American Orthodox
Theological Seminary, in Minneapolis in 1905. The seminary
replaced the first American Orthodox Missionary School, Father Leonid Turkevich (later Metropolitan Leonty), the Dean
established and located in the city of Minneapolis, 1897- of the North American Ecclesiastical Seminary.
1905. That school was transferred to Cleveland, Ohio, and
became known as the “Bursa” — a preparatory school or
college. The best and most qualified honor students of the Among the students admitted to the first seminary were
missionary school were first to be admitted to the seminary. Benjamin Basalyga (later Archbishop of Pittsburgh and West
Virginia), John Semanitsky, Joseph Dzvonchik, John Grat-
The first active dean of this newly established theological son, Alexander Varlashkin, Theodore Pechinsky, Joseph
institution was the Very Reverend Archpriest Constantine Stefanko, Stefan Osipoff, Gregory and John Soroka, Basil
Popoff, graduate of the Vologda Seminary, Russia, who was Repella, Theodore Kondratik, Jacob Piatecky, Theodore
pastor of St. Mary’s Church, Minneapolis, 1899-1907. Dr. Vaniga, Andrew Sura, John Adamiak, John Telep, John
Basil Metrofanovich Bensin, graduate professor of the Mos- Dzubay, Joseph Kostick, Michael Rusynyk, Vladimir Lev-
cow Theological Academy, and the Right Reverend Arch- kanich, Andrew Vanush, Steven Lukach, Joseph Semanshko,
priest Alexander Kukulevsky, graduate of the Kiev Theo- A. Pazdrey, Michael Fekula, Andrew Solanka, P. Pozdnan-
logical Seminary, were the first instructors. sky, D. Krishka, Paul Tkach, all of whom entered the priest-
In 1906, the Very Reverend Leonid Turkevich was ap- hood. Others who attended the seminary but were not
pointed rector and dean of the first American Orthodox ordained were John S. Reshetar, Steven S. Podany, Eli
Theological Seminary. Father Turkevich, with the degree of Dzubay (Zubay), Walter Gladky, Leonid Repich, John
Doctor and Candidate of Theology, was a graduate of the Kurrila, George McKulla, Andrew Kohanik, John Semanko,
Kiev Theological Academy. He also served as pastor of the John Konstantinovich, Theodore and Taras Danchenko,
Minneapolis St. Mary’s Church while serving as dean of the Peter Varlashkin, Sam Chupick, and many others whose
seminary (1907-1912). names are not known. School started on September 1. There
were two divisions. The senior division was instructed in a
Other learned theologians and instructors were the Right
way that would prepare students for ordination at the end
Reverend Archpriest Vasily Vasilieff, graduate of the Ufim
of the year. In July 1906, at the end of the first school
Theological Seminary; the Very Reverend Michael Ijinsky
year, three students were ordained: Fathers Fekula, Pazdrey,
(later to become Archbishop Makary), graduate of St.
and Pozdnansky.
Petersburg Theological Academy; the Very Reverend In-
gram W. Irvine, a former Episcopalian minister, converted While the seminary was in Minneapolis (1905-1912), the
to the Orthodox Church in 1905; and Cleora Francella L. Divine Liturgy and other church services were celebrated
Smith, English teacher. in the English language. Father Ingram Irvine and other

109
 An early class of the North Ameri-
can Theological Seminary. Standing
on the top step are Father Alexander
Kukulevsky, Basil Bensin and Father
Leonid Turkevich.

Seminary Students in 1908

pastors conducted services in the church’s small sanctuary,
while the seminary student choir sang the responses and
hymns in English. The “Service Book” translated by Isabel
F. Hapgood in 1906 was in constant use. Looking forward
to Americanization and the future of the Orthodox Church
in America, Metropolitan Leonty, former rector of the
first Orthodox Seminary on this continent wrote: ““The
Americanization of the Orthodox in this country is strong
enough to force the members of this Church to have re-
course to the neutral language (English) — which to a good
many of them has become the natural language — of all
American citizens for all everyday affairs. It would seem
that by this everyday use of the English language, Orthodox
Americans are preparing themselves for the future exterior
expression of their unity in faith and spirit.”
As most of the Orthodox parishes were located in the
eastern district of the United States, the majority of the
students in the seminary came from that part of the coun-
try. To be closer in proximity to the districts from which
most of the students came, the seminary was moved to
Tenafly, New Jersey, in 1912, and later to New York City.
In 1923, because of financial difficulties, it was closed by
order of His Eminence, Metropolitan Platon. However the
graduate students organized an ‘Alumni Association of the
Orthodox Theological Seminary” with the aim of promot-
ing reopening of the seminary. Orthodox theological educa-
tion in America entered a dormant phase, but the spirit
behind it remained alive.

110
 ARCHPRIEST CONSTANTINE POPOFF

Archpriest Constantine Vasilievich Popoff, the son of a

priest in Vologda, Russia, was born on May 10, 1875. At
age twenty he was graduated from the Vologda Theological
Seminary and was assigned as chanter to the Vologda
Cathedral. In 1896 he was married and then ordained to the
diaconate. He petitioned the Holy Synod to serve in the
North American Mission and upon his arrival that same
year and was ordained to the priesthood and assigned first
to serve the Kvikhpakh Mission in Alaska and then as a travel-
ing circuit priest in the Allegheny Valley, serving also
parishes at Osceola Mills and Philipsburg, Pennsylvania. In
1899 he was transferred to Holy Virgin Protection Church
in Minneapolis and assigned as rector and teacher of Cate-
chetical, Liturgical and Pastoral Theology at the Minneapo-
lis Missionary School. When the Mission School was trans-
formed into a Seminary in 1905, Father Constantine was
elected chairman of the Minneapolis Theological Seminary
Council. During his years in Minneapolis, he made several
missionary trips throughout Minnesota, Wisconsin, North
and South Dakota, and Canada, and he accompanied Arch-
bishop Tikhon on his episcopal journeys throughout those
areas as well. (cf. Parish Development: Canada)
Professor Paul Zaichenko, choir director of the Minneap-
olis parish and instructor of liturgical music at the Minneap-
olis Theological Seminary, later described Father Constan-
tine as follows: “Father Constantine Popoff played an
important part in the parish. He was a most generous man;
friendly to the teachers, fatherly to the students, kind and
affable to parishioners. He took great interest in Church
affairs and there was peace and absolute order in the parish.
He was an authority on religious matters, the Bible, and
canon law; a strict economist in parish and domestic affairs;
devoted to his duties as a Bible teacher. May God send us
more priests of such pleasing personality, sincerity, honesty
and nobility of character.”
Archpriest Constantine received several honors in recog-
In 1907 Father Constantine returned to Russia and nition of his missionary work, the reception of converts,
served there as a prison chaplain, as pastor of the church in and his outstanding pedagogical work. His wife died in
a school for the deaf and dumb, and as a teacher of religion Leningrad in 1940, where two of his children still live; a
in secular schools in Petrograd. In 1928 he was sent to serve third resides in this country. Archpriest Constantine was a
| various parishes in Europe until he returned to the United prolific writer, and many of his writings remain unpublished,
States in the same year. He served parishes in Sioux City, as are his memoirs. Many of his articles appeared in the
Iowa (1928), Windsor, Ontario (1929-1930), Hartshorne, journal Nash Put (“Our Road”), published in Chicago. In
Oklahoma (1931), and Joliet, Illinois (1931-1945). During his last years Father Constantine was deeply concerned
his pastorate in Joliet, he also served as a member and later about the divisions in American Orthodoxy.
secretary, of the Chicago Diocesan Administration. In May Archpriest Constantine Popoff died on October 19,
1945 he was transferred to Bryte, California, as pastor of 1965, at the age of ninety. His Burial Office was sung at the
the Church of the Holy Myrrhbearers, but soon, in July, he St. Spiridon Cathedral in Seattle, Washington, where he was
was sent to Santa Rosa to the Church of the Protection of living in retirement. Although Archpriest Constantine was a
the Theotokos. member of the Patriarchal Russian Orthodox Church when
he died, those who attended to his burial rites came from
In March 1946 Archpiiest Constantine was received into
the Patriarchal Russian Orthodox Church, serving temporar-
other parts of the Orthodox Church: two priests and a
protodeacon from the Metropolia and two Greek priests,
ily in Brookside, Alabama, and San Diego, California. From
including one from the Russian Synodal jurisdiction. It
November 12, 1946, Father Constantine was secretary of
would seem that only in death could Archpriest Constan-
the (Patriarchal) Metropolitan Council in New York and
tine’s desire for peace and unity be realized.
from January 1947 until his retirement in June of that year
he was acting dean of the New York St. Nicholas Cathedral. Father David Abramtsev

11]
 MY RECOLLECTIONS
Desiring to work in America I asked Archbishop Tikhon
if it would not be possible for me to get a suitable appoint-
ment in the United States after completing my studies at
the Academy.
“T think that we will need you in America,” he an-
swered, “I have decided to found a Seminary for young
people born in America, who intend, as most of the priests
from Russia, to stay there for good. This Seminary would
not be like the Russian Ecclesiastical Seminaries. We must
establish a school that would suit the needs of people in
America. You would be the first instructor. Upon your
arrival to America, your first task would be to arrange a
schedule for the Seminary, and secondly, to acquaint
yourself with the condition and needs of Russian-American
people. The seminary is to be in Minneapolis, a university
city, where you could study if you should so wish.
Toward the end of 1904, Nicholas, Bishop of Tavrich-
esk, was appointed member of the National Council. On
his way to St. Petersburg he visited the Troitsko-Sergievsky
Monastery, where the Moscow Ecclesiastical Academy was
located.
During the quiet days at the monastery, he interviewed
the students and held long and intimate conversations with
them. He was pleased to learn of my desire to go to Amer-
ica, and offered to write to Archbishop Tikhon and send
his recommendation, for Bishop Nicholas knew me well,
as a seminarian at Simferopol.
While in America, Bishop Nicholas had taken a personal
interest in preparing young men of American birth for the
priesthood. The ablest students of the Minneapolis Mis-
sionary School, organized by him, were sent to Russia,
where they entered the seminaries as scholarship students,
thus curtailing the expenditures of the diocesan funds.
The Holy Synod offered 35 scholarships for the American
Diocese.
In August 1905 I came to New York, where I met Arch-
priest A. Hotovitzky, Archpriest B. Turkevich, and his
Eminence Raphael, Bishop of Brooklyn. Archbishop
Tikhon was away, but had given orders that I should leave
for Chicago at once, where he would be for a few days.
After staying but two days in New York, I left for Chicago,
and was received very cordially by Archbishop Tikhon. I
remained in Chicago for a week, and had long talks with
the Archbishop concerning my future work in the Semi-
nary. I felt very strange amidst the new surroundings, but
he reassured me and asked me to write regularly and in
detail of the progress of the new Seminary.
On my arrival to Minneapolis, the students were al-
ready gathered. I was surprised at the diversity of their
ages and scholastic training. Among them were adult men,
and even middleaged, together with children from 13 to
14 years. The Seminary was situated in the old Mission
112
School, built during Bishop Nicholas’ ministry and most
of the seminarians were its former pupils. The faculty
consisted of four persons, Father Constantine Popoff,
rector; instructor A. G. Kukulevsky; Miss Smith, an Eng-
lish teacher and myself. Former pupils of the Missionary
School spoke and wrote good Russian. It was only later
that I could fully appreciate the work that had been ac-
complished by the Missionary School and their Russian
teachers, such as A. Kukulevsky, Archmandrite Anatoly,
afterwards Bishop of Elizabethgrad and member of the
National Duma, Mr. Kazansky and Paul P. Zaichenko, an
accomplished choirmaster and musician.
School and household affairs were administered by the
Teacher’s Council, composed of the above mentioned
names. Father Constantine was its chairman, and I was
elected secretary; I held that position during my five year
sojourn in Minneapolis.
Sincere comradeship existed among the teachers of the
Seminary. On Christmas, 1905, I received a very friendly
and encouraging letter from Bishop Nicholas. He loved
Minneapolis and was extremely interested in the Seminary.
I must confess, that being a young and inexperienced
teacher, I had to prepare myself thoroughly for every
lesson. I also decided to acquaint myself with American
schools, and to master the English language. With this end
in mind, I started attending kindergartens, and then the
public schools going from one grade to another, so that at
the end, I had a very complete picture of American educa-
tional methods. My observations did not drive me into
raptures and I criticized the standardized method of
American teaching, yet I was convinced that certain points
in American schools should be adopted by the Seminary,
as Archbishop Tikhon had once suggested. Also I felt that
the seminarians should be prepared to take the public
school teacher’s examinations, so that they would be well
qualified to teach public schools.
The curriculum for the first school year included the
following subjects: study of the New Testament, church
history, Russian grammar, church singing, and Russian
literature. The history of the United States and civics were
taught in English. The older students were put in a special
group to study the practical side of the ministry, such
subjects as homiletics and practical manual of administra-
tion for priests in the form of Pastoral Theology courses.
Church services were attended by the seminarians in
the new, beautiful church whose construction was not yet
finished.
Thus, Bishop Tikhon’s plan to establish a Seminary in
America was realized. The Seminary was opened in
Minneapolis in 1905S.
Dr. Basil M. Benzin
 Father Alexis Toth and the Sts. Peter and Paul Brotherhood
THE
The brotherhoods, which played a significant role in the
growth of Orthodoxy in America at the end of the nine-
teenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries, have
roots in similar societies which existed in Russia in the six-
teenth century. At that time, Patriarch Joachim of Constan-
tinople, while traveling through western Russia, gave his
hierarchical sanction to Orthodox Christians who formed
brotherhoods for the purpose of protection of the Orthodox
faith from the Unia and from Latinization by the Polish
Roman Catholic government. These brotherhoods promoted
Orthodoxy by erecting temples of worship, organizing
parochial schools in cities and villages, opening public
libraries of Orthodox literature for the sake of enlightening
future generations with the truth of the Orthodox faith,
and promoting the study of Orthodox art. In addition, they
organized and supported charities, orphanages, hospitals,
hostels and monastic communities for the good of the Or-
thodox Christians.
In the last decades of the nineteenth century, Greek-
Catholic Carpatho-Russians and Galicians began migrating
from the Austro-Hungarian Empire to industrial areas in
the United States in order to find a better material life and
religious freedom. Simultaneously, these immigrants had a
need for some agency or project which could insure for
them a certain material and moral survival in their new and
strange American surroundings. Such was the nature of the
“Greek-Catholic Mutual Aid Society” which had brother-
1888 - Minneapolis
BROTHERHOODS
hoods in Minneapolis, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Wilkes-Barre and
Osceola Mills.
Although religious tolerance was a basic tenet of this
organization, many ofits members, including one ofits very
initiators, Father Alexis Toth, were expelled from its
membership because of their return to Orthodoxy. Since it
was the intention of the Orthodox to bring back as many as
possible of the faithful who had been under the Uniate
yoke, the Orthodox had to form such an organization of
national dimensions, but with the additional purpose of re-
uniting Uniates to the Orthodox faith and solidifying their
commitment to the Orthodox Church. For this reason,
Father Toth, with the endorsement of Bishop Nicholas,
ruling hierarch of the North American Mission, convened a
meeting of clergy and lay representatives from all local
Orthodox brotherhoods on April 10, 1895, at Wilkes-Barre,
Pennsylvania. The meeting resulted in the organization of
the Russian American Orthodox Mutual Aid Society (later,
ROCMAS), under the protection of St. Nicholas the
Wonderworker. The Holy Synod of the Russian Church
approved and gave its blessing to the federation on Septem-
ber 27, 1895 (Ukase No. 4707).
The local brotherhoods which constituted the Society
were: St. Alexander Nevsky, Pittsburgh; Holy Dormition,
Wilkes-Barre; Sts. Peter and Paul, Minneapolis; Sts. Peter
and Paul, Bridgeport; St. John the Baptist, Phillipsburg; St.
iS
Michael the Archangel, Old Forge; Nativity of the Holy
Theotokos, Osceola Mills; St. Nicholas, Streator, Illinois.
Total membership numbered 523 persons.
In Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, at the Society’s initial
meeting, A. E. Olarovsky, Russian Consul General in New
York City, was chosen as its chairman-treasurer; I. Murzin,
of the New York City Brotherhood, vice-chairman; and
priest Evtikhy Balanovich, rector of the New York City
parish, secretary. Following Father Balanovich’s return to
Russia in 1897, he was replaced by his successor at the New
York parish, priest Alexander Hotovitzky.
First Year of Existence
In its first year, the society’s treasury collected $1,052.22
and added eight more brotherhoods: St. John the Baptist,
Sheppton, Pennsylvania; Sts. Cyril and Methodius, Mayfield,
Pennsylvania; St. Basil, Ansonia, Connecticut; St. Nicholas,
Cleveland, Ohio; Sts. Peter and Paul, Buffalo, New York;
Sts. Cyril and Methodius, Catasaqua, Pennsylvania; Holy
Trinity, Bridgeport, Connecticut; St. Nicholas, Sheppton,
Pennsylvania, thus enlarging the membership by 137 more
THE MEMBERSHIP AND THEIR NEEDS:
In two years, therefore, the Society has grown by
18 brotherhoods and 606 members. This is no small
growth rate, if we remember that the Society accepts
into membership only Orthodox Christians who are
members of purely Orthodox brotherhoods, not
mixed, and that its members are not native Americans
with roots in this country, but settlers hoping to find
a better life for themselves. It follows, therefore, that
the growth of the Society is closely linked with the
spread of Orthodoxy in America, especially upon
waves of immigrants from Europe. The growth of the
Society also depends upon the opportunity for em-
ployment of its members in any given location.
In terms of its ethnic composition the Society is
composed of three unequal groups. The largest of
these groups is the Carpatho-Russian, from Galicia,
Croatia, and the Carpathian regions of Slovakia. The
majority of this group returned to Orthodoxy from
the Unia through the efforts of our American Mission.
The second group, quantitatively much smaller than
the first, consists of Slavs from the Balkan peninsula:
Serbs and people from Montenegro, Several brother-
hoods, Export, two in McKeesport, Benwood, and the
Pittsburgh brotherhood of St. John the Baptist, are
composed almost entirely of these Slavs. Finally, the
most insignificant part is composed of Russian immi-
grants, mainly from the Southwestern region — the
Kingdom of Poland, Lithuania, and the Ukraine.
In terms of material position most of the members
of the brotherhoods are poor working people who
have left their native land to find better sources of
income. With the high cost of living here and small
daily or weekly wages, one can say that he is here and
is alive. Only a very few have succeeded to build them-
114
members. At the society’s first convention in April 1896, in
New York City, 18 brotherhoods were represented.
Aims of the Society
Among the many tasks of the brotherhoods, one of their
most significant was the founding of Russian Orthodox
parishes in the East. During these early years, The Light,
the official organ of the Society, was a vital news medium
for the entire North American Mission. As a result of this
basic formative work in the area of Orthodox Christian life
in America, the number of parishes in the Mission rapidly
increased. At its peak, the Society had 224 chartered local
chapters with 9719 members, while the number of parishes
in the Mission had risen from 18 to 315.
Analysis of the aims and purposes of the Russian-
American Orthodox Mutual Aid Society is perhaps best
made by the actions and minutes of the Society itself. The
minutes of the Second Convention, held on May 10, 1889,
in Allegheny, reveal the scope of the activity and concerns
of the membership of the young federation.
selves up above this, mainly through independent
labor, shops, farms, smithies, etc. As a result of this
material scarcity and the precariousness of its mem-
bers, the Society often receives insufficient payments
and some even leave it. When there is work in a given
place and the pay is good, dues are received regularly.
When unemployment occurs or wages drop, the
Society must wait months for its dues and even loses
members. This latter fact is responsible for the ex-
treme instability of the membership of the Society.
The inability to fulfill his financial obligations often
forces a member to resign from the Society. The
search for work often leads the member to places
where there are no brotherhoods to which he could
possibly belong. Thus, departure from the member-
ship rolls might be unwilling, but unavoidable. Finally,
after two or three years of fruitless wandering
throughout America, the member is attracted back to
his native land and, thus, leaves the Society. All of
these, however, are unavoidable occurrences and are
in no way to be construed as the fault of these mem-
bers or as the absence on their part of the desire to
fulfill their obligations or to see the Society flourish.
Their poverty, search for work, and attraction to their
native land does not deserve reproaches or penalties
or threats of exclusion from the society; it is simply
not in their power to avoid these things. These mate-
rial problems are not lessened by another sad fact,
the low level of literacy among the members, which
even renders correspondence with the Society diffi-
gult. 4
One must admit that the center of life for the
Society is Pennsylvania. Here the Society was born,
here it grows more and more each day by way of the
reunion of the Uniates. The Orthodox Church is grow-
ing, new brotherhoods enter the Society and from
here, spreading westward, the Church and the Society
are growing, spreading even to the furthest states,
such as Washington. The role of Pennsylvania in the
destiny of the Society is understandable, if one takes
into account that it is the center of industrial activity
in America and, more than other states, offers to the
immigrant who is seeking work the chance of constant
employment. It is the first stop for such an immigrant
who has crossed the Atlantic Ocean and as a result has
been selected for settlement by the Carpatho-Russians
who form the largest group within the Society. These
people in turn attract their kinsmen to join them.
THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY:
The Society, as expressed in Part II, paragraph One
of the Statutes, ought to devote itself to two goals —
moral and material.
In relation to the first goal the activity of the
Society has taken the following forms:
The Society, through its members, has de-
votedly and successfully labored to spread Or-
thodoxy in America; many converts, mainly
from the Unia, have been attracted to Ortho-
doxy and to the Society. The first place in this
work must be assigned to the local Orthodox
missionaries, the clergy of our Eparchy, who
are also members of the Society. Their great
success can be measured by noting the union of
the following brotherhoods to the Society:
Marblehead, Wilkeson, the Philipsburg brother-
hood of St. Michael the Archangel, and the
Pittsburgh brotherhood of St. John the Baptist.
Undoubtedly, however, other members of the
Society, not directly involved in missionary
activity, have contributed to this success, es-
pecially the Carpatho-Russians, who testify
to the truth of Orthodoxy before their Uniate
countrymen.
The members of the Society eagerly fulfilled
as much as possible the pledge of the previous
Convention to aid in the construction of
churches and schools. Several brotherhoods
donated their labor for this cause. In this regard
it is necessary to give special attention to the
Yonkers brotherhood, which constructed a
church with its own money and labor.
(NOTE: In the third session, “an important
question concerning the participation of the
Mutual Aid Society in the construction of new
churches was settled. The Philadelphia brother-
hood, through its delegate, proposed the follow-
ing question: if one of the brotherhoods has
begun the construction of a church with the
permission of the Bishop, would it not be pos-
sible to tax the members of the Society 25¢
for its construction. The delegates unanimously
decreed that not only was it possible, but it
should be done under the following conditions:
that such a tax be levied only once a month
and only with the permission of the Bishop.
This decree should be published in the statutes
for the purposes of information and guidance.”’)
The Society attempted to maintain as much
as possible the publication of the paper Sver.
The Board of Directors of the Society active-
ly looked after the religious and moral needs of
the members of the Society. With this in view,
icons, liturgy books, and calendars were pro-
cured in order to be sold to members and others
who might desire them. Books and brochures of
a religious and moral nature were sold to mem-
bers at a reasonable price. It is necessary to
mention here the printing of the statutes of the
Society in the Serbian and Slovak languages so
that all members might be acquainted with the
goals and tasks of the Society. The Serbian
version was translated by Hieromonk Sebastian
(Dabovich).
(NOTE: Several decisions and actions during
the meeting revealed the degree of mixture in
ethnic backgrounds, “‘At the beginning of the
meeting congratulatory telegrams and letters
were read. From the editorial board of the
American Slovak News, published in Pittsburgh,
a letter was received in which, among other
things, the thought was expressed that Russians
and Slovaks should not be divided, but rather,
as soon as possible, work together for the glory
of all Slavic peoples. Also, in considering the
obligatory subscription to the magazine Sver,
the delegates decided that the regulation of the
last convention concerning obligatory subscrip-
tion ofall members to the magazine for a dollar
a year be changed for the following reasons:
The Serbian brotherhoods do not understand
the Russian language of the journal; the Sister-
hoods have many members whose husbands
belong to brotherhoods and, thus, already re-
ceive the paper and, finally, Slovak members of
the brotherhoods read only the Latin alphabet.”)
Finally, the very growth of the Society, the
facts of which are given above, is nothing else
but the spread and establishment of the ideas of
Orthodoxy and nationality, the principles of
Christian charity and mutual help and, conse-
quently, the fulfillment, through the labors of
its members, of the moral aims of the Society.
In conclusion to the Minutes, the following was stated:
Examining the record of our Society, we should
note with joy the fact that people more and more
look favorably upon it and are inclined to show more
and more confidence in those representing it. The
growth of the Society testifies to this as nothing else
can. But what are the reasons for this occurrence? If
they are temporary and accidental, then undoubtedly
115
 it is necessary to look at the inevitable fact of the
Society’s disappearance. Fortunately, we have full
reason to presume otherwise.
The Society enjoys the good will of the people of
Slavic descent, settlers from Europe. But it could not
do otherwise, as its principles fully answer to the
people’s spiritual and material needs. These needs are
related to the fully natural striving to create for them-
selves a little corner in a far, alien region, where they
would all be united in a unity of faith and nationality,
in a union of charity and mutual aid, where the alien
concept of “help yourself’ would not be so strongly
and painfully felt. This is what the Society does. Its
principles are the principles which are native and dear
to the people through their faith and nationality —
the principles of charity and spiritual and material
support.
The people have confidence in the Society. This
was also an inevitable occurrence. It is impossible not
to have confidence in it because its important officers
are people with known authority, and, therefore,
under control. These are members of the local clergy.
Any act of theirs which could be considered blame-
worthy in relation to the Society would be in direct
contradiction to their calling and would be reflected
in their official position. They themselves are under
the jurisdiction and control of their bishop, their Con-
sistory, and the Holy Russian Synod. At their head,
as the Honorary Chairman of the Society, stands the
Diocesan Bishop of the Aleutians and Alaska, a figure
with holy authority for the Orthodox person. This is
ALASKAN
Other groups of Orthodox brotherhoods followed later.
In 1896, only one year after the founding of ROCMAS, the
monk Anatolius established a unique brotherhood in Alaska
as a means of appealing to the Indians to assist and defend
themselves. The brotherhood is described by Father Ana-
tolius:
My efforts resulted in the formation (in January
1896) of an Indian Temperance and Mutual Aid Soci-
ety. The following is a list of the first members:
Jacob Kanakut, Anna Kuttla,. Michael Shtattlew,
Maria Lkantoo, Nicephorus Kulkita, Elizabeth
Kishekh, Pelagia Siquetla, Charlampius Katan, Xenia
Onkelat, Andrew Tweek, Maria Huk-kaat, Andrew
Kentukotl, Anastasia Hutke, Basil Kavakhnak, Simeon
Kakvaish, Elikanida Kussly.
It was with the assistance of only these few persons
that a statute of the new society was composed. This
statute received the sanction of His Grace Bishop
Nicholas, and is now in force. It is not long, consisting
of only thirteen articles or paragraphs; but many
sides of Indian life are therein foreseen. Here are the
thirteen articles.
116
an undoubted guarantee for the people that the
affairs of the Society are conducted in an unblemished
manner. In the eyes of our people such an organiza-
tion of our Society is in no way similar to other local
organizations pursuing the same aims, for example,
the Uniate organization, where officials are under the
control only of the members of the society, where
the members are deprived of the authority of servants
of the Church, and where justice can be found only
in a lawsuit. These thoughts, the thoughts of the
people themselves, have been expressed by them not
once, both in oral and written fashion.
If these reasons for the good will and confidence of
the people towards the Society do not exist outside
of the Society, in a temporary or accidental fashion,
but rather flow in the Society itself, in its organization
and implementation of its principles, it remains for us
only to preserve the good will of the people and to
continue to act so as to evoke their confidence, and
the flourishing growth of our Society in the future
is beyond doubt.
Leading churchmen in the organization of the ROCMAS
and those who held official positions were Father Alexis
Toth; Father John Nedzelnitsky; Father Alexander Hoto-
vitzky; Father John Kochurov; Archimandrite Anatoly;
Father Constantine Popoff; Father Victor Stepanoff; and
Deacon (later Father) Vladimir Kalnev. At the 1897 con-
vention, Father John Nedzelnitsky was elected an honorary
member of the society as were also Bishop Nicholas of Sim-
feropol, Archpriest D. Sokolov and Nicholas Orloff.
BROTHERHOOD
1) Only persons residing in Sitka can be members.
2) Any person wishing to become a member must de-
clare his or her intention to the priest.
3) The candidate must pledge him or herself in the
church to observe the following rules:
a) never to drink wine or any other spirituous
drinks;
b) Not to play cards or other hazard games;
c) not to perform any ancient heathen rites;
d) not to share in any heathen amusements or
games;
e) to avoid quarrels;
f) not to slander anybody;
g) not to observe the law ofblood vengence;
h) not to believe in spirits or the Shamans;
i) not to hold heathen commemorative feasts for
the dead.
All these rules to stand for ever.
4) Every member shall pay 25 cents dues every
month; members, if they wish, may pay a year’s dues
in advance.

5) A member who has omitted paying his dues for a
term of six months, forfeits his right to assistance.
6) The membership dues form a fund, out of which
aid is given not alone to members, but to poor persons
generally, especially orphan children. The Society
gives from $5 to $10 to bury a poor member, and
from $1 to $3 a week in sickness; in other cases it
uses its discretion.
7) All members must be present at the funeral of one
of their number, holding lighted candles.
8) There is to be no funeral feast, except the usual
simple meal; the funeral is performed by the members
themselves.
9) In church, during the reading of the Gospel, the
members stand with candles in their hands, which
UROBA
The second major federation of brotherhoods, the
UROBA, came into being in 1915. In December 1913, dis-
satisfied with the continued Latinist politics of the Uniate
Bishop Ortinsky and his clerical supporters, the members of
the Uniate community of Monessen, originally established
by the missionary Eugene Volkay in 1902, accepted the
Russian Orthodox priest Vladimir Levkanich as their pastor.
The following year, at the thirteenth convention of the
Sojedinenije (the Union of Greek Catholic Brotherhoods in
North America), held in Scranton, the delegates of the
Monessen Lodge No. 188 were expelled as “‘schismatics.”
On July 18, 1915, in corporate reaction to the expulsion
of their representatives from the Sojedinenije convention,
the members of the Monessen fraternity met to declare their
independence and reorganization under the name Greek
Catholic Russian Pravoslavnii Brotherhood. In this endeavor,
they placed themselves under the patronage of Sts. Cyril
and Methodius, Equals-to-the-Apostles and Evangelizers of
the Slavs. The first executive committee of the Brotherhood
were Vladimir Levkanich, spiritual advisor; George Chuma,
candles are distributed by two members elected for
the purpose by the society.
10) Any member who violates the rules of the statute,
is tried by the society, and, after two or three trans-
gressions, is expelled.
11) The business of the society is transacted by the
priest and by two assistants, Indians, elected by the
society.
12) The society’s funds are kept in the church.
13) The members themselves look after the observ-
ance of the statute.
It is now more than a year since the society was
founded. In this span of time it has already experi-
enced both good and evil. The membership has fluc-
tuated in numbers. One thing, however, is noteworthy:
that all the original members have kept their pledges
unswervingly. The oath which every member takes on
entering they have held sacred the entire time.
True, the bulk of the population has shown violent
hostility to the society. But that is a good sign. Right
and truth have never met with a favorable reception
from the world: yet it turned out that, in the end,
they have always overcome the world and its denizens.
Such are the hopes our society cherishes. In the mean-
time it finds plenty to do within its own circle. The
members have accomplished not a little in the way of
mutual aid in cases of sickness and death.
But they will have to work a great deal at their
own improvement if these hopes are ever really to
come true.
Anatolius, Monk
Sitka, Alaska
(July 1897)
president; John Barna, vice-president; Peter Ratica, secre-
tary; Joseph Firer, treasurer; and Michael Skurkay, John
Petruska, Michael Nestor, Peter Skurkay, John Latkanich
and Nicholas Studeniak, trustees.
Active in organizing lodges in the Monongahela Valley
region were Rev. Andrew Slepecky, Basil Krenitsky, Peter
Semak, John Fedeleschak, John Markus, Michael Kohut,
George Mihalik and George Petrichko. In later administra-
tions, the ranks of these pioneer organizers were augmented
by the following: Peter Polivak, Rev. John Obletiloff, Rev.
John Yanchisin, Nicholas Pachuta, Peter Kormos, Stephen
Emrick, Rev. Michael Tidick, Rev. Joseph Stefanko, and
John Skunda.
Steps toward the full concretization of the Brotherhood
succeeded one another at a rapid pace. On September 16,
1915, a Pre-Conventional Executive Meeting was held in
Monessen with the participation, among others, of Rev.
Michael Perhach of Brownsville, Rev. Hotovicky of McKees
Rocks, Rev. Bazilevich of Pittsburgh, George Berdar and
Andrew Racin of New Salem. On November 21, 1915, the
ORG
application for official chartering was signed. On December
27-28, 1915, the First Executive Convention was held in
Monessen under the chairmanship of George Chuma. In
attendance were delegates from the seven lodges then estab-
lished: Monessen (2), Monongahela, New Salem, Braddock,
Duquesne, and McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania. It was also at
this first convention that the Brotherhood newspaper, the
Pravoslavnii Russkii Viestnik, was founded, with Nicholas
Lomakin as its first editor. On June 16, 1916, the organiza-
tion was chartered by the Court of Common Pleas of West-
moreland County, Pennsylvania.
One of the high points in the early history of the UROBA
was its Fifth Executive Convention, gathered on May 29-
June 2, 1922, in Monongahela, Pennsylvania. It was during
this meeting that ratification was given to the merger of the
American-Russian Brotherhood with the UROBA. Two
years later, the modification in the organization’s name —
to the present United Russian Orthodox Brotherhood of
America — was approved, with the necessary charter amend-
ments, by the Common Pleas Court of Westmoreland
County, on December 29, 1924.
At the time of the Tenth Anniversary celebration of the
UROBA in 1925, its membership was grouped in 87 general
lodges in Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Illinois, West Vir-
Convention of the Russian American Mutual Aid Society with Bishop Tikhon and prominent
ginia, New Jersey, Alabama, Indiana, and Kentucky, with
13 Sokol branches and 55 junior lodges. Since then, its ex-
pansion has been monumental.
The strength of the UROBA has always been the convic-
tion and dedication of its members, preserved in unswerving
continuity with the ideals of its founders. Welcoming into
its ranks countless former Uniates who, in the immigration,
returned to the Orthodox Church of their forefathers, the
UROBA has granted fraternal security and aid, both ecclesi-
ally and nationally, to its widely scattered membership. As
the current president of the Brotherhood, Paul Ratica,
has observed, “All succeeding administrations, including the
present one, continued to foster the ideals set by our found-
ers and were active in propagating the truths of the Ortho-
dox faith and the solid national ideals of Russian unity and
brotherhood.”
Thus we see the significance of the brotherhoods in the
early period for the life of the Church and her members.
During this time they truly functioned not only for the
Church, but within and together with the leadership of the
Church for the preservation and growth of Orthodoxy in
America.
priests of the Mission
 PARISH DEVELOPMENT 1898 - 1906

As indicated above, the brotherhoods were instrumental

in the establishment of many parishes and assisted the
assimilation of new immigrants into existing parishes.
During the period of Tikhon’s administration (1898-1907),
more than twenty parishes were organized or returned from
the Unia in the United States, at least fifteen in Canada,
and several in the Syrian and Serbian missions. The 1902-
1903 parish listing numbers 37 parishes in the Diocese in
the United States, two in Canada, and one in the Syro-Arab
mission, plus 16 parishes in Alaska (chapels not listed). By
1906, the last full year of Tikhon’s administration, the list
had grown to 45 parishes in the United States, 17 in Canada,
7 Syro-Arab, 6 Serbian, and 16 parishes and 37 chapels in
Alaska. (Cf. Appendix)

Midwest and West Coast

Wisconsin:
In the early 1900’s, parishes were established in several
ruraland mining areas (cf. Chapter II for Pueblo and Calhan,
Colorado). In Wisconsin, parishes were organized in Huron
(or Stanley —1906), Lublin (1908) and Cornucopia (1909).
Most of these parishes followed the same pattern of develop-
ment as the parish in Clayton. The settlers were basically
farmers, though some worked in lumber camps or saw mills.
As soon as a sufficient number of families could be gathered
together, a parish was formed, usually with the assistance
of the priest in Minneapolis, who also continued to service
them until a permanent priest could be found. Finally, a
priest began to service the two communities of Huron and
Above: Church in Huron, Wisconsin.
Below: Parishioners of Wisconsin parishes gather at Lublin 1923
 Lublin, staying two weeks at a time in each community.
During this time, religious instruction was conducted in the
evenings in the home where the priest stayed. Even when a
priest was not available, regular services were held on Sun-
days, for which many parishioners walked long distances
from their farms to attend. The three parishes of Clayton,
Lublin and Huron, which were founded in a radius of 100
miles, usually gathered together for special celebrations,
such as in 1923 (cf. photo), when the bishop came to Lub-
lin for an episcopal visitation.
Ilinois:
Father John Kochurov was instrumental in establishing
two new parishes, in Madison (1900) and Joliet, Illinois
(1907). A number of missionary priests visited Madison
prior to 1900, the first of whom was Father Stepanoffof
Cleveland, Ohio. By 1900 a wooden structure was erected
on Ewing Avenue. Father Kochurov consecrated the church
and donated an old icon of Our Lady of Kazan, which is
still in the sanctuary of the church today. In 1901 Bishop
Tikhon visited the parish; he donated the Holy Gospel and
Father John Kochurov, American missionary and first clergy-
martyr of the Russian Revolution, December 8, 1917
Tc
}S 3/5 °"When the Bolshevik Revolution broke out, Father John was at
Tsarskot Selo, near Petrograd. He upbraided a mob of revolutionary
sailors for their excesses, The mob attacked and seized him, and pro-
ceeded to drag him ove a railroad track until he died,
The Russian Church Council sitting in Moscow learned of Father
John’s death as its first sermon was coming to an end, On December
8, 1917 the Council addressed a message of sympathy and condo-
lence to Father John’s widow. Father John Kochurov was the first
clergyman-martyr of the Russian Revolution.
120
Ue
ON
Misi Wa
New Church in Joliet, Ilinois
the Church bell, and gave $500 towards the building ex-
penses. St. Nicholas parish in Joliet was organized. by
Carpatho-Russians who came to work in the steel mills. One
of the founders, Luke Pinchak, had been converted to Or-
thodoxy by Father Toth in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. He
told the other settlers about the Orthodox faith and made
arrangements in his home for the celebration of the first
Divine Liturgy by an Orthodox priest in Joliet (1905).
Father Kochurov came from Chicago to celebrate the liturgy
and encouraged the people to organize a brotherhood and
build a small chapel. After several such liturgies, the brother-
hood was established, land was purchased and a house was
remodeled as a chapel and consecrated in 1907. From that
date, Father Michael Potochny of Streator, Illinois, began
to service the church on a regular basis.
Ohio:
West of Cleveland in the small town of Marblehead on
the shore of Lake Erie, a group of immigrants from Austria-
Hungary found work with the Kelley Island Lime Company,
where they labored in the stone quarries. In February 1899,
they held a meeting to elect church officers, who were
charged with finding suitable land for a church. In June,
three lots were purchased in the name of Bishop Tikhon,
and with his blessing the Church of the Assumption of the
Virgin Mary was built. The dream had been realized, but
soon it was marred by growing dissensions which in 1901
led a group of Uniate sympathizers to join with Rome. A
civil court ordered the property sold at Sheriffs auction
with the proceeds to go to the Orthodox parishioners. The
twelve remaining families then purchased a former Con-
gregational Church, which remained in use until 1905; at
that time, the building and its land were exchanged for the
site on which the present church is built. In 1906 Arch-
bishop Tikhon laid the cornerstone and celebrated the first
Liturgy. The parish was presented with four icons and liturgi-
cal vessels, a gift of Tsar Nicholas II. Another church was
also established in Kelley’s Island, which was serviced for
many years by the clergy of the Marblehead church. The
first clergy to serve during this early period were: Fathers
Anthony Doroshuk (1900-1901), Gregory Varlashkin
(1902)-1905) and John Gratson (1905-1908).

Pennsylvania
Western Pennsylvania:
In 1900, Father John Nedzelnitsky with 30 persons
began to organize a parish in Pittsburgh. For several years,
Father John continued to serve the Allegheny parish as well
as foster the development of St. Michael’s Church. Finally in
spring of 1903, a church building was completed, and the
first Liturgy was served on Easter by Father Nedzelnitsky.
In 1905, he was succeeded as pastor by Father Peter
Kohanik, who served the parish for five years, and then by
Father Alexander Kukulevsky (1911-1912). Also organized
during this period were the churches in Charleroi (1901),
Patton (1904) and Lyndora (1906).

Eastern Pennsylvania:
A new center ofspiritual life in the Eastern region began
with the establishment of St. Tikhon’s Monastery in 1905.
Prior to the founding of the Monastery, several parishes
were already in existence in the area, namely St. Nicho-
las in Olyphant (1901) and Simpson (1904). In addition,
there were many other Uniate parishes which returned to
Orthodoxy within the next decade, and a number of new
parishes that were serviced during their formative years by
the clergy at St. Tikhon’s (cf. Chapter IV). Parishes falling
into one or another of these categories were McAdoo
St. Andrew’s Church, Philadelphia, Pa. in 1902
(1901), St. Clair — Assumption (1901), St. Clair — St.
Michael’s (1897), Olyphant — All Saints (1905), Reading
(1905), Mt. Carmel (1906), and Philadelphia — St. Andrew’s
St. Andrew’s parish in Philadelphia was initiated by the
founding by five men of a Russian Orthodox Brotherhood
(1901).
early in 1897. In May ofthat year Father Hotovitzky came
from New York to conduct the first service and to bless the

i
All Saints Church, Olyphant, Pa.
newly-founded organization. The expenses for that service

wee
amounted to $5.53 and the offering totaled $1.50. The
second service, also celebrated by Father Hotovitzky, was
held in December. Services followed fairly regularly until
we October 14, 1889, when a charter was approved, incorpo-
rated, and recorded. Up to this time services were held in
parishioners’ homes. In 1899 the Cramps’ Shipyards on the
nearby Delaware River held two warships that were being
constructed for the Russian Navy -- the cruiser Variag and
the battleship Ratvizan. Russian officers and sailors were
sent to Philadelphia to form the crews for these ships. As a
natural consequence, St. Andrew’s parish began holding fre-
quent services on board the ships, beginning in April 1899.
Later the sailors began to attend the regular services that
were held in a small church on South Fourth Street. Phila-
delphians of that day were treated to a most impressive
sight as they watched the Russian officers and sailors march
through the city street on their way to the chapel.
Father John Nedzelnitsky was now celebrating the serv-
ices at St. Andrew’s and in May 1900 was replaced by
Father Dmitri Gebay. At a meeting in January 1901 the
parish decided to look for a site to build a church. That
spring the Variag left for St. Petersburg and thence joined

12]
 Officers of The Variag. The “Variag’”’
the Asiatic Fleet; in October the Ratvizan was completed
and left to join the Variag. Before the ship left on March 17,
1902, the Brotherhood presented an icon to the chaplain of
the ship, Father Paul Ratkovsky, and a presentation of icons
from the Ratvizan’s chapel was made to St. Andrew’s
Church, where they remain to this day. With the arrival of
Father Alexander Nemolovsky in May 1902, the parish
decided to purchase a building and grounds at North Fifth
Street as the site for their church. Later, between 1909 and
1912, a new church in traditional Russian Orthodox archi-
tecture was erected in its place.
East Coast
Connecticut:
The history of the Holy Trinity Church in New Britain
is filled with anecdotes and revealing information which
serve to capsulize many of the incidents involved in the
formation of parishes throughout Connecticut. The New
Britain narrative begins with the arrival of John J. Hamilla,
a Carpatho-Russian immigrant from Austria-Hungary, into
the city on September 8, 1899. By the end of the same year
Mr. Hamilla had assembled 14 of his fellow countrymen
into the Sts. Cyril and Methodius Brotherhood. In an
attempt to become the nucleus of a future Orthodox parish,
the Brotherhood members went to public gathering places
throughout the city to listen for people speaking in the
Russian language. One of the persons discovered and ap-
proached in this manner doubted the sincerity of the
Brotherhood members in their endeavors to raise funds to
build a church. “It’s not possible to build (Orthodox)
churches in America,” he said. “In Russia, only the Tsar
builds churches. How can you build a church in America?”
Then he added: “All you want to do is collect a few dollars
and then skip town!” The Brotherhood members devised
the following plan in order to convince the man of their
sincerity. First, each of them placed $5 on a table; then the
man was asked to do the same. The new man was then
allowed to select one of his own friends as treasurer for the
money, holding it in trust until such a time as it would be
needed. Using this approach, the Brotherhood found and
attracted many Byelorussians from among the huge Polish
population of the city, and the ranks of the Brotherhood
began to swell. Other Carpatho-Russian and Galician Uniate
groups in the city were approached, but they refused to
join the new Orthodox group, saying that they did not
wish to become schismatics.
By 1902 a parish council had been formed with John J.
Hamilla as warden, and the building of a church had com-
menced. Archimandrite Raphael, later Bishop for the Syro-
Sailors of The Variag
Arabic parishes in the North American Mission, presided at
the blessing of the cornerstone on August 31, 1902, and
was assisted by Father Benedict Turkevich and by Father
Ptolomey Timchenko of Ansonia. Father Peter Popoff of
Bridgeport had handled the initial request of the people in
New Britian to Archbishop Tikhon for his blessing in the
formation of the parish. The Church Administration in New
York sent a letter to the New Britain group requesting that
a representative be sent to New York to speak with Arch-
bishop Tikhon. Mr. Hamilla was selected to make the trip
and was asked by Tikhon about the size of the parish (6
families and 30-40 single people at that time), where the
people worked, and details of their personal lives. When the
New York Cathedral archpriest, Alexander Hotovitzky,
heard Bishop Tikhon state that he would come to New
Britain on ‘“‘American’’ Christmas (December 25) in order
to consecrate the new church according to the full pontifi-
cal order, he interjected: “But Viadyka, that really doesn’t
seem feasible; by that time such a small body of parishioners
will probably disband and the church will be empty.”
Pointing his finger toward John Hamilla, Tikhon replied:
“But Father Dean, look at the young man they have for their
Starosta; it’s my guess that all the parishioners there are
young people like him and will be zealous defenders of the
Orthodox Faith!”
Archbishop Tikhon kept his word and came to New
Britain with Fathers Benedict Turkevich and Alexander
Hotovitzky on December 25, 1902. The new church was
consecrated in the name of the Apostles to the Slavs, Sts.
Cyril and Methodius. Tikhon himself donated sacred vessels,
a set of priest’s vestments and $100 to the parish. The Holy
Ghost parish in Bridgeport gave to the parish in New Britain
two banners, a processional cross and an American flag.
Father Ptolemey Timchenko, who had previously served in
both Ansonia and Bridgeport, was assigned as the first
pastor in New Britain with a salary of $50/month from the
Church Administration plus $10/month and living quarters
from the local parish. ‘Before the assignment of a permanent
pastor, Tikhon had assigned the pastors in Ansonia and
Bridgeport to alternate monthly in conducting Divine
Services in New Britain.
The next parish founded in Connecticut was that of the
Nativity of the Theotokos in Waterbury. It was organized in
1906 through the assistance of the clergy of the Three
Saints Church in Ansonia. Father Theofan Buketoff and his
brother, Constantine, who was serving as choir director,
both in Ansonia, came to Waterbury to direct. the organizing
efforts of the local people. Constantine Buketoff remained
on in Waterbury as one of the original signers of the petition
 Bishop Platon on a pastoral visit to
Ansonia and Waterbury, Conn.

to Tikhon requesting permission to form a parish. A church

was erected and consecrated by Bishop Platon on Labor
Day, 1908. The longest pastorate in the parish was enjoyed
by the V. Rev. Peter P. Dzubay (1917-1958). Under the
guidance of Father Joseph Pishtey, Jr., a large, new church
building was erected at 3125 North Main Street in Water-
bury. The cornerstone and entrance blessing of the new
church were conducted by His Grace, Bishop Dmitri on
March 24, 1974. The parish consists at present of about 400
members and plans to develop a church hall and rectory on
the spacious church property.

Father Theophan Matfeevich Buketoff was born in Kher-

son, Russia, on June 5, 1879. He was educated at the Kherson
Parochial School and the Odessa Theological Seminary,
from which he graduated in 1901. Upon graduation, he de-
cided to serve in the North American Mission and even prior
FATHER THEOPHAN BUKETOFF to ordination was assigned to Sheppton, St. Clair, and Mc
Adoo, Pennsylvania. He was ordained to the diaconate by
men7-” Bishop Memnov of Novo-Mirgorod on November 3, 1901,
and to the priesthood the following day. Father Buketoff
arrived at his assignment in early 1902 and after a year of
service was transferred (by Bishop Tikhon) to Three Saints
Church in Ansonia, Connecticut, where he helped to develop
the parish. In 1906, Father Buketoff led a group of Uniates
in Waterbury, Connecticut, back to Orthodoxy and estab- |
lished a parish. The same year he was transferred to Alle-
gheny, Pennsylvania, but served less than a year before
returning briefly to Russia. Father Buketoff made a mission-
ary trip to Eastern Canada in 1907 and organized a parish
in Montreal. The following year he was assigned to organize
a parish of former Uniates in Brooklyn and was also made
Dean of the New York Deanery. Father Buketoff was trans-
ferred to St. Nicholas Church in Salem, Massachusetts, on
June 22, 1911. While in Massachusetts, he organized the
parish in Lawrence prior to his return to Russia.
After an eight year absence, Father Buketoff returned to
the United States in 1921 and was assigned to Maynard,
Massachusetts, by Archbishop Alexander. Within a few
months, he became editor of the periodical Nedelya and
was assigned to St. Michael’s parish in Newark, New Jersey.
Metropolitan Platon selected Father Buketoff to be sacris-
tan of Holy Virgin Protection Cathedral in 1928. He was
elevated to Dean of the Cathedral by Metropolitan
Theophilus in 1937. Father Buketoff reactivated the
Russian-American Orthodox Messenger in 1936 and served
as its editor until 1961. Recognizing his work for the
Church, the Synod of Bishops designated him as a proto
presbyter in 1949. Father Buketoff continued to serve the
Church until his death on January 8, 1968.
 Yonkers Parish

New York—New Jersey:

From the Cathedral in New York City, several parishes
in the outlying areas were founded through the establish-
ment of brotherhoods and the aid of the cathedral clergy,
particular Father Alexander Hotovitzky. Yonkers parish
was the first of these to be established. In 1898, several men
rented a building on Oliver Avenue for the purpose of
holding religious services. Fifteen men and three women
attended the first Divine Liturgy in Yonkers, served by
Father Ptolemey. Priests from New York came to serve
liturgy twice a month until attendance reached a total of 20
faithful. Soon a wooden church was erected on Seymour
Street, built by the parishioners. On Christmas Day 1899,
the first Liturgy and vespers were celebrated in the still
uncompleted church. Services now continued two or three
times a month until a resident priest, Father Vladichevsky,
arrived in 1903. In 1904, fire destroyed the little church
and the people mobilized to build a larger church. In Sep- In January 1901, Father Alexander Hotovitzky met with
tember 1905, the new church was blessed by Archbishop a group of men in Watervliet (Troy, Colonie), New York
Tikhon, who appointed Father Benedict Turkevich as pastor and said to them: “You are a grain of mustard seed that
of the congregation. From 35 families in 1905, the parish shall rise and grow till its branches overshadow the earth.
grew to 200 families in 1918, due to the large influx of You are few but this work is the work of God. His smile is
immigrants from 1914-1918. upon you, and your children shall fill the land forever.”

124
 Those words moved 19 men to form a brotherhood which
affiliated a few months later with the Russian Orthodox
Mutual Aid Society. By 1902, a new church edifice was
consecrated by Bishop Tikhon, assisted by Father Hotovit-
zky. Father Hotovitzky continued to travel from New York
City to conduct services, and his ardent sermons and spirit-
ual advice were a source of inspiration to the small, faithful
group. A parish school was organized in May 1903 with 15
pupils taught by Father Arseny (the founder of St. Tikhon’s
Monastery). Through Father Arseny’s efforts, the parish
received many beautiful vestments and vessels from his
former countrymen in Krakov, Russia.
A charter was signed on September 11, 1898, by a small
group of men founding the Three Saints Russian Orthodox
Society in Garfield, New Jersey. Twenty-six families under-
took to construct a church on the corner of Cambridge
Avenue and Commerce Street. On July 3, 1901, the corner-
stone was laid, blessed by Archimandrite Raphael (Hawa-
weeny), the future bishop of the Syro-Arabian mission, on
behalf of Bishop Tikhon and the North American Diocese.
During the building of the church and until its completion,
ARCHPRIEST BENEDICT TURKEVICH the parish was served by Fathers Alexander Hotovitzky and
Elias Zotikoff of New York City. Upon completion of the
Archpriest Benedict Turkevich, brother of the late church, Father Anthony Doroshuk was assigned as rector
Metropolitan Leonty, was born on March 14, 1873, in (to 1903), followed by Fathers Keyko and Olchevsky.
Kremenitz, Volynia, Russia, where his father was a priest. Finally, Father Peter Popoff came to Garfield (1905-1908),
After graduation from the Volyn Theological Seminary, he and through his efforts the membership of the parish was
entered the Moscow Theological Academy and was gradu- doubled and a parish school and the first church choir were
ated there in 1898. The same year he came to the United organized.
States as a missionary and served as a reader and choir Another parish was organized in South River, New
director at the Holy Trinity Cathedral in Chicago, under Jersey, in July 1905. A group of villagers from the area of
Father John Kochurov. He married Theodora Antonovna Minsk settled in central New Jersey, where they established
Putkovsky on February 21, 1900. That same year they small embroidery and handkerchief factories.
moved to New York City, where he served for a while as a
reader at St. Nicholas Cathedral. Benedict Turkevich was
ordained by Bishop Tikhon to the diaconate there on March $
29, 1902, and to the priesthood the next day. He served as
rector of Holy Ghost Parish in Bridgeport, Connecticut,
from 1902 through 1905, and he was the first priest to serve
Holy Trinity Parish in Yonkers, New York, 1905 through
1914. While in America he was the editor-in-chief of Svit,
the official newspaper of the Russian Orthodox Mutual Aid
Society, and of their annual Church directories, as well as
president of the society. Father Benedict was known as a
writer and preacher throughout the mission by his numerous
| articles in Svit and the Russian-American Messenger. While
he was in the United States, Father Benedict and his wife
had eight children. In 1914 he returned with his family to
Russia.
After returning to Russia, Father Benedict served as a
chaplain. He and his brother, Archpriest Leonid Turkevich,
were delegates to the All-Russian Sobor of 1917-1918.
Following World War I and the Russian Revolution, he
settled in Warsaw, Poland, where he continued to serve the
Church. Father Benedict represented the Orthodox Church
of Poland at the Ecumenical Conference at Lausanne,
Switzerland, in 1927. He died in Warsaw on the eve of Holy
Thursday, April 13, 1928, at the age of fifth-five.
 Immigrant Home

126
CHAPTER IV
Development of Church Life
1907-1917
The goals and programs developed by Archbishop Tikhon
were continued by his immediate successors, Archbishops
Platon (1907-1914) and Evdokim (1914-1917). Church
institutions, designed to assure the continuity and self-
sufficiency of the North American Diocese, continued to
expand. The seminary was transferred to Tenafly, New
Jersey, to place it closer to the center of diocesan adminis-
tration and to areas of high Orthodox population; an Ortho-
dox Women’s Aid Society was founded (1907); and the
Russian Immigrant Home, a women’s college, an orphanage
and convent, and even a bank were established. In addition,
the organization of the diocese continued to develop along
the lines foreseen by Archbishop Tikhon, as multi-ethnic
but canonically united. Bishop Raphael (Hawaweeny) re-
mained at the head of the Syro-Arabic mission until his
death in 1915, and in 1917 his position was assumed by
Bishop Aftimios (Ofiesh). Archbishop Sebastian Dabovich
continued to head the Serbian mission, and Archimandrite
Theoklytos Triantafilides at least nominally supervised the
Greek parishes until his death when Father Michael Andrea-
des assumed this function. In 1908, an Albanian mission
was inaugurated with the ordination to the priesthood of
Theophan S. Noli; and in 1917 a recently-converted Uniate
priest, Alexander Dzubay, was consecrated as Bishop
Stephen of Pittsburgh, with a special mission to the
Carpatho-Russians. Smaller missions also seem to have been
organized for Romanians and Bulgarians. In addition, Alaska
continued to have a suffragan bishop. On the return of
Bishop Innocent (Pustynsky) to Russia, Father Alexander
Nemolovsky was consecrated bishop (1909); and in 1916,
when Bishop Alexander was transferred to Winnipeg with
the newly created title of Bishop of Canada, he was suc-
ceeded by the former Archimandrite Philip (Stavitsky).
Yet the vast diocese was beginning to show signs of
strain. The Great Immigration continued unabated, bringing
more Orthodox to the New World, but added numbers and
the resultant burdens on the central administration made it
increasingly difficult to care adequately for these diverse
new arrivals. Attention of the ruling Archbishop and his
staff was directed above all to problems arising from the
continuing return of parishes from the Unia. Archbishop
Platon received 72 largely Carpatho-Russian Uniate parishes
into his fold, and during Archbishop Evdokim’s administra-
tion 35 new parishes, consisting in many cases of former
Uniates, and 30 Uniate parishes were added. Yet this return
did not go unchallenged. Concerned over the continuing
flow of Uniates to the Orthodox Church, the Vatican in
1907 — the year of Archbishop Platon’s arrival — appointed
a Uniate bishop to America, Soter Ortinsky. As Uniate
organization in America grew stronger, struggles over the
return of Uniates became increasingly bitter, loaded with
political and ethnic overtones, with “Ukrainization” versus
“Russification” becoming a central issue. Archbishop Platon
and his staff devoted much of their energy to these East
Slavic problems. Constantly they were visiting new parishes,
organizing open public meetings (“‘vetche”’), taking part in
heated discussions and polemics to which religious concerns
easily could become obscured by Russian patriotism and
loyalty to the czar.
Meanwhile the Balkan Slavs, the Greeks and other ethnic
groups were left largely to their own devices. Archbishop
Platon wrote in a 1908 resolution concerning the applica-
tion of a Serbian Priest: “It is necessary to find out, at least
to some extent, the condition of the Serbian Mission in
America, because I myself and the Chancery are very little
informed about it.” But little came of this resolution, and
the neglected Serbian Mission grew restive. In 1913 a dozen
Serbian parishes held a convention which requested that
they be released from the jurisdiction of the North Ameri-
can Russian bishop and be allowed to go under the author-
ity of the Serbian Orthodox Church. The matter was shelved
until the 1920’s, due to World War I and the chaos in its
aftermath, but the request of the Serbian parishes did not
bode well for the continued canonical unity of the multi-
ethnic Church in America.
The church situation of the Greeks was even more
neglected and chaotic. In part this was due to patterns of
immigration. The various Russian immigrant groups had
often arrived in whole families, intending to settle perma-
nently in the new land and thus comparatively quick to
organize church communities. In contrast, the Greek immi-
grants, like many of the Balkan Slavic immigrants, were
overwhelmingly male (95 percent between 1899 and 1910)
who often returned to Greece. This hardly promoted stable
church life.
But hierarchical neglect also played a role. In a report of
1908, Dean Theodore Pashkovsky, the future Metropolitan
Theophilus, suggested a more active participation of the
Greeks in the Church administration. Archbishop Platon,
though agreeing in principle, expressed his doubts: ‘‘Al-
though the idea of a united leadership is so really important
for the success of Orthodoxy in America, . . . it seems it is
not feasible, if one takes into account the traditional self-
sufficiency of the Greeks in the questions of Religion and
Faith . . . The Greeks here do not contact the Russian
bishops. At least I have not seen a Greek at my place during
the four months of my stay here.” The Archbishop’s com-
ments no doubt exaggerate; and a few Greek parishes, par-
ticularly in the West, were an integral part of his diocese.
L27
 METROPOLITAN PLATON

Metropolitan Platon (Porphyry Theodorovich Rozhdest-

vensky), son of a parish priest, was born on February 23,
1866, in the Kursk Eparchy of Russia. After graduation
from the Kursk Theological Seminary and marriage, he was
ordained to the priesthood in 1887. Fulfilling his life’s
desire, he was assigned as a village priest in Lukashevsky. A
short time later his wife gave birth to a daughter, but within
five years Father Porphyry had become a widower. He then
entered the Kiev Theological Academy, graduating in 1895.
Tonsured as a monk in 1894, Father Porphyry received the
name Platon. While continuing his studies at the academy,
he served as an assistant professor and later an instructor of
Moral Theology. Receiving a Master of Theology degree in
1898, Father Platon became inspector of the Kiev Academy
and was raised to the rank of archimandrite. In 1902, he
became rector of the academy and was consecrated a bishop
to serve as second vicar of the Kiev diocese.
After five years of episcopal service in the Kiev diocese,
Bishop Platon was transferred in 1907 to the North Ameri-
can Diocese, to replace Archbishop Tikhon. Soon after
arrival in America, he realized the needs of the diocese and
acted accordingly. Under his leadership more Carpatho-
Russian Uniates returned to Orthodoxy. He was responsible
for the opening of the Russian Immigrants Home and organ-
izing an orphanage in New York City. The Theological
Seminary was transferred to Tenafly, New Jersey, through bishop Alexander felt that it would be better for him to
the initiative of Archbishop Platon to be closer to the center return to Europe and asked Platon to assume leadership
of Church administration. He was transferred to the diocese
within the diocese. The appointment was later temporarily
of Kishniece and Khotin in 1914, but soon became the
approved by Patriarch Tikhon. Metropolitan Platon was
exarch of Georgia and a member of the Holy Synod. Arch- faced with the difficult task of maintaining the unity of the
bishop Platon served with distinction in the Second State diocese in the face of attacks by the “Living Church” led
Duma in 1915. Prior to the Russian Revolution, he was ap- by John Kedrovsky and the financial crisis. He declared the
pointed Metropolitan of Kherson and Odessa. Church in America to be temporarily autonomous in view
After the Russian Revolution, Metropolitan Platon was of the problems with communications with the Russian
forced to flee from Odessa and finally arrived in the United Church. After a long illness, Metropolitan Platon died at his
States in 1922. With the financial crisis of the Church, Arch- residence in New York City on April 20, 1934.
But for the most part, the Greeks — and the Greek parishes On his arrival, Archbishop Evdokim set out to learn and
— were on their own, with their priests usually provided by understand objectively American life and the place of
the Synod of Greece and, before 1908, by the Patriarch of religion in it. The product of his investigation was an essay
Constantinople. entitled “Religious Life in America” (in Russian), published
In May of 1914, Archbishop Platon was transferred back by the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius press, in which he points out
to Russia. His successor, Evdokim, arrived only in March of a false impression widely held by Russian people that Amer-
the following year, due to the outbreak of World War I. The icans are indifferent to religion and interested in ““business”’
new Archbishop had been the Dean of the Moscow Theo- only. After giving a detailed statistical report on the various
logical Academy, where he had distinguished himself as an Christian denominations in America and particularly stress-
intellectual with a deep involvement and interest in the ing their work with young people, their missionary efforts
social problems of the day: “Christianity does not know in their own country and abroad, and the amount of private
spiritual stagnation and inertia, Christianity is not unleav- donations to religious needs, Archbishop Evdokim con-
ened bread; it preaches eternal progress.” It was perhaps cluded:
this dissatisfaction with an often complacent status quo Have you encountered the same labor in your
that eventually led Archbishop Evdokim to the Living country? Have you seen the same rivers of gold,
Church movement. Yet this very quality also made him which are poured out here by the private people and
uniquely qualified to discern the problems of the North not by the government or state institutions? Have you
American Diocese, if not to solve them. seen such intense service rendered to those who

128
 suffer? Have you seen such multitudes of self-denying
workers who voluntarily, without any pay, toil in
Christ’s vineyard?
Archbishop Evdokim recognized the unique situation of
the Orthodox Mission in the New World. In his 1916 report
to the Holy Synod, he reiterated Archbishop Tikhon’s
recommendation for a wider autonomy for the multi-
national Orthodox Church in America and pointed out that
the existing administrative structure of the Mission was
quite inadequate, due to the rapid growth of Orthodoxy in
America and difficulties in communication with the Holy
Synod. According to the report, the Holy Synod was com-
pletely ignorant of the American way of life and even of
American laws relating to religion; consequently, it was
often quite incompetent in solving various problems arising
in America, and some of its directives were even harmful to
the cause of Orthodoxy there. The Archbishop’s recom-
mendation: “It is necessary to grant some kind of auto-
cephaly to the Mission.”
“Some kind of autocephaly”’: In his 1916 report Arch-
bishop Evdokim, like Archbishop Tikhon before him, saw
this as an event in the distant future. The immediate need
was more mundane. The bulk of the 1916 report is finan-
cial, outlining the many programs of the diocese, the need
for supplementing clergy salaries, the cost of establishing
necessary new institutions. The request was for an annual
allotment of $1,000,000. The Synod appropriated $550,000
— no small sum in 1916, but still inadequate for meeting
the Mission’s expenditures. When Archbishop Evdokim
departed in 1917 to attend the All-Russian Council, a debt
of $100,000 already existed. Soon, with the termination of
funds from Russia, the financial situation was to become
2ven more serious. The Church in America was catapulted
into a situation demanding self-sufficiency, demanding sup-
port, if not by “rivers of gold... poured out by the private
people,” then at least by “‘multitudes of self-denying work-
ers who voluntarily, without any pay, toil in Christ’s vine-
yard.”

ARCHBISHOP EVDOKIM

Archbishop Evdokim (Basil Mikhailovich Mischersky)

was born on April 1, 1869, in the Vladimir diocese. In his
youth he spent much time participating in the life of his
home parish church, where his father was a reader. He was
educated at the Moscow Theological Academy, and after
graduation in 1894 he received the monastic tonsure and
was ordained to the diaconate and priesthood. Father
Evdokim was then appointed Inspector of the Novgorod
Seminary, but at the same time he continued his theological
studies at the Academy, receiving the Master of Theology
degree. In 1898 he was raised to the rank of archimandrite
and five years later was appointed Rector of the Novgorod
Seminary and then Dean of the Moscow Theological Acad-
emy. On December 13, 1904, he was consecrated as a vicar
bishop of the Moscow diocese.
Bishop Evdokim was actively involved in charitable
activities and in the intellectual issues of the times. He was
involved in the “Russian religious renaissance,” a movement
of the intelligentsia that strove to revitalize the Church and
to recover its organic link with secular culture. Beginning
in 1906, he published The Christian, a journal dedicated to
the Christianization of society.
In 1909 he became Bishop of Kashir, in the Tula diocese,
and on August 11, 1914, he was assigned to the North
American archdiocese and elevated to the rank of arch-
bishop. Arriving in his new archdiocese on May 27, 1915, America. The Brooklyn orphanage was transferred to a
he immediately set out to understand its problems and newly-received convent in Springfield, Vermont, and a
needs. Understanding the vision of Archbishop Tikhon, as Women’s College was opened in the former orphanage
buildings. Evdokim also took a keen interest in St. Platon’s
elaborated in 1905, Evdokim tried to organize church life
in the various national groups within the vast diocese and to Seminary in Tenafly, New Jersey.
link them firmly together. Soon after his arrival, he had On August 6, 1917, he returned to Russia to attend the
Aftimios consecrated to lead the Syro-Arabs, to succeed All-Russian Church Sobor. He never returned to America.
Bishop Raphael, who had died in 1914, and he began In 1919 he was appointed Archbishop of Nizhegorod and,
negotiations with other ethnic groups. The archbishop also in 1922, he joined the “‘Living Church” as their Metropoli-
set out to reorganize the institutions of the Church in tan of Odessa. He died in Moscow in 1935.

129
 Toscsie Ba THK, B08, 4nk x Sn%
Be Post SO 1.600
Necotie za t-¥/on Spioroan/ 34000,
. Mroro”
$32. Uplors. :
Ha opresuseniv sbce ese vores KOBE xe apin- LAR AAU MQRAMOCTRTTUXS UY ’
TOBt % nongepeenls cymectaveuExs /Cnpanr: WARACRAPO Be, nocoéle sxonarh Weoronund Zembru w moped.
Koapaxerero # Lorapnicpun iyaecueas CORZOBEIS NH Uyvemka ooperuna nocedlx Branmreg See Sesaoecer
On." axeovopencnh movaTH’ RATS WATe.
LABS Fucrogte BHARe TCA He CBuue A ancliemxe eypeercence cexe, 3
Mawaps SPRAROPHUSS OPM BRoNeNeRlaKs 4a covey «4 we eemme &
Bs Re Coesuxenmmxs Ureraxt : RGM YROMLACALHRY OF CAyEOR.
Rrare T2408 ig Pe nyTeper woeotic 2h OTbbash Me SACHETS ACAREMBEHA AONLPH.
— ere © r e #¢ 82 PF 9127008

Budget proposal of Archbishop Evdokim to the Holy Synod, January 26, 1916, No. 1174, totaling nearly one million dollars or rubles (exchange
tate was nearly equivalent).
Selected items from the above budget submitted in 1916 indicate the growing needs of the Diocese:
1. New York Diocesan Headquarters, Staff $ 32,840 12. Monasteries: South Canaan, Pa; Springfield, Vt.
2. Vicar Sees in Sitka, Winnipeg, Brooklyn & Pittsburgh 39,750 Vostok, Sochava and Shandro, Canada $ 9,000
3. Administrators of Missions: 13. Hosteis: Springfield, Kodiak, South Canaan 12,000
Serbian, Albanian, Romanian, Greek 10,000
Total $ 21,000
Total for Administrative Offices & Salaries $102,990
14. Clergy — USA, Canada, Alaska
4. Pro-Cathedral and Vicar Cathedral Staff, Maintenance $ 16,010 1st Class parishes
5. Chancery 19,500 (lowest rank & newly-opened) — 150 $ 45,000
6. Vicariate Administration 13,200 2nd Class parishes (average rank) — 100 90,000
7. Missions Administrative Offices 1,200 3rd Class parishes (highest rank) — 150 180,000
15. Deans and Deanery Travel 10,000
Total for Administrative Staffs $ 48,110
16. Missionaries and Translators:
8. Seminary Budget (submitted separately) Australia, Honolulu, Midwest, Alaska 9,000
9. Russian Women’s College $ 11,120 17. Psalomschicks (250 parishes) 48,000
10. Parochial Schools 295,800
Total $382,000
11. Dept. of Education of the Diocese 15,600
19-22. Pensions and Missionaries Benefits (submitted separately)
Total for Education (less Seminary) $320,720 23. Publications $ 14,000
Approximate Total All Expenses $1,000,000

130
 BISHOP PHILIP (STAVITSKY)

Bishop Philip was born Vitaly Stephanovich Stavisky,

the son of a priest, in Novgorod, Russia, on April 14,
1884. He attended the district theological seminary and
then the Moscow Theological Academy, from which he
graduated in 1910. Upon graduation, he entered the
monastic life at Chernigov and was ordained. He served
as a missionary with the particular function of combating
sectarianism in Chernigov and in 1911 was transferred to
Kiev in the same capacity. While in Kiev, he lived at the
famous Kiev Lavra of the Caves. In 1914, Father Philip
became a hospital chaplain in the Russian Imperial Army.
The following year, he arrived in the United States and
became rector of the Tenafly, New Jersey, Theological
Seminary. On August 19, 1916, he was consecrated Bishop
of Alaska at St. Nicholas Cathedral in New York City by
Archbishop Evdokim, Bishop Alexander and Metropolitan
German,of Selevkiystaj. The following year, Bishop Philip
returned to Russia to become Bishop of Smolensk. He
died as Archbishop of Astrakhan and Saratov on Decem-
ber 12, 1952.
ee ‘
selevcia

BISHOP ALEXANDER

Alexander Alexandrovich Nemolovsky was born on

August 30, 1876, in the Volynia Eparchy, Russia. After
being educated in local parochial schools, he completed his
formal education at the St. Petersburg Theological Acad-
emy. He left Russia soon after graduation for the United
States. After ordination to the diaconate on November 18,
1901, and priesthood on November 25, 1901, Father
Alexander Nemolovsky was assigned to the parish in
Catasaqua, Pennsylvania. He also served in Reading, Penn-
sylvania (1906-1908) and Sts. Peter and Paul Church in
Jersey City, New Jersey (1908-1909). Father Alexander was
editor of Svit from 1905 to 1909. He was also active in the
work of the Russian Immigrants House in New York City.
In 1909, he was elected to be first vicar of the North Amer-
ican Archdiocese by the Holy Synod of the Russian Church
because ‘‘as a priest of the church he directed affairs with
such consummate skill’ (Russian American Orthodox
Messenger). Father Alexander was tonsured on November 6,
1909, and consecrated as a bishop at the Monastery of
Alexander Nevsky in St. Petersburg on November 15, 1909.
As Bishop of Alaska, he traveled extensively in his diocese
and reported on developments in the Russian American
Orthodox Messenger. Bishop Alexander was in charge of the
North American diocese from the departure of Archbishop
Platon until the arrival of Archbishop Evdokim in July
1914. In 1916, he was transferred to Winnipeg as Bishop of
Canada. Once more in 1917, Bishop Alexander became
temporary administrator of the Archdiocese with the return
of Archbishop Evdokim to Russia and was confirmed as
primate in 1919. (See Chapter V for a full biography.)

13]
 BISHOP STEPHEN (ALEXANDER DZUBAY)

Alexander Dzubay was born on February 27, 1857, in

Kalnik, Berezhanets, Carpatho-Russia, the son of Father
Stephen and Matushka Justine Dzubay. He attended the
gymnasium at Uzhgorod and then the Uzhgorod Theological
Seminary, from which he graduated in 1880. The next year
he married Andrea Chuchka, the daughter of a priest, and
was ordained to the priesthood. He served the parish in the
village of Lokhovo. In November of 1881, his wife died. He
was assigned as second priest at the Trinity Church in
Uzhgorod in 1881. Along with the Metropolitan of Sem-
bratov, he visited Rome for the papal jubilee in 1887.
Father Alexander entered the United States in 1889 and
was assigned to the Wilkes-Barre Uniate parish, where he
was attacked for having been married. Father Dzubay
traveled across the country and helped to organize Uniate
parishes in Hazelton, Scranton, Osceola Mills, Trenger,
Johnstown, Pittsburgh, Pankstontown, Pennsylvania; Pas-
saic and Trenton, New Jersey; Brooklyn, New York;
Streator, Illinois; and Minneapolis, Minnesota. In 1913, he
was elected as vicar of the Uniate parishes in America by
the clergy.
After becoming increasingly disillusioned with the Unia,
Father Alexander decided to become Orthodox. He was
received into the Orthodox Church on July 30, 1916, and
was tonsured a monk with the name of Stephen. On August
7, 1916, he was consecrated as Bishop of Pittsburgh by
Archbishop Evdokim, Bishop Alexander, and Metropolitan
Hernran at St. Nicholas Cathedral in New York City.
Bishop Stephen was charged with the responsibility of re-
a)
ee
uniting other Carpatho-Russians with the Orthodox Church. iC
However, due to bad relations with other Uniate clergy and
advanced age, his mission was not as successful as had been
hoped. Disappointed at this, Bishop Stephen returned to the
Unia after 1924 in the hopes of heading a Uniate diocese.
After his return to the Unia, Bishop Stephen was for the
most part ignored; he retired to a Roman Catholic monas-
tery in Graymoor, New York, where he died in 1933.

REVEREND MICHAEL ILYINSKY

Michael Ivanovich Ilyinsky, the son of a priest, was boin
on October 27, 1866, in Gorodovo, Tver District, Russia.
He attended local parochial schools and then the Tver Theo-
logical Seminary, from which he graduated in 1886. After
marriage, he was ordained to the priesthood on February
17, 1891. After serving as a parish priest in the Tver diocese,
Father Michael entered the St. Petersburg Theological
Academy in 1897 and graduated in 1901. He continued to
serve the Church in Russia for ten more years and then went
to the United States in 1911. Arriving in Minneapolis, he
served as Inspector of the Minneapolis Theological Sem-
inary. In 1916, when Archimandrite Philip, rector of the
Tenafly Seminary, was selected to be the Bishop of
Alaska, Father Michael was appointed the new rector. The
following year, he was elevated to the rank of archpriest.
With the closing of the seminary, Father Michael remained
active in the national church.
In recognition of his service to the Church, he was con-
secrated as Bishop of Boston on October 13, 1935. Prior to
this, after the death of his wife, Father Michael had be-
come a monk, with the new name of Makary. He was ac-
tive in the movement to reopen the theological seminary
in America, and with the establishment of St. Vladimir’s
Seminary, Bishop Makary became its rector on October 3,
1938. Following World War II, Bishop Makary decided
that the situation of the Church in the Soviet Union had
stabilized and wanted to establish church unity. In 1946,
he was received into the Exarchate of the Russian Ortho-
dox Church in North America and in 1946 was designated
as Archbishop of New York. He became Archbishop of the
Aleutian Islands and North America in 1948. For his serv-
ice to the Church, Archbishop Makary was elevated to
Metropolitan in 1952. Metropolitan Makary died on No-
vember 12, 1953.

IBZ
 CHURCH INSTITUTIONS

The rapid growth of the North American Diocese during priest Alexander Hotovitzky, Chairman; Priest Ignatius
the episcopal administration of Archbishops Platon and Lachno, Treasurer and Director; Mr. Vladimir Polevoy, Con-
Evdokim created certain needs for the Diocese. If the Dio- troller; and John Telep, Secretary.
cese had any hope for its future in America it would have to
The Society operated through offices on Ellis Island and
respond to these needs quickly and adequately. It was dur-
in Washington, D.C. It was there that it interceded on be-
ing these times, therefore, that the American Diocese
half of the immigrants, sponsoring and defending their
created and established its own institutions, which were
entrance into the United States for residency. The Society
financially supported partially by grants from its Mother
supported two immigrant homes: a five-story brick home
Church in Russia until World War I, and by Orthodox and on East 14th Street in New York City and a branch home
non-Orthodox benefactors, but chiefly by the contribution in Baltimore, Maryland, which was directed by Priest Con-
of its own faithful through the brotherhoods. stantine Seletzky.
The continual arrival of immigrants in America plus their After securing entrance for the immigrants into America,
return to Orthodoxy resulted in the development of addi- the Society provided food, shelter, clothing, jobs and recre-
tional new parishes, which of course needed qualified ation until the new arrivals could become established on
priests, choir directors, chanters, and religious instructors their own. In addition the home contained a chapel, with a
who, in addition, had to be bilingual. As a result of the full-time chaplain and a library. It operated a Russian bank
immigration of the war years, many new arrivals from where the inhabitants could secure and save their earnings;
Russia, Galicia and Austro-Hungary lacked the means and
know-how for establishing their new residence in America.
Also, in the chaos of immigration to America, many chil-
dren lost their parents as a result either of war or fatal sick-
ness. Needless to say, the North American Diocese felt
sincere responsibility to care for these peoples’ needs.
Finally, with the faithful scattered throughout the United
States, the North American Church, for the sake of church
unity and the preservation of the Orthodox Faith, had to
establish tools of media for informing the faithful.
ing the faithful.
All these needs were met by the American Church im-
mediately with the creation of the Russian Orthodox Chris-
tian Immigrant Society of North America (1908), the
Society of Zealots for Orthodoxy in North America (1912),
St. Platon’s Theological Seminary (1912), Russian Orphan
Home of Brooklyn (1914), Holy Annunciation Women’s
College (1915), and Holy Virgin Protection Convent and
Orphanage (1915).

Russian Orthodox Christian Immigrant

Society of North America
We have mentioned previously how successfully the
brotherhoods at this time answered the needs of the im-
migrants and promoted and protected the Orthodox faith
in America. The brotherhoods in many ways preceded and,
as a Church organization, collectively embodied all the
functions for which these institutions were later individually
established.
In December 1908, the Russian Orthodox Christian
Immigrant Society of North America was founded and
established at the initiative of Archbishop Platon. Its pur-
pose was to help and protect newly-arrived Russian immi-
grants from Austria-Hungary, Galicia and Russia. The first
officers were Archbishop Platon, Honorary Chairman; Arch- St. Vladimir’s National Home and Bank, NYC.
a press that printed its own daily newspaper, The Russian
Immigrant, and the American Orthodox Messenger, under
the editorship of Fathers Alexander Nemolovsky and Alex-
ander Hotovitzky; and operated a library and conducted
classes in religious instruction and English language.
addition the home operated a hostel for many of the faith-
ful visiting in the area for fifty cents a day.
From January through December 1913, the Society
sponsored the entrance of 2,370 Russians and Carpatho-
Russians into the United States. By 1919, its role began to
diminish as did the immigration. The Second All-American
Sobor, in Cleveland, that year decided to sell the home and
to use the revenues to reduce the growing debt of the
Diocese which resulted from the Russian
Throughout its life, the Society was funded mostly by the
Russian Orthodox Mutual Aid Society, and partially by
various benefactors and by the Holy Synod in Russia.
St. Platon’s Orthodox Theological Seminary
At the recommendation of Archbishop Platon, the Holy
Synod of the Church in Russia approved and financed the
transfer of the North American Russian Orthodox Theo-
logical Seminary from Minneapolis to an area closer to the
diocesan seat in New York City. Additional contributions
for this came from the Russian Orthodox Mutual Aid
Society. This relocation of the Seminary would allow for its
much more careful and efficient direction and operation by
the Church Administration.
In 1912 the Diocese bought fourteen and a half acres
with a large mansion between the cities of Bergenfield and
Tenafly in New Jersey, for $21,000.00. The mansion housed
dormitory space, classrooms, and offices. Another
was added for a chapel, which was named for the Venerable
Platon, the Confessor of the Studios.
The objective of St. Platon’s Seminary was to train
priests, choir directors and teachers to serve in the parishes
of the North American Diocese.
The training program consisted of a four-year course of
academic study of theology, daily liturgical life and field
work in parishes of the Diocese. Upon completion of the
following curriculum the students were awarded a diploma:
St. Platon’s Seminary, Tenafly, New Jersey.
oe! ee ee
3 oh “% ‘wis
A ON Se ite
In
Revolution.
St. Platon’s Seminary Baseball Team.
The first year consisted of introductory studies in Old
Testament; New Testament; Dogmatic, Fundamental, Moral
and Pastoral Theology; History of the Early Church, the
Russian Church and Sectarianism; Homiletics; Liturgical
Practice and Catechism. The second year course of philo-
sophical and scientific studies consisted of introductions to
Philosophy, History of Philosophy, Logic, Psychology,
Physiology, Hygenics, Physics, Mathematics and Pedagogics.
The third year course on philological studies consisted of
Russian and English language and grammar, Histories of
Russian and English Literature, English Literature and Lexi-
cography. The fourth year course on political science studies
consisted of Sociology, Histories of Russia, the United
States and Western Civilization, and Church Music. During
the summer vacations the students either returned home
room with permission to work or stayed at St. Tikhon’s Monas-
tery for field work in Liturgical Practice.
Admission to the Seminary was granted on the basis of
successful completion of an entrance exam for which the
candidates could prepare by studying a suggested bibliog-
raphy that was distributed by the Admissions Office, favor-
able recommendation of the candidate’s parish priest and
evaluation of the candidate’s own desire and motive for
entering the Seminary. Tuition plus Room and Board was
$81.00 per semester, with a $6.00 book fee.
The faculty of the Seminary included Archpriests Leonid
Turkevich, Michael Ilyinsky, Peter Popoff, John Kozitsky,
Sergius Snegireff, Eugene Krysanovsky; Priest Vasily Ama-
tov; Archimandrites Innocent Pustynsky and Sebastian
Dabovich; Reverend Doctors Irvine, Stewart, Pierce; Mr.
Andrey Rozdestvensky and Professor Vera Johnson. From
1912 through 1923 seventy-eight students enrolled.
St. Platon’s Seminary contributed two groups of clergy
to the North American Church: the classes of 1921 and
1922. The graduates of these classes who served the Amer-
ican Church as priests were: Afanasy Hubiak, John Kivko,
John Kozakovich, Dimitri Ressetar, John Rusyn, Joseph
Pishtey, Vladimir Prislopsky, Simeon Nemetz, Peter Jan-
kura, Andrew Fedetz, Gregory Homko, Alexis Revera,
Peter Kreta, Emilian Skuby, Afanasy Besmertniuk, Prokopy
Marchenkoff, Sava Kavalchuk and Gabriel Davidiuk.
 :
;
a,
¢.WT’
;
‘‘
oa

St. Platon’s Seminary, Tenafly, New

Jersey, 1912-1922.
 Students of St. Platon’s Seminary,
Tenafly, New Jersey.

With the termination of financial assistance from the

Church in Russia in 1918, the Seminary experienced a finan-
cial collapse. As early as September 1918, Bishop Alexander
made an emergency appeal to all the faithful for funds:
Classes in our Seminary cannot begin until October
1, old style. The Seminary building is presently being
repaired.
I heartily ask all of our clergy to take a collection
in Church for the Seminary next Sunday, and to send
it to the Consistory without delay. The need is ter-
tible. Every cent is precious. For the sake of Christ,
help us. Fathers and brothers, inspire your parish-
ioners with heartfelt sermons...
Bishop Alexander
September 13, 1918
The students traveled around the eastern states giving
benefit concerts to try to raise money to save the school.
The All-American Council of 1919 noted that the needs and
debts incurred by the Seminary totaled $22,500.00. The
school was able to exist in Tenafly through 1922, but in
1923 moved to the Russian National Home on 17th Street
in New York City. The following year it closed due to com-
plete lack of funds. In 1923 the alumni published a month-
ly magazine called Alma Mater, to raise funds for the semi-
nary’s reopening. But for the next fifteen years, until 1938
when St. Vladimir’s and St. Tikhon’s Seminaries were
organized, the Diocese was to have no seminary.

Graduates of St. Platon’s Russian-American Theo-

logical Seminary, Tenafly, New Jersey. Seated,
left to right: Vladimir Prislopsky, Joseph J. Pishtey,
John Kivko, and Gabriel Daviduk. Standing: John
Russin, John Kulick, Afanasy Hubiak, Dimitri J.
Ressetar and John Kosakevich.

136
St. Viadimir’s Society of Zealots for Orthodoxy
The confrontation of Orthodox faithful in America by
an active Uniate movement under the leadership of Uniate
Bishop Soter Ortinsky, provoked Archbishop Platon to
organize the “Zealots for Orthodoxy” in 1912. The aims of
this organization were to propagate and encourage an
Orthodox consciousness among the faithful in the North
American Diocese, to dispel ignorance about sectarianism
and the Unia, to acquaint people with the teachings of the
Orthodox Faith, to extend material and moral support to
those Orthodox Christians living in the Carpathian who
are persecuted by the Unia, and ultimately to work towards
the unification of all Carpatho-Russian, Galician and Rus-
sian immigrants into a single Orthodox Church in America.
The Society worked for the realization of its aims by Nuns and Orphans of Holy Virgin Convent and Orphanage,
organizing brotherhoods on a local parish level and by dis- Springfield, Vermont.

seminating information through printed literature. Its major

official organ was a semi-monthly magazine The Zealots for
Orthodoxy edited by Bishop Alexander Nemolovsky.
The duties of the members were to be an example of
Christian living, to reflect in themselves the life of the
Orthodox Faith by partaking at least annually of the sacra-
ments of Confession and Communion, to defend the Ortho-
dox faith from Uniate and sectarian propaganda, to estab-
lish and care for the religious education of young people in
the parishes of the Mission, and to work for the realization
of an Orthodox basis in parish life.
The Society was supported by the dues oflocal chapter
members which was ten cents a month. Eight cents of this
fee went for the work of the national organization and two
cents was retained by the local chapter for its own work.
Russian Orphan Home of Brooklyn and
Holy Virgin Protection Convent and Orphanage
In response to a petition of Archbishop Platon for the
expansion and improvement of the Diocesan Orphanage,
which was organized by Archpriest Alexis Toth in 1905, on
the grounds of St. Tikhon’s Monastery, the Mutual Aid
Society at its ninth convention in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsyl-
vania, responded with a contribution of $6,500.00 and the
Wilkes-Barre Women’s Society of St. Olga with $1,000.00.
Because of the inconvenient location of the monastery in
the wilderness, its great distance from schools, it was de-
cided to move the orphanage to newly-acquired quarters in
Brooklyn, New York, near Holy Trinity Church. Priest John
Chepeleff, rector of Holy Annunciation Church in the
 5 7

Lilie
On =
ool ES
Holy V irgin Protect
To
te ion
o®
ie ae-oF
ie)
toy) oc Le

~~

138
Brownsville section of Brooklyn, was appointed director of
the orphanage, Natalia S. Polevoy as director of education,
Anton Diachenko as choir-master, and A. Zayanchkovsky
as resident doctor. Many parishes of northeast Pennsylvania
supported the Orphanage generously, and the Orthodox
Women’s Mutual Aid Society considered its financial sup-
port to be their chief purpose.
In addition to caring for the education of the children in
American Public schools, the Orphanage held daily after-
noon classes in religious education and Russian language.
Daily morning and evening community prayers in the
orphanage chapel were included in the children’s schedule.
Because of the high cost of living expenses, continued
operation of the Orphanage in the New York City area
would soon have become impossible. Therefore it was
decided to move the Orphanage to the Holy Virgin Pro-
tection Convent, in Springfield, Vermont. The Convent had
more building space and more adequate facilities to properly
care for the fifty-three orphans. There the Orphanage was
supervised by Mother Pavlina and it grew to include over
one hundred orphans. Unfortunately, due to various internal
problems and the increasingly difficult financial situation in
the Diocese, the orphanage and convent were forced to
close in 1926. The property, though, is still maintained to-
day by the Springfield parish.
Holy Annunciation Russian Women’s College
The Church in its earliest times knew and felt the need
for a “Christian Culture,” whether or not the faithful ex-
pressed the idea as we do today. Because “God is the High-
est Life’? and because Christians are called by their very
Students and Dean of the Orthodox Women’s College,
nature to enter His life by an eternally endless process of
deification which lifts the human race above and beyond
the limitations of all human frailties, Christianity is not only
the highest culture but it alone is culture. This, in so many
words, was the philosophy of existence for the Russian
Womens’ College, which was expressed in the speeches
delivered on its opening day September 14, 1915, at
Brooklyn, New York. The college was opened formally by
Archbishop Evdokim with the celebration of a Divine
Liturgy and Service of Thanksgiving at Holy Annunciation
Chapel near the site of the College, and with an Opening Act
in the College Hall. The college was located in the former
Russian Orphan’s Home.
Archbishop Evdokim was personally responsible for the
idea and creation of the College. He chose the faculty and
supported the school totally with funds from the Mission.
The goal of the College, which was open to all Russian
Orthodox women, was to supply vocations for women in the
Mission. The vision which they had for these vocations was
not too different from the function of deaconesses in the
early Church: to serve as teachers, nurses and guardians and
to influence Christian society by their conscious Christian
presence, behavior and activity. The students, training and
formation consisted of three elements: academic, socio-
cultural and spiritual. They attended classes, worked with
people and participated in daily church services at their
chapel. One chief consideration of the school was, of course,
that their refined and educated young ladies, fit for the life
of the Church and its interests, would become wives of the
seminarians at St. Platon’s Seminary.
Brooklyn, 1915.
 Chapel, Dormitory and Classroom
buildings of the Holy Annuncia-
Women’s College, Brooklyn,
York.
Although the college was not accredited, its level of
operation was equal to the standards of any contemporary
private finishing school for girls. It was modeled after the
pattern of parochial schools in Russia for the children of
clergy.
The faculty and curriculum consisted of the following:
History of Western Civilization and Russian History,
Matushka Anna Turkevich; Sacred History and Liturgics,
Priest Peter Kohanik; Geography, Z. I. Chernobaeva; Arith-
metic, Matushka Anna Mischerskaya and I. B. Cherepnin;
Pedagogics, Archbishop Evdokim and Archpriest Leonid
Turkevich; Russian and Church Slavonic, Matushka Eugenia
Kohanik; French, Z. I. Chernobaeva; English, Priest Nathan-
iel Irvine; Domestic Management, Novice Mikhaila; Hygen-
ics, Home Economics and Serving, Novice Andrea; Church
Music, Hieromonk Seraphim (Oblivantzev) and Matushka
Anna Mescherskaya. The President of the College was Arch-
bishop Evdokim; the Dean of the College, E. A. Krylova and
the Director of Studies, Archpriest Leonid Turkevich.
FATHER NATHANIEL IRVINE
Father Nathaniel Ingram Irvine was one of the pioneers
of Orthodox missionary work in America in the English
language. Born in Ireland in 1850, he was ordained as a
priest in the Protestant Episcopal Church in 1874 after
studies at General Theological Seminary in New York.
After serving in parishes in the East and Midwest, he was
assigned to a parish in Huntingdon, Pennsylvania. Follow-
ing a conflict with the local bishop over church discipline
in regards to the second marriage of a woman in the parish,
he was relieved of his duties in 1900. He spent the next
five years in serious study of the Episcopal Church with
special attention to church unity. After serious delibera-
tion, he decided that only the Orthodox Church had pre-
served the fullness of truth and that total church unity
could only be achieved through the Orthodox Church.
In 1905, he contacted Archbishop Tikhon through his
friend Archimandrite Sebastian Dabovich, asking to be
received into the Orthodox Church and ordained to the
priesthood. After serious consideration and investigation,
Archbishop Tikhon received him by chrismation and on
140
New
At the end of the first academic year, its total student
body of seven girls from ages 17 to 25 was graduated, and
the faculty and administration looked forward to another
such successful class for the coming fall. Unfortunately, the
financial collapse of the mission which accompanied Arch-
bishop Evdokim’s return to Russia that summer made it
impossible to reopen the school.
While none of the preceding institutions exist today,
their founding gives us an understanding of the fact that the
North American Diocese had planned from the earliest
times to possess all the necessary institutions of a mature
and growing local Church. While the institutions have come
and gone, the spirit which they embodied has continued to
live on in new institutions, founded in stabler times and
given the proper food for further growth and development.
Father John Matusiak
and Vasily Lickwar
November 4, 1905, ordained him to the diaconate. The
next day, he was ordained to the priesthood and was
placed in charge of “English service and English work” at
St. Nicholas Cathedral. Many of his Episcopalian friends
broke off their friendship with him over the ordination,
but Father Nathaniel continued in what he believed was
right.
Father Nathaniel faithfully carried out the duties as-
signed to him. He and his wife taught church school
classes at St. Nicholas Cathedral and at the Syrian St.
Nicholas Church in Brooklyn. At the Cathedral, he cele-
brated the Liturgy in English on some weekdays and
served Sunday Vespers in English. He also wrote articles on
the content of the faith and on relations with the Episco-
pal Church for Al Kalimat and the Russian-American
Orthodox Messenger. Serving the Church as a teacher, he
taught at the seminaries in Minneapolis and Tenafly and at
St. Mary’s College for Women in Brooklyn. Father
Nathaniel continued to advocate English in Church services
and Church unity until his death on January 23, 1921, in
Brooklyn.
Father David Abramtsev
 EDUCATIONAL
Education was a primary concern of the missionary
bishops and priests in America from the very beginning. The
establishment of mission schools in Alaska, Minneapolis and
Cleveland as well as pastoral schools in Sitka, San Francisco
and Minneapolis, organized by Bishops Innocent, Vladimir,
Nicholas and Tikhon, led to an early concern and awareness
for the development of educational programs in the diocese
(cf. Chapters II and III).
Perhaps the best example of leadership in the area of
education in this early period was that provided by Father
Leonid Turkevich (later Metropolitan Leonty). Although he
already had the combined responsibility of rector of the
Seminary and pastor of the local parish in Minneapolis, he
still found time to develop an extremely full program of
education for the children and adults of the parish. His
program was based on sound Orthodox principles of educa-
tion, integrating all elements of teaching, liturgical experi-
ence, and common action and witness as necessary and
complementary aspects of spiritual development. A brief
look at the educational activities organized by Father
Turkevich reveals both the vision and tremendous energy of
the man who helped to guide the educational work of the
Church in America for nearly fifty years.
Father Turkevich assumed his duties as rector of the
Minneapolis Seminary in 1906. Since the mission school
had been transferred to Cleveland, becoming a preparatory
school for future seminarians, Father Leonid began the task
of organizing another school for the parish. In September
1907, a day school of three divisions was established, pro-
viding courses in religion, Russian language, arithmetic and
English. Examinations were given semi-annually by visiting
bishops: e.g. Platon, who visited in October 1907 and March
1908, and Innocent, who came to give examinations in May
ACTIVITY 1900 — 1917
1907. By 1908, the enrollment numbered 108 students in
three classes of approximately 35 students per class. In
October of 1908, a regular elementary school was also
established for 40 students. By 1909, it appears that these
two programs were merged into one, as the faculty was
changed and four divisions of the school are mentioned.
In addition to this school, Father Turkevich organized
an evening catechism school for older children which met
from eight to ten o’clock every evening during the winter
months. Attendance varied between 35 to 60 students. By
1912, the evening school had an enrollment of 144 students
—55 in an upper division and 89 in the lower. In later years,
this school offered a four-year course of study.
A Sunday school was also organized by Father Leonid.
Classes began in the fall and continued until Great Lent. In
all of the educational programs established by Father Turke-
vich, regular attendance at all services was required, the
students participated in the reading and singing, and con-
fession and communion was required at least during the
Advent and Great Lenten seasons.
Defenders of Orthodox Religious Life
As a complementary form of education, Father Turke-
vich organized two societies in the parish: the Society of the
Defenders of Orthodox Religious Life and the Russian
Library Association, organized in 1907 and 1908, respec-
tively. The society of “Defenders” had two main purposes.
Its primary aim was to insure the beauty and quality of the
liturgical life of the church, preserving both the form and
content according to proper church order. The second aim
concerned the regulation of the members’ private lives,
ordering them according to the commandments of the
Church school classes such as
this one in Auburn, New York
were conducted in Jersey City,
Passaic, Wilkes-Barre, Mayfield,
Cleveland, Minneapolis and
Bridgeport, 1916.
14]
Church and striving always to live a truly Christian life, es-
pecially in relationship to their family and friends. Any
Orthodox Christian man or woman over 12 years of age was
eligible to join the organization. Upon entry he would an-
nounce to the other members his desire to live up to the
purpose of the organization. There were no social or occu-
pational barriers to membership except for those engaged in
work considered harmful to Christian and human morals.
Membership was denied to alli of those of anti-political,
anti-religious and immoral organizations (communists, anar-
chists, socialists, atheists). Those under age had to obtain
the permission oftheir parents before being admitted, unless
the latter had disowned the Orthodox faith and recanted
honorable Christian living.
The members were divided according to age — young
boys and girls from twelve to twenty, and those over twenty
married or single. Each had to have a desire to serve God,
either by actual work in the interest of the church, or by
leading a godly and pious life, thereby setting an example
to others of chastity, religion and industry. If amember so
desired, the priest would appoint him to perform a certain
task either in church during the services, or on the outside
in some community action. The older members had to abide
by the conditions put forth by St. Paul in his first epistle to
Timothy (I Timothy 3:2-13). These rules for behavior in
church and daily life became deeply rooted in the people
and many benevolent acts were practiced as a result of its
institution in the life of the parish.
Library Societies
The Russian Library Association was founded for the
promotion of education and named in honor of Bishop
Nicholas of Warsaw (formerly of North America). The par-
ish priest was the president of the organization which spon-
sored religious discussions, a theatrical group, a singing club,
and occasionally discussions on patriotic themes. Monies
were collected to sponsor these projects as well as the estab-
lishment of a library and reading room in the parish. Many
parishes developed these educational societies, library groups
or theatrical organizations for the cultural development of
the people.
Russian Library Association in Minneapolis with Father
Turkevich, 1909.
142
Actor’s Guild, Monessen, Pennsylvania.
These examples illustrate not only the energetic educa-
tional activity organized by Father Turkevich, but also the
types of programs that were eventually organized in many
of the larger parishes in the country. Two types of programs
began to be normative in most parishes — the Sunday or
Saturday school and some form of evening or afternoon
school. In larger parishes where priests and instructors were
subsidized by the Church in Russia, collapse or diminution
of educational work followed the Russian revolution and
the stoppage of funds for materials and ‘salaries. However,
the Sunday and evening schools continued but these were
often reduced primarily to the teaching of the Russian
language with a minimum of religion and church history
included.
During the period of 1914-1917, Archbishop Evdokim
(who was formerly Dean of the Moscow Theological Acad-
emy) planned to develop a more effective parish school
system, and to establish a training school for teachers of
parish and Sunday schools. The Woman’s College (cf. insti-
tutions) was probably a step in this direction, but World
War I prevented the full development of this plan with the
diversion of funds in Russia to other sources.
Education in Canada
In Edmonton and Winnipeg, parish schools were estab-
lished with about 20 pupils each. Both operated, however,
only when an adequate teacher or psalomchik was available
to conduct classes. Catechism, liturgical singing, and Russian
reading and writing were taught. The tuition fee was fifty
cents per month.
In Mundar, Alberta, Father Panteleimon Bozlick estab-
lished a parochial school in 1916 for children of the Western
Provinces. He managed to collect $600 from nearby farmers
who were Orthodox parishioners and began to build a school
which was completed at a cost of $3000. Twenty-five stu-
dents came from the remote areas of Canada and as far
away as Saskatchewan. The plans for the school were ap-
proved by the Consistory in New York. The students paid
two dollars a month for room and board and all expenses.
In 1917, Father Panteleimon was appointed Dean of the
area and assigned to Edmonton. His successor, Hieromonk
Nikon Mikulsky was unable to handle the operation ofthe
Leonid
school and it was soon closed after approximately five
months of operation.
 A SURVEY OF NON-RUSSIAN ORTHODOX GROUPS
FROM 1898 TO 1917
After 1890, immigration from eastern Europe increased
rapidly. Groups of Greeks, Albanians, Romanians, Serbians,
and others were establishing scattered communities through-
out the continent. This growth was such that by 1905,
Archbishop Tikhon submitted a repost to the Pre-Conciliar
Commission in Moscow, outlining his “‘vision” of a pan-
national Orthodoxy in America. According to an earlier
report in 1903, the entire body of parishes was to be en-
titled. the “Orthodox Church in America” and administered
canonically “under the jurisdiction of the Russian Holy
Synod.” In his 1905 report, however, the Archbishop noted
that the North American Diocese “is composed not only of
different nationalities, but also of different Orthodox
Churches, which though one in faith, each have their peculi-
arities in the canonical order, the office ritual and the parish
life. These peculiarities are dear to them and altogether
tolerable from the general Orthodox point of view. This is
why we do not consider that we have the right to interfere
with the national character of the Churches in this country;
and on the contrary, try to preserve it, giving each a chance
to be governed directly by chiefs of the same nationality.”
Archbishop Tikhon went on to note that the establishment
of a bishopric for the Orthodox Syrians, headed by Bishop
Raphael of Brooklyn, was an example of what could and
should be done in regards to the other national groups. His
final proposal, in view of the facts, was a North American
Diocese “composed as follows:
1) The archbishopric of New York, with all the de-
pendent Russian Churches in the United States and
Canada;
2) The Bishopric of Alaska, which is to embrace all
the churches of the Orthodox inhabitants:
Russian, Aleutians, Red Indians, and Eskimo;
3) The Bishopric of Brooklyn: Syrians;
4) The Bishopric of Chicago: Serbians;
5) The Bishopric of( ? ): Greeks.”
Thus, a little over one hundred years after the first mis-
sionaries came to North America from Valaam, the diocese
had grown in such a way as to require a new organizational
system, one which would include all national Orthodox
groups. Unfortunately, the “vision” of Archbishop Tikhon
did not become a reality, due to the events during and
following the Russian Revolution.
I. The Greeks
Greek immigrants who maintained affiliation with the
Orthodox Church in the New World became identified with
parishes that followed one of two paths of development in
parochial life.
IN AMERICA
Some of them, which constitute a minority, were early
immigrants who joined with other Orthodox settlers to
form multi-national parishes under the jurisdiction of the
Russian Mission. The history of these communities already
has been outlined in Chapter 2: Seattle, Washington; Port-
land, Oregon; San Francisco, California; Pueblo, Colorado;
Galveston, Texas; New Orleans, Louisiana; and New York,
New York. These constitute the most important pan-
Orthodox settlements of the late nineteenth century. With
the exception of one of these, New Orleans, the Greeks in
every other pan-Orthodox parish eventually broke away and
formed their own community. The reverse took place in
New Orleans, but the fate of the non-Greek parishioners
has not been clearly determined.
The majority of Greek immigrants after 1890 formed
parishes that were for the most part exclusively Greek. Ac-
cording to a report prepared by Father Michael G.
Andreades, more than 50 such parishes were organized be-
tween 1890 and 1915.
Most of the parishes, if not all, began as communities or
societies organized by laymen. They were not founded by
bishops or priests. On the contrary, these organized gorups
of laymen contacted ecclesiastical authorities abroad for a
priest, or simply contacted a priest they knew, who then
proceeded to make arrangements with his local diocesan
bishop for a release to serve the new parish in America.
Unfortunately, sometimes the priest appointed by the local
communities arrived without any official permission. Even
worse, there are reports of instances in which an appointed
“clergyman” could not substantiate the validity of his
ordination.
Ultimately, the source of the problem and confusion lay
in the fact that prior to 1918 there was no resident Greek
bishop to organize the parishes and administer their various
needs. Records show that bishops visited America on occa-
sion, but none of them remained.
Before 1900, the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the
Church of Greece were both involved in the appointment of
priests for America. Father Paisius Ferentinos was appointed
by the Church of Greece in 1892 to serve the Holy Trinity
Parish in New York City. Father Kallinicos Thilveis was
appointed the following year to serve the Annunciation
Parish, also in New York City. This duality in administrative
jurisdiction continued until 1908 when, due to certain
political difficulties with the Turkish government, the
Ecumenical Patriarchate issued a tomos whereby the Greek
parishes in America were “temporarily released”’ to the care
of the Holy Synod of Greece. The difficulties arose over
allegations from the Turkish government that Greek clergy
in America were actively participating in anti-Turkish agita-
143
tion. Because of this, the Turkish government threatened
reprisals against the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which
was powerless both in protecting itself and in controlling the
activities of the Greek people in America.
Each parish in America functioned mostly on an autono-
mous basis, particularly with regard to its inner parish life.
A bishop was contacted when the parish needed something
it could not provide on its own. A good example was the
parish financial program. In contrast to the situation in
Greece, parishes in America were forced to seek financial
support from among their own parishioners. On the other
hand, they relied on the Church authorities in Europe to
provide them with their priest. The situation regarding pro-
curement of “‘antimensia,” the altar cloth upon which the
Divine Liturgy is celebrated, varied from one parish to an-
other. Records show that on many occasions prior to World
War I, Greek parishes contacted the local bishop of the
Russian Mission for the “‘antimensia.” Those requests were,
for the most part, submitted by the priests who, as noted
above, were technically under the jurisdiction of the Holy
Synod of Greece from 1908 until shortly after World War I.
This inconsistency in policy reflected the confusion and dis-
organization that was caused by the absence of an organized
diocese for the Greek parishes. On the other hand, perhaps
because of incidents such as those which took place in New
York in 1904, cf. Chapter II, the local Russian Diocese
stood ready to offer assistance whenever it could and when-
ever asked to do so, but apparently it felt that it should not
become involved further in local parish matters of the Greek
communities. On the local parish level, there are recorded
instances of friendly cooperation and mutual assistance be-
Il. The Syrians
Since immigration of the Syrians began as early as 1878,
their number had increased sufficiently by 1895 to warrant
a certain Dr. Ibrahim Arbeely, president of the newly organ-
ized “‘Syrian Orthodox Benevolent Society” in New York
City, to write to Archimandrite Raphael (Hawaweeny),
professor of Arabic at the Kazan Theological Academy,
asking him to come to America. As his own request to the
Holy Synod, Archimandrite Raphael arrived in October
1895, and began to administer the Syrian parishes. In 1902,
he founded St. Nicholas Church in Brooklyn, which was
dedicated by Archbishop Tikhon. The number of Syrian
parishes had increased to 7 by 1903, when Archbishop
Tikhon, on his visit to Russia that year, requested permis-
sion to consecrate Archimandrite Raphael to the episcopate.
His request was granted, and early in 1904 Archimandrite
Raphael was consecrated Bishop of Brooklyn. This was the
first Orthodox consecration to take place in America. Thus,
the Syrian parishes became the most fully integrated group
in the North American Diocese, possessing their own
bishop. After Bishop Raphael’s death in 1915, no successor
was appointed until the consecration of Bishop Aftimios
(Ofiesh) in May 1917, by Metropolitan Evdokim.
Problems had arisen within the Syrian Mission in 1914,
when Metropolitan Germanos Shehadi of Seleucia and
Baalbek came to America to collect funds for an agricultural
144
tween the Greek people and other Orthodox ethnic groups.
For example, when the Greeks in Seattle decided in 1916
to form their own parish, located on Yale Avenue and
Thomas Street, the entire St. Spiridon parish, to which the
Greeks belonged up to that point, escorted them in a solemn
procession to mark the door opening ceremonies of the new
church. Instead of harsh feelings, the bond of love they
built over the years remained intact.
Efforts were made to obtain a Greek bishop for the
Greek communities in America. In one instance, which took
place in 1912, Father Michael Andreades, Dean of the
Western American Deanery of the North American Diocese,
visited Ecumenical Patriarch Joachim III (and not the Holy
Synod of Greece) and proposed that a Greek bishop be sent
to America. Father Andreades explained that a diocese had
been established by the Russian Church in North America.
It is perhaps because of this that the Patriarch suggested
that Archbishop Platon made arrangements through the
Holy Synod of Russia to recommend to the Holy Synod of
Greece that “‘a Greek bishop be appointed for America who
has studied in a Russian theological academy.”
Nothing resulted from Father Andreades’ efforts. The
situation remained the same until 1918, when Archbishop
Meletios Metaxakis, who was visiting America with Bishop
Alexander of Rodostolon, appointed the latter to oversee
the Greek parishes in America and begin forming a diocese.
By 1922, the task was completed and the new Greek Ortho-
dox Archdiocese of North and South America was officially
incorporated.
school in his diocese. According to an archpastoral letter,
issued by the bishops of the North American Diocese in
May 1917, Metropolitan Germanos was received “with open
arms and in the spirit of brotherly love by Bishops Alexan-
der of Alaska and Canada and Raphael of Brooklyn.” He
was permitted to conduct services and “did not meddle in
the affairs of the church in any manner whatever.” In time,
however, Metropolitan Germanos “declared himself to be
the representative in this country of the Patriarch of Anti-
och, without any permission or legal warrant to that effect
whatsoever.” This was done in spite of the fact that the
Patriarch of Antioch, in September 1915, wrote to Bishop
Alexander and subsequently to Metropolitan Evdokim,
asking them to pastor the Syrian flock until a successor for
the late Bishop Raphael could be appointed. Metropolitan
Germanos was thus censured by the North American
hierarchy. Yet shortly thereafter, Metropolitan Germanos
attempted to establish his own separate diocese. On Febru-
ary 18, 1918, he. incorporated it as “The Syrian Holy Or-
thodox Greek Catholic Mission in North America.” Despite
orders to return to Lebanon, he remained in America. The
majority of Syrian parishes, however, remained a faithful,
integral part of the North American Diocese, headed by
Bishop Aftimios of Brooklyn.
PROTOPRESBYTER MICHAEL G. ANDREADES
One of the most outstanding Greek Orthodox priests in
America in the first half of the twentieth century was the
Reverend Protopresbyter Michael G. Andreades. He repre-
sents a wide cross-section of the Greek Orthodox clergy-
man’s mission in America. His life and works aptly describe
two of the Orthodox Church’s most prominent directions
pursued in its establishment and growth in the New World,
as typified by the early Russian Mission and the Greek
Orthodox Archdiocese. Both elements are uniquely present
in Father Andreades, distinct yet not in conflict. To him,
there was no contradiction or conflict of interests in being
an Orthodox Christian in a parish wifh members of various
national backgrounds or serving a parish in either a Russian
or a Greek jurisdiction. His biography reveals why and how
_ this was possible for him.
Father Andreades was born in the Phanar section of Con-
stantinople on August 21, 1874. As a young boy he was
sent by his family to study at a seminary school in Sim-
feropol, Crimea, in Russia. In 1890, having graduated from
that school, he returned to Constantinople to study in the
patriarchal school in the Phanar. Five years later, he went to
St. Petersburg, Russia, for advanced courses in Theology at
the Academy. The Inspector (Dean) during the 1896-1897
academic year was Platon, later Metropolitan of the Russian
Church in America. In 1900, he graduated from the St.
Petersburg Academy. the Russian mission in North America ended that year.

The following year, he went to Bakhtchi-Serai, Crimea,
and was ordained to the diaconate by Archbishop Nicholas
(Ziorov) of Tavrida and Simferopol, who previously had
served as Bishop of the Aleutians and Alaska. For four
years, Deacon Andreades served the Church as an educator
as well as a clergyman. From 1901-1902, he served as
deacon and instructor at the Greek parish of St. John the
Forerunner in Kerch, Crimea. During the following two
years, he served as a deacon and director of the Greek-
‘Russian School in the Greek community in Theodosia,
Crimea.
On March 25, 1905, he arrived in San Francisco to serve
in the Russian Archdiocese of the Aleutian Islands and
North America. The Primate of the Archdiocese, Arch-
bishop Tikhon, ordained him to the priesthood in St. Spyri-
don Church of Seattle, Washington.
His first assignment, a temporary one, was to serve the
Russian parish in Scranton, Pennsylvania (April-September
1905). This parish was waiting for the arrival of its perma-
nent priest, Father Ivan Kurdyaev, who was appointed by
the Holy Synod of Russia. It is coincidental that the reader
in this parish at the time was a certain Deacon Ivan Kedrov-
sky, who later became the Metropolitan of the “Living
Church.”
Father Andreades left Scranton to assume pastoral duties
among the Orthodox people in Wilkeson and Seattle, Wash-
ington. He remained in Seattle until 1916. After a brief stay
in Simpson, Pennsylvania, he was assigned to the Russian-
Serbian parish of Sts. Constantine and Helen in Galveston,
Texas, where he served until 1918. His pastoral duties in
Because of his capability, zeal and diligence, Father An-
dreades was appointed to important administrative positions
in the Russian mission. From 1909-1912, he was the dean
of the Russian-Serbian parishes on the Pacific Coast, an area
extending from San Diego, California, to Vancouver, British
Columbia. From 1912-1916, while serving the parish in
Seattle, he was also the dean of all the parishes in Alaska.
Then from 1916-1918, he served as dean of the Russian
parishes in the southern part of the United States and pastor
of Sts. Constantine and Helen Church in Galveston.
Throughout this period, the Orthodox parishes under his
immediate supervision and guidance, consisting of Orthodox
people of various nationalities, apparently remained united
within the Russian mission. Father Andreades recognized
the importance of all the traditions represented in his
parishes, and he strove to keep all his parishioners united
under the banner of Orthodoxy.
After the Russian Revolution, Father Andreades peti-
tioned his bishop for his release to the newly-formed Greek
Diocese in America, established by Metropolitan Meletios
Metaxakis and headed locally by Bishop (later Archbishop)
Alexander of Rodostolon. His request for a transfer was
based solely on the political ramifications of the Bolshevik
Revolution in Russia and the discontinuation of salaries and
clergy pensions resulting from the revolution. A full release
was granted by Archbishop Alexander Nemolovsky.
From 1918 until the time of his retirement in 1949,
Father Andreades served in a number of parishes in the
Greek Archdiocese: Houston, Texas, 1918-1919; Charles-
ton, South Carolina, 1919-1920; Savannah, Georgia, 1920-
1923; Lowell, Massachusetts, 1924 (he organized the Trans-

145
figuration Parish in that city); Atlanta, Georgia, 1924-1925;
New York, New York, 1925-1928; Newark, New Jersey,
1929; Orange, New Jersey, 1929-1932; Baltimore, Mary-
land, 1932-1935; and Jamaica, New York, 1935-1949.
Among his many activities in the Greek Archdiocese was
his appointment by Archbishop Athenagoras in 1931 to the
Missions Program Executive Board.
In 1947, at the age of 75, he underwent a kidney opera-
tion at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. He went to Arizona for
a five-week period of recuperation and then,to Florida for
an extended rest. Even at his advanced age, he demonstrated
a strong will and drive to return to pastoral duties. His cor-
respondence late in life, written legibly and neatly, contin-
ued to show clarity of thought.
He petitioned Archbishop Athenagoras for retirement
from full parish duties on December 1, 1948, but the latter
persuaded him to remain at the parish. He petitioned again
in 1949 and was then given permission.
While living in retirement in New Jersey, Father An-
dreades continued to be actively involved in pastoral duties
and in Archdiocesan matters, particularly with certain de-
velopments among the Slavic groups in the early 1950's.
Then, in the summer of 1959, at the age of 85, he fell asleep
in the Lord.
Among his many activities, one cannot overlook his
prolific writings, especially in his correspondence and re-
ports. The first extensive report on the Greek communities
in America was prepared by Father Andreades in 1915 and
submitted to Archbishop Evdokim. It is a monumental
work on a relatively bleak period in the history of the
Greek communities. What is even more important is that it
was prepared for the local missionary administration and
not a Holy Synod located in a distant land.
Father Andreades never published a book on his mission-
ary work, but he did submit articles to various Greek, Rus-
sian and English periodicals. He published an English-
language newspaper, the American Hellenic World, on a
weekly basis for three years. In addition to reporting news,
its purpose was “to elevate the Greek name” among the
American people. Feature articles dealt with contributions
made to civilization by Greeks. He published about 1500
copies each week. They were mailed to senators, congress-
men, societies, libraries and distinguished Americans in
Washington, D.C., social circles.
In 1931, he published an extensive work called “Soviet
Russia and the Red Paradise on Earth” in an Athenian
periodical called New Creation. His plan was to publish it
in book form, but he never succeeded in doing so because of
a lack of financial support. Among his various unpublished
works are manuscripts on the three Divine Liturgies and the
Seven Sacraments of the Orthodox Church.
A prolific writer, Father Andreades was also an out-
spoken, articulate, courageous, dedicated priest. He always
remained faithful to the canonical structure of the Ortho-
dox Church. An excellent example of this may be garnered
from the careful procedure he followed in asking for a
transfer from the Russian Mission to the Greek Archdio-
146
cese. This undoubtedly reflected the excellent training
which he received in the theological schools in Constan-
tinople and St. Petersburg. His obedience to the bishops is
evident in all his correspondence and reports, even when he
felt he was being treated unjustly.
An important document describing his thoughts and
feelings is his letter of February 7, 1928, to Archbishop
Alexander of the Greek Archdiocese. In it, he complained
that he was experiencing financial difficulties while waiting
in New York for more than two years to be assigned to a
parish. He pointed out that he served the Russian mission
faithfully for 18 years and was highly respected by the
Russian bishop. He immediately referred to a visit he and
Archbishop Alexander paid to Metropolitan Platon in 1924
in which the latter praised Father Andreades’ work highly.
During the turbulent years of the 1920’s, when there was
great ecclesiastical disorder in America, Father Andreades
preached in parishes in many southern cities about the
correct canonical order in the Church and the importance
of rejecting self-ordained and proclaimed bishops. He him-
self rejected an offer to break from the Greek Archdiocese
and form an “independent” parish in Georgia.
Father Andreades was particularly annoyed by the idea
or suggestion that he should not be treated equally with other
Greek priests because of his past association in the Russian
Mission. He made this point clear in his letter to Archbishop
Alexander. He pointed out that certain Greek priests who
had at one time or another supported an uncanonical bishop
were never left without a parish assignment. In fact, he
asked the Archbishop point blank if his ordination by Arch-
bishop Tikhon was playing any role in keeping him un-
assigned.
Does this mean that Father Andreades might be thought
of as a pan-Orthodox priest, a clergyman completely re-
moved from sentiments revealing a spirit of nationalism?
The answer can be found in his letter of February 1928.
He hinted that, if necessary, he could appeal for a release to
rejoin the Russian Church; however, his “Greek conscience
and duty to the Greek nation would not permit it.”
From his writings and various reports and documents
pertaining to his life and activities, it becomes clear that
Father Andreades was a unique person. A man of strong
convictions and character, he seemed to accept everything
that was positive, vital and fundamental to the overall
Orthodox milieu in the New World. He was not the only
Greek Orthodox priest serving in the Russian Mission in the
early part of the twentieth century. There were others.
Father Andreades states that up to 1927 at least seven
Greek priests had served in the Russian Church. Further-
more, between 1922 and 1927, Metropolitan Platon re-
ceived 78 petitions from Greek-Americans for ordination
to the priesthood. What made Father Andreades an out-
standing priest is that he was a highly educated, prolific and
outspoken priest, and a dedicated pastor. Becauke of him,
posterity has received a great deal of important historical
information on Orthodoxy in America.
Alexander Doumouras
 Ill. The Serbians
Serbian immigration to America dates to the Civil War.
Serbian immigrants were instrumental in forming the Ortho-
dox Church in San Francisco, together with Greeks and
Russians. There were also Serbians in Alaska, arriving in the
latter half of the nineteenth century. The first Serbian-
American missionary, Archimandrite Sebastian (Dabovich),
was in fact born in San Francisco in 1863. He is credited
with the establishment of the first Serbian parish in 1892 in
Jackson, California. Other missionary priests and national
societies combined efforts to form new parishes, often in
conjunction with Russians, such as in Denver, Colorado.
The Serbians clearly formed a specific group within the
North American Diocese and apparently received greater
pastoral care than the Greeks did from the Russian bishops.
The lists of parishes within the North American Diocese,
printed in the Russian-American Orthodox Messenger in
1903 and 1906, cite the Serbian parishes as separate entities,
possessing their own administrator, parishes and clergy.
Although officially part of the Diocese, there was appar-
ently a certain vagueness as to the exact position of the
Serbian parishes within the Mission, and a certain amount
of congregationalism also was evident. According to one
report, “each Serbian Church community made its own
regulations, hiring and firing the parish priest at will .. .
there were no laws with which to regulate Serbian ecclesias-
tical'life...”
Archbishop Tikhon was undoubtedly well aware of this
situation when he made his report to the Pre-Conciliar Com-
mission in 1905, proposing that a special Diocese be erected
with Archimandrite Sebastian (Dabovich) as bishop. Un-
fortunate delays in the execution of this plan and other
problems led to a convocation of a Church Assembly in
Chicago late in 1913, under the chairmanship of the
Administrator, Father Sava Voyvodich, successor to Archi-
mandrite Sebastian. The minutes of this meeting show the
dissatisfaction of the Serbian-American clergy with the Dio-
cese, and among the meeting’s resolutions were the follow-
ing: to secede from the Russian Orthodox jurisdiction in
America and to join the jurisdiction of the Serbian Metro-
polia of Belgrade; to title the Church the “Serbian Ortho-
dox Church in North America,” with the seat of the bishop
in Chicago; and to divide this ecclesiastical unit into three
districts, each headed by a Bishop or Administrator. In ex-
pectation of the reply from Belgrade, the session of this
assembly was adjourned with the decision to reconvene later
in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.
The reply by the Metropolia of Belgrade, however, did
not come. At the Johnstown meeting, it was resolved to
submit the draft of the by-laws for Serbian parishes to the
Russian Archbishop Evdokim, who granted his approval
and expressed his hope that they be printed and distributed
to all Serbian parishes. He also emphasized his willingness
to help the Serbians to reorganize themselves. Thus the
chairmanship ofthe Serbian Mission continued under Father
Sava Voyvodich until 1917.
In October of 1916, the Second Assembly of Serbian
clergy and parishes met in Chicago under the presidency of
Archbishop Evdokim. During this convention, the by-laws
of the Russian Diocese, with a few amendments, were ac-
cepted by the Serbians. Other resolutions were passed,
which concerned the candidacy for the priesthood, the
promise that four pages of the Russian-American Orthodox
Messenger would be reserved as the official organ of the
Serbians. Unfortunately, due to the Russian Revolution and
the resulting chaos in America, all these plans, while valu-
able and practical, remained a dead letter.
IV. Other Groups
Among the other ethnic Orthodox groups who had im-
migrated to America in smaller numbers, the ecclesiastical
history of each is less complete.
The Albanians can trace the development of a solid
church life to 1908, when Theophan Noli was ordained to
the diaconate by Bishop Raphael and then to the priest-
hood by Metropolitan Platon in the same year, at the re-
quest of the large Albanian community in Boston. He was
quite active, especially in the area of translation, having
rendered the Liturgy into Albanian for the first time.
Several other Albanian communities were established within
the next decade with his help,and by 1919, at the Second
All-American Sobor, the Albanians were’ represented by
Archimandrite Theophan as their Administrator.
Bulgarian immigration became significant after 1903,
when several thousand Bulgarians came to America as the
result of the Macedonian insurrection. Being quite scattered,
they generally attended Russian churches, although as early
as 1907 the first Bulgarian parish was established in Madi-
son, Illinois. Gradually, other parishes were formed, and
apparently, in 1909, a small Mission was organized for them.
The Romanians founded their first parish in Cleveland,
Ohio, in 1904 and, being scattered, many also attended
Russian churches. Apparently a small Mission was also
organized specifically for their needs. (Cf. Chapter VIII for
additional information on the development of the Albanian
and Romanian dioceses.)
Father John Matusiak and
Alexander Doumouras
Reverend Fan Noli with group from Marlboro, Mass. 1908.
147

METROPOLITAN THEOPHAN (FAN) S. NOLI
Metropolitan Fan Noli was a leader of the Church both
in America and his native Albania. He was a pioneer in call-
ing for a united Orthodox Church in America and in the use
of English in services. Fan Stylian Noli was born in Ibrik
Tepe (Kuteza), an Albanian settlement in what is now
European Turkey, on January 6, 1882. Of Albanian peasant
stock, he was one of thirteen children. His early education
was in Greek primary and secondary schools. Throughout
his youth, Byzantine music was his main interest, and at
one time he was the main cantor at the Greek Cathedral in
Adrianople. It was from his family that Fan Noli received a
sense of identity as an Albanian. After completing his sec-
ondary education, he left home and traveled to various
Albanian colonies, located in such places as Athens and
Egypt, before finally arriving in New York in 1906.
It was in the United States that Noli began his life of
service in the Church. Within a year he ended up in Boston,
where there was already a large Albanian colony. After a
series of problems with the local Greek priest, these Alba-
nian immigrants wanted to have their own Albanian priest
and for this task they selected Fan Noli. After his selection,
he went to New York to see Archbishop Platon and Father
Alexander Hotovitzky. Following an investigation of the
Albanian community, Platon agreed to ordain Fan Noli. On
February 9, 1908, he was ordained to the priesthood by
Archbishop Platon at St. Nicholas Cathedral. Father The-
ophan then returned to Boston, where he served the first
Liturgy on March 18, 1908, using his own translation ofthe
service into Albanian.
The next few years were spent in organizing Albanian
parishes in America, including the Cathedral of St. George
in Boston. In March of 1918, he was appointed administra-
tor of the Albanian Orthodox Mission in America by Bishop
Alexander (Nemolovsky). He took monastic vows on
November 17, 1918, and was raised to the rank of archi-
mandrite. The following November, he was elected bishop
of the Albanian Orthodox Church in America by the
General Council of the Albanian Church, though unsettled
conditions prevented his consecration. Father Theophan
was also active in establishing Albanian organizations in
America and in writing for Albanian newspapers. During this
same era, he visited Albanian colonies throughout Europe.
With the Balkan Wars and the independence of Albania,
Father Theophan devoted more of his time to the cause of
Albania. He represented his native land at many conferences
and was a delegate to the League of Nations. He served in
148
tArek bahop Fan S.vot tt.
Second Apos ee of
the Albamiane’
the Albanian Parliament and was Prime Minister of Albania
in 1924. On November 21, 1923, he was consecrated a
bishop in Korcha, Albania, and was named Primate of All
Albania. After a change in the political climate in late 1924,
Bishop Theophan was forced to leave Albania. He spent
eight years in Germany trying to gain a visa to return to the
United States and was finally able to return in 1932. While
he was in Albania, he translated more liturgical books into
Albanian.
Upon arriving in the United States, he retired from
politics and resumed his duties as bishop of the Albanian
Orthodox Church in America. Bishop Theophan found that
most of the young people could no longer understand Alba-
nian. He decided to translate the liturgical books from
Greek into English, as he had once done with Albanian.
Before his death, he published eight church books in Eng-
lish. His great concern was for young people and for their
active participation in the Church. Bishop Theophan was
one of the first to call for an American Orthodox Church
and even for the establishment of a Patriarchate. He con-
sidered his Albanian Orthodox Church in America as a
daughter of the Russian Orthodox Church in America and
looked to it for the creation of a single Orthodox Church in
America. Bishop Theophan continued his education while
in America receiving a Bachelor of Music degree from the
New England Conservatory of Music in 1938 and a Ph.D.
from Boston University in 1945. He continued to lead his
flock and to advocate Orthodox unity until his death in
1965.
 PARISH
New immigration and the return of parishes to Ortho-
doxy from the Unia marked a rapid growth in the American
Diocese in the decade of 1907-1917. Over 100 parishes were
formed in the Diocese in this period located primarily on
the Eastern seaboard and extending to the Midwest.
Metropolitan New York—New Jersey
Jersey City
In 1889, the Brotherhood of Saints Peter and Paul was
founded as a means of assisting newly arriving immigrants
from the old country, of providing them with aid in the
form of homes, jobs, or financial help. As religious people,
the members of this brotherhood were also instrumental in
the establishment of an Orthodox Church in Jersey City,
their new home. A parish was founded on Chestnut Street,
Jersey City; this edifice served for ten years as their spiritual
center.
At the turn of the century, a new edifice was erected in
the downtown area of Jersey City, closer to the homes of
most people. At the same time, however, a rift developed in
the parish over the attempt to latinize the church. The faith-
ful Orthodox rebuffed this attempt of the Unia, and severed
themselves from those who accepted this form of Catholi-
cism.
The faithful Orthodox, still led by the members of the
Saints Peter and Paul Brotherhood, established again an
Orthodox congregation. His Eminence Metropolitan Platon
accepted this group as a member of the Russian Orthodox
Greek Catholic Church in America in 1907. In October of
that year. Archpriest Alexander Hotovitzky celebrated the
first Divine Liturgy for the group in a small “house church”’
in the downtown area; this church continued to bear the
name of the patron saints of the original organization,
Saints Peter and Paul. Father Hotovitzky continued to serve
the parish on a temporary basis from the Cathedral in New
York City for one year.
In 1908, Father Alexander Nemolovsky was assigned as
the first permanent pastor. With the new wave of immi-
grants from Slavic lands, it soon became necessary to find a
larger church edifice. A nearby Dutch Reformed Church
was purchased early in 1909 for $37,500.00, and gradually
the structure was renovated to conform to Orthodox tradi-
tions and liturgical needs. The large Gothic building was
adorned with three cupolas and bells. A beautiful wooden
iconostas was constructed; the interior of the church was
decorated with Orthodox iconography by Photius Bodasiuk
over a three year period.
Among the prominent pastors of Saints Peter and Paul
parish was the Mitred Archpriest John Adamiak, who served
the congregation and community for two decades. Father
John was instrumental in the reduction of the church debt
during his pastorate, despite the economic depression; he
was also responsible for the introductionof the English
language into the services and teaching functions of the par-
ish to meet the needs of the second generation of Orthodox
DEVELOPMENT
faithful. Aside from faithfully fulfilling his pastoral duties
in the parish, Father John also played an important role in
the Church center, and also served as Dean of the New
Jersey parishes.
The Very Rev. Michael Dziama had a brief but fruitful
tenure as pastor in the 1940’s. Under his guidance an or-
ganized Sunday School program was set up, the Senior and
Junior “R” Clubs were established, the church mortgage
was paid off, and the Sisterhood of the Protection of the
Virgin Mary was organized. The present pastor, the Rt. Rev.
John Skvir, has served the parish longer than any of his
predecessors, beginning his duties in October 1952. Under
Father Skvir’s supervision, an increased portion of the serv-
ices are held in English. However, Church Slavonic is still
preserved for the sizable number of parishioners who are
newly-arrived from Slavic lands. The number of new immi-
grants is surprising.
Although Saints Peter and Paul parish is located in the
downtown section of Jersey City and many other parishes
in similar situations have recently witnessed a decline or
have moved to the suburbs, this parish continues to thrive
and to serve its people in the inner city. It has constantly
been one of the major supporters of the Church Center of
the Orthodox Church in America and a benefactor of both
seminaries. The spiritual fervor and the generosity of the
congregation are indications of the Christian life that exists
in the Jersey City parish.
Brooklyn
The Cathedral of the Transfiguration of Our Lord was
started by immigrants around the turn of the century who
settled in the areas of New York City known as Williams-
burg, Greenpoint, Blissville and Maspeth. The congregation
first held its services in the home of one Luka Taras, serv-
iced on a temporary basis by Archpriest A. Hotovitzky
from St. Nicholas Cathedral. One Sunday they passed the
hat around from door to door, and raised the amazing
amount of $160. This was used as a down payment to pur-
chase the Brooklyn Methodist Church on North Sth for
$16,000. The first Church was consecrated in honor of St.
Volodimir (Vladimir), by Archbishop Tikhon. He presented
the parish with a most cherished and revered holy icon of
the Mother of God of Pochaev, “In blessing to the Russian
Orthodox people in Brooklyn.” The parish was formally
organized on April 5, 1908, by Dynosia Koosma, Stephen
Padlo, Luka Taras, Michael Romanek, Isidore Senko, Alex-
ander Vansach, Michael Vilchinsky, John Tsap, Basil Koval,
the two Karliak brothers, Platon Svist, Nicholas Kazeke-
vich, Makar Petrikevich, Paul Ganzha, and Theodore Kuno-
vich. The Rev. Theofan Buketoff was the first rector with
Mr. Chervinsky as his lay assistant. The Siste:hood of St.
Olga, and the Brotherhoods of St. Michael, Sts. Peter and
Paul, St. John the Baptist, St. Nicholas and Holy Trinity
joined the church. Beautifying the church according to
Orthodox traditions was begun.
149
 Plans for the iconostas were obtained from various Ortho-
dox cathedrals in Russia. A beautiful hand-carved, three-tier
oak iconostas was selected and built by a German firm, Dop-
pel, at a cost of over $1,000. The icons selected were copied
from those painted by the noted Russian iconographers
Ishakevich and Vasnetsov. The major icons were painted by
Sokolov, and those on the second and third tier by Lopatkin.
A plaschanitza was imported from Russia.
As the parish grew, a larger church was needed. Michael
Vilchinsky and Isidore Senko were given the.assignment of
finding a new site halfway between the “Williamsburgers”
and the “Greenpointers.” The site selected consisted of 5
building Jots on the corner of North 12th Street and Driggs
Avenue, purchased for $16,000. The Moscow Cathedral of
the Dormition (Assumption) was used as a basis for design
by the architect, Louis Allmendiger. The Schneider Com-
pany agreed to build it and the parish house for $117,000.
The new church was chartered on the 25th of October 1916.
Completion of the church was interrupted by World War
I. Labor and material costs rose. The Rev. John Krohmalney
led a drive to complete the church, whose cost had risen by
$20,000. The North Sth Street church was sold in 1919 to
relieve some of the financial burden, and church services
were held in the incomplete edifice. The cupolas and church
exterior were completed in 1921, and the new church was
consecrated on September 3, 1922, by Archbishop Alexan-
nh
“s
} the famous Nixon-Khrushchev exchange, a photograph of
Cathedral of the Transfiguration of Our Lord, Brooklyn, N.Y.
150
der. The iconostas was transferred from the North 5th
Street church and additions made to it. It is recorded that
when the Holy Articles were being carried from the North
5th Street church to the new one, the procession was seven
blocks long.
The depression put the parish into financial difficulty.
Loans made by individuals' and organizations could not be
paid, people were begging for repayment. The church com-
mittee was afraid that it might have to close the church. The
Very Rev. Constantine Buketoff arrived in February 1932
and with the assisting church committees, the slow, pain-
ful job of paying off the loans was accomplished. It is said
that through the parishioners’ “nickels and dimes,” the
church finally became debt free. Metropolitan Leonty cere-
monially “burned the mortgage” in October 1950. The
parish had become active and was recognized by city, state,
and federal officials. Because of his work in organizing other
parishes and his devotion to Transfiguration, the Bishop’s
Sobor in 1952 awarded Father Buketoff the mitre, presented
by Bishop John of Detroit. The Very Rev. Igor Tkachuk
was appointed rector of the Cathedral on October 1, 1966.
Through his guidance and efforts, restoration and beautifi-
cation of the church continues.
By decision of the Holy Synod of Bishops, Transfigura-
tion Church was raised to the rank of Cathedral. It is con-
sidered to be the largest of about 25 churches in the New
York metropolitan area. It was the first in the area to use
the English language of any amount in the Liturgy (1949).
During the American Exposition in Moscow in the year of
the Cathedral was used to show a Russian Orthodox
church in the United States. By an official act, the Cathe-
dral was designated a landmark of New York, November 19,
1969.
East New York
At about the same time, that Transfiguration parish was
being established, those Russian Orthodox who settled in
East New York and Brownsville had to travel to Manhattan,
to a small wooden church rented on Second Avenue. In
1902, the magnificent St. Nicholas Russian Orthodox
Cathedral was built at 15 East 97th Street, which meant
still further to travel. The feeling for a local church
strengthened in East New York and took concrete form in
1908, when an organizational committee was formed.
Premises were rented on Liberty Avenue and remodeled
for Orthodox services with various priests from the Cathe-
dral officiating. Within a year, they found a lot, 100 feet by
100 feet, on the corner of Pennsylvania and Glenmore
Avenues with one brick and two wooden houses, at the
price of $17,000. A thousand dollars was borrowed (later
returned) from parishioners and turned over to Metropoli-
tan Platon; two mortgages were written for the balance and
these mortgages were not finally paid off until 1934 and
1939,
The first service was held on Palm Sunday, April 3, 1908,
by the Rev. Elias Zotikov. The Easter Matins was conducted
by the Rev. Alexander Hotovitzky and the Liturgy by the

Holy Trinity Church, Brooklyn (East New York).
Rev. Alexander Nemolovsky (later Archbishop of North
America). The Rev. Vasily Mihailovsky was the first rector.
The first child baptized was Peter I. Tomashevsky on June 7,
1909; the first wedding — Paul Davidovsky and Eva Gibov-
sky on July 5, 1909; the first funeral — John Balta on
June 22, 1910. The parish was active in the support of the
children’s orphanage when it was located in Brooklyn, and
also the Women’s College in the period 1913-1915.
With the exception of a church-minded group of people,
the rest of the Russian-speaking people in the neighborhood
were lukewarm in their support. From 1909 to 1925 (the
year Father A. Kukulevsky was assigned rector) there were
19 transfers of priests, obviously an abnormal situation.
This was partly due to the fact that the parish was not or-
ganized in its own name but as a subsidiary of the 97th
Street Cathedral.
Difficult days followed the Bolshevik Revolution. Rev.
John Kedrovsky (later ‘“Metropolitan’’) of the Soviet “Liv-
ing Church in America” tried to swing the parish away from
its canonical bishop. The majority of the parishioners re-
pulsed him, but the struggle was long and costly. There was
a second troublesome period, though not as alarming an
attempt, in 1925 to shift the parish to the jurisdiction of
Bishop Adam Filipovsky, who had forcibly occupied St.
Nicholas Cathedral on 15 East 97th Street and declared
himself ruling Bishop. These disturbances split the parish
into cliques and church interests were brushed aside. The
work of agitators (including a false fire rumor) was foiled,
but only after heartaches. The “Living Church” under
Kedrovsky tried to gain control and threatened injunctions.
The attorney defending the Parish’s interest was Mr. Simms,
supported by an active group of parishioners. Courageous
women stood guard until late at night and physically ejected
a six-foot henchman of the false Metropolitan Kedrovsky.
The “Living Church” was finally defeated and Father Alex-
ander Kukulevsky held the parish.
At last the way was cleared for the most essential project
of building a new, adequate church edifice. Collection of
funds actually started in 1923, when $6,000 was subscribed.
The president of the East New York Savings Bank, Mr.
Edward Richards, proved to be ofgreat help. The parish was
incorporated in 1934, to strengthen its legal position, as
“Russian Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity” with
authorization from the Most Reverend Metropolitan Platon.
The property was acquired April 27, 1934, and a new era
began in parish life. R. A. Melzer, an experienced architect,
drew plans and the building contract was signed September
10, 1934, with N. V. Testin.
The church was completed and consecrated on February
22, 1936, by Metropolitan Theophilus and Bishop Makarv
and many other clergy. Among the outstanding features of
Holy Trinity Church today are its byzantine-style frescoes
painted by Pimen Sofronoff.
Garfield and Singac, New Jersey
Several related parishes were organized in New Jersey in
the period from the turn of the century to 1916. A Greek
Catholic parish dedicated to St. Michael was organized in
Passaic in 1890. Due to much turmoil in the parish, a group
organized an Orthodox parish in Garfield (Three Saints)
around 1901. Most of the parishioners were Galicians,
Lemkos, a few Ugro-Rusins and Russians from Imperial
Russia. They were served at first by a monk from the parish
in New York City. Later, in 1914, a group from this parish
that lived in the Singac-Little Falls area formed the Brother-
hood of St. John the Baptist and founded a church in Singac.
Their church was consecrated on June 28, 1916, by Arch-
bishop Alexander. A new brick church was built later in
1954, and consecrated by Archbishop Benjamin of Pitts-
burgh.
Passaic, New Jersey
A year later, another 400 families, primarily Ugro-Rusins
and some Galicians also seceded from St. Michael’s Church
and established the Greek Catholic congregation of Sts.
Peter and Paul of Passaic, New Jersey. The parishioners
tried to make sure that the title would remain with the
people and that it would not be wrested from them by the
Roman Catholic diocese.
The parishioners invited the Uniate priest Basil Voloshin
of Mahonoy City, Pennsylvania, to be their pastor. With his
advice and direction the newly-purchased building was re-
modeled to conform to the needs of the Greek Catholic
Rite and on July 13, 1902, it was consecrated by Fathers
Basil Voloshin, K. Lavrishin of Shenandoah, Pennsylvania,
and A. Kechkesh of Perth Amboy, New Jersey — all Uniate
clergy.
In 1903 the Brotherhood of Sts. Peter and Paul was or-
ganized with 150 members of both sexes. Two other broth-
erhoods in the parish were organized in 1900. The year
1903 saw the construction of a brick rectory. The parish
owned its own cemetery. Soon the Roman Catholic bishop
of Newark, New Jersey, tried to have the parish properties
transferred to his name. He was assisted in his endeavors by
1S]
the pastor of St. Michael’s Church, Father N. Molchany and
Father A. Godobay, the Uniate Apostolic Visitor for Greek
Catholic Rusin churches in the United States.
Feeling that if the parish permitted the Roman Catholic
bishop to take title to their parochial property they would
again invite the type of turmoil suffered in the past, the
parish decided to petition the Russian Orthodox Church
authorities to receive it into Orthodoxy. They felt that
this was the only way they could insure that their ancient
Eastern traditions and Rite could be preserved. Besides the
pastor of the church, John Boruch (then cantor but later an
Orthodox priest) was instrumental in turning the parish in
the direction of Orthodoxy. The original frame church was
replaced with the present magnificent temple built in true
Russian design in 1911/12.
Spring Valley and Whitestone, New York
Because of the traveling distance, a group of parishioners
from Sts. Peter and Paul who lived in Spring Valley, New
York, met with their pastor, Father Stephanko, to organize
a parish in the north. Forty-two persons were present at this
meeting and organized under the name of St. John the Bap-
tist Church. They agreed to purchase property at the sum of
$2,000, for a church building. The first liturgy of this con-
gregation was celebrated by Rev. Basalyga (later Bishop
Banjamin of Pittsburgh) on June 1, 1914. A year later on
July 5, 1915, a new temple was consecrated.
The original idea for the establishment of a parish in
Whitestone was discussed on a train trip as parishioners
were returning from the Sunday Divine Liturgy held in
the Saint Nicholas Cathedral in New York City. Shortly
thereafter, in May of 1916, in the home of Mr. and Mrs.
John Keblish, John Keblish, Alexander Pasternak, Nikita
Pononshuk, Joseph Pomaranko, Joseph Timofey and Step-
hen Timoshuk explored possibilities of creating the parish.
The first religious service, Vespers, was then held soon after
in the home of Mr. and Mrs. Stephen Tichansky and was
served by Father Maxim Jumba. Then followed a continu-
ous series of developments. Fathers Michael Dziama, Peter
Popoff, Joseph Dzvonchik were key pastors of the parish,
who held the longest tenures of service.
A hall was leased and the first Divine Liturgy was cele-
brated near the feast of ST. Nicholas, and thus the church
was named. In March 1919 adjacent property was pur-
chased and plans were designed by William Keblish for the
erection of a new church. The following year Archbishop
Alexander, the ruling bishop of the Russian Orthodox
Church in America, dedicated the church. Shortly after a
parish house was built, additional land was bought in 1924,
and a hall was purchased adjacent to the church in 1941.
In 1949 English sermons were preached regularly and the
Divine Liturgy was celebrated in English as well as Slavonic.
In 1968 construction of a new church began and was dedi-
cated by Metropolitan Ireney in November 1970.
Today St. Nicholas Church has grown from serving the
needs of people from a sparsely populated farm land to a
densely populated suburb of New York City.
ho2
Upstate New York
Auburn and Syracuse
The St. Nicholas parish in Auburn was founded on
December 1, 1908, as a result of the interest and encourage-
ment of Father Alexander Hotovitzky, Dean of the New
York Cathedral, who came to Auburn in August of 1908 to
conduct funeral services. Several months later, Abbot
Arseny came from St. Tikhon’s Monastery to preside at an
organizational meeting held at the home of Thomas Garbin-
sky. A small house was purchased and converted into a
chapel by Father Nicholas Duda, the temporary priest. The
first rector, Father Joanniky Keyko, was assigned in 1909,
when plans were made to build a church edifice. The church
was dedicated in 1912 by Bishop Alexander. Several years
later, a group of men in Syracuse led by Peter Kurock con-
sulted with Father Vasily Bikov of the Auburn parish to or-
ganize a church in Syracuse. Their first attempts were not
successful, but in 1915 the St. Vladimir’s Brotherhood was
organized and the nucleus of a community was formed.
Through the continuing assistance of Father Bikov, the
group expanded its membership and the Hieromonk Solov-
yev was appointed temporary pastor. Property was pur-
chased in 1916 and a formal organizational meeting of the
parish was held to form the Sts. Peter and Paul Church.
Father Evdokim Polevoy arrived in 1916 and served the par-
ish for four years during which time buildings were pur-
chased for a church and rectory. Father Cornelius Svigoon
followed and built the chapel at the cemetery. With the ar-
rival of Father Paul Razkazov, the present church was con-
structed and dedicated in 1927 by Archbishop Platon. Since
1951, Father Alexander Warnecke, chancellor of the New
York Diocese has been pastor of Sts. Peter and Paul Church.
With the population greatly increased after World War II,
the Auburn parish began to examine means of expansion.
Through the untiring efforts of Father Andrew Kuharsky, a
new building was completed and dedicated by Bishop Ireney
in August 1961. St. Nicholas Parish in Cohoes evolved out
of a Reading Society and the St. Archdeacon Stephen
Brotherhood. Both groups, together with the Brotherhood
of St. Basil, cooperated in establishing an Orthodox parish in
Cohoes in 1914. Father Paul Filipovsky was assigned as the
first rector of the parish. Construction on a church began in
1915, and under the guidance of the second pastor, Father
Peter Karel, the building was completed and dedicated the
following year by Archbishop Evdokim.
Binghamton and Herkimer
Parishes were organized in Binghamton and Herkimer
Heights in 1916. The core group of St. Mary’s Assumption
Church in Binghamton was a group of twenty families who
returned to the Orthodox faith from the Unia. Contacting
Mr. George Bakhmeteff, the Russian Ambassador to the
United States, they were given the name of Father Elias
Klopotovsky of Wilkes-Barre who directed them to Arch-
bishop Evdokim. The first priest assigned to serve the parish
was Father Elias Barna. Sts. Peter and Paul parish in Herki-
mer was organized by 25 Russian and Carpatho-Russian
 lr happened in Elmira...

A priest from Binghamton came only once or twice a month for services on Sunday in Elmira Heights in 1910. Mrs. Tekla
Obuhanych and her fiance wanted to get married, but the priest had a problem — he had to leave for Binghamton the next
morning on the 7:00 a.m. train. He‘ told them and another couple to be at the railroad station in Elmira Heights at 6:00 a.m.
and he would marry them before departing on the only train to Binghamton. Both couples agreed and were married at the
railroad station at 6:00 a.m.
People came to Elmira Heights from Austro-Hungary and were lured to the area by factories and promises of employment.
They were very young when they arrived and the main employment for the men was at the iron works, foundries and the
U.S. Steel Bridge Works. The women worked in the textile mills. The immigrants did not find it hard to get employment at
these places, for they worked very hard, long hours for very little pay — 10¢ an hour, $6.00 per week. It was every man’s
dream to work at the Bicycle Shop, the Eclipse-Bendix Corporation, inasmuch as the work was not as difficult and wages
were a bit higher, up to $8.00 per week. To be hired by Eclipse upon arrival was next to impossible for they did not hire
“greenhorns.” The first immigrant to be hired by Eclipse was Mr. Kuryla, a member of the Church. He, in turn, “asked” for a
job for his friend, who in turn asked for some more friends and finally there were many immigrants working at this plant. As
word spread, some of the miners who settled in Lopez, Mildred and Wilkes-Barre moved to Elmira Heights in the early
twenties to find new jobs.
The salary did not go far for most men and women. Single men paid $3.00 per month for room and board, which also in-
cluded laundry and a lunch pail. Women paid $2.00 because they did their own laundry. Three men slept while three others
worked the night shift. When the night shift men returned home in the morning, those who occupied the bedroom at night
were off to work and the beds were used day and night. Married couples who rented a house for $4.00 a month would often
rent bedrooms to other married couples for $3.00 with kitchen privileges, and thereby earn extra money. They were a thrifty
people and saved to buy their own homes.
Originally, all the Slavic-speaking people in the area attended the same church (Ukrainian) located on 14th Street.in Elmira
Heights. It should be mentioned that the town is separated by two sets of railroad tracks. In 1907 or 1908, property was pur-
chased on Horseheads Boulevard and the ‘church was literally moved across 14th Street to the new location. When the
church was moved as far as the Erie Railroad tracks, funds were needed to pay the utility company to cut the electric wires.
Since there were no funds, the church was left there for some weeks until the people of the parish collected the money. In
the meantime, temporary steps were placed in front of the church and services were held on the spot for several weeks. When
the money was collected, the wires were cut and the church was moved to the D.L. & W. tracks, where the same situation
occurred. Again the temporary steps were placed in front of the church and services held there until the money was raised to
cut the wires. Finally the church was moved to its new location on Horseheads Boulevard.
In about 1916, there was a rift between the Ukrainian and Russian factions in the church. Early in 1916, a small group of
Russian men who had been organized as the Sts. Peter and Paul Brotherhood met at the home of Andrew Basal to discuss the
| problem, and eventually the Holy Trinity Russian Orthodox Church was organized. Upon request of the committee, Arch-
bishop Evdokim sent Father Borisoff to assist the twenty-five families in organizing the parish. Plans were established for the
erection of a church. A few weeks later Father Borisoff reported that Father Timothy Berkey was to come to Elmira as pastor.
But now the young committee was embarrassed, for there was no housing for a priest and his family. Everyone was willing to
sacrifice, however, and Kozma Mowchan offered his home for the Sunday Liturgy and the housing of the pastor and his
family. So for the next four weeks, the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgy in Elmira was held at the home of Kozma Mowchan
on McCauley Avenue. Soon the new church was completed and gradually outfitted for services. In its infancy, the parish con-
sisted of about 25 families; presently there are about 135 families in Holy Trinity parish.
Father Samuel Sulich
people. The first service was held in an Episcopalian Church
in December 1919. In July 1925, Archbishop Platon dedi-
cated the newly-erected church. A parish was also organized
in this period in nearby Little Falls, New York.
Northern New England
Massachusetts
The first parish in Massachusetts was organized in Sep-
tember 1901 by a group of Galicians. For five years they
did not have a permanent priest and were served by Uniate
priests. In 1906, the parish decided to break with the Uni-
ates and Archbishop Tikhon sent Father Jacob Grigorieff to
serve the parish. A larger church building was erected in
1908 and by some miracle was not touched by the famous
Salem fire of 1914. As a precaution, the parishioners had
met the first day of the fire and moved all the religious
articles and furniture of the church to a safe place. During
its early period, the parish was also served by Father
Theofan Buketoff (1910-1913) and by Father Peter Popoff
(1913-1916).
In 1910, Father Grigorieff was assigned by Bishop Platon
to Boston to organize a parish. After an organizational
meeting in June, a church was acquired in Roxbury in
August and consecrated in February 1911. In 1938, the
church was designated as a cathedral by Metropolitan
Theophilus, at which time also Father Grigorieff was trans-
ferred to Ansonia by his own request. He was followed by
Father John Kozitsky and Father Theodore Chepeleff. A
new church was built in the early 1950’s and was conse-
crated on February 3, 1952, by Archbishop Dimitry (Magan)
of Boston. The church building in Roxbury was then sold
to a Greek Orthodox community.
Until 1916 Orthodox people living in the suburbs of
Boston had to travel to Boston or Salem for services. Father
Jacob Grigorieff helped a group in the area of Maynard to
organize a parish there. The priest best remembered by the
parish for his efforts was Father Sergei Basilevich who
worked diligently in the areas of religious training, choral
instruction and cultural guidance. Other parishes to form in
this period were Fall River, Taunton, Pittsfield (1916) and
Lawrence (1913), Massachusetts; and Manville (Cumberland),
Rhode Island. As a result of later immigration, a parish was
organized in Chelsea in 1924.
Vermont and New Hampshire
At the turn of the century, a group of immigrants from
Minsk settled in Springfield, Vermont. They were brought
by Mr. Hartness and Mr. Smith to work in the Shoddy
Mills, where wooden bells were made. Over 1,000 Roman
Catholic and Orthodox men arrived between 1896 and
1904. In 1905 an Orthodox Brotherhood was founded
which organized and sustained the parish. The first liturgy
was celebrated on October 5, 1905, and the parish was char-
tered in 1906 when a church was built. It was dedicated by
Bishop Alexander. A parish was also organized at this time
in Proctor, Vermont.
154
Three parishes were organized in New Hampshire in
1914-1915. fhe first resulted from a group of Uniates who
had organized a parish in 1905 in Manchester. With the lat-
inizing pressure of the Uniate Bishop Soter Ortinsky in
1907, a group separated to organize an Orthodox parish.
Until a priest could be assigned to assist the group, it was
served by the local Greek parish and the Russian priest
from Boston. Other Russian immigrants arrived and on
April 11, 1915, Father Jacob Grigorieff from Boston cele-
brated the liturgy at the local Greek Church and presided
at the first meeting, which was attended by 38 married and
66 single persons. The first pastor assigned to Sts. Peter and
Paul Church was Father Peter Solovey. The group continued
to hold services at the Greek church until 1916 when their
own church was completed under the leadership of Father
Michael Sotak.
Russian immigrants, mostly young farming people from
the provinces of Minsk, Wilensk and Grodnensk in pre-war
Russia, settled in Claremont, New Hampshire, in 1907-1908,
and later in Berlin. A great number found jobs in Claremont
at the Sullivan Machinery Company and wrote home to tell
others to follow until several families settled in the area. In
1909 the Claremont group organized the Brotherhood of
the Holy Resurrection, and until 1914 they were served by
frequent visits from priests in nearby parishes. In 1914
Father Basil Oranowsky was appointed to Claremont and
for six months held services in the local Episcopalian church.
That same year the Brotherhood bought a two-story house
and converted it into a temporary church and living quar-
ters. A new church was built in 1941 and dedicated by
Metropolitan Theophilus. Meanwhile in Berlin, New Hamp-
shire, Father Jacob Grigorieff had made frequent visits to
serve the needs of the Orthodox people, but they proved
insufficient to prevent a further decline in the moral and
spiritual life of the people, which was being undermined by
their atheistic co-workers and by the efforts of special prop-
agandists. This situation was brought to the attention of
Archbishop Evdokim and also to the employers of the
workers. Mr. O. B. Brown, vice president and general mana-
ger of the Brown Company, and Mr. Robert B. Wolf, who
was the superintendent of the Burgess Sulphite Fibre Com-
pany, agreed with the suggestion of Father Grigorieff that
the only solution to the problem was to restore to the Rus-
sians their religious background. Both assisted the Russians
to establish a church of their own. After the temporary as-
signment of one priest who was not successful, Father
Arcady Piotrowsky was appointed to Berlin and he succeeded
in organizing the parish. At the first service and organiza-
tional meeting, 139 people were present and agreed to or-
ganize a church and school. A garage was rented and be-
came a temporary church. A large church was built in 1915
and dedicated by Archbishop Evdokim. Parish membership
dwindled at several stages due to the economic situation in
Berlin, and especially during World War II, when many
people moved to the larger cities to work in the ammunition
plants. For many years the church was closed as no regular
priest was available to serve the parish, until this past sum-
mer when the parish was enthusiastically reactivated with
the arrival of a newly ordained priest, Father Michael Wes-
 .
4
al
Aa
roe
we
Holy Resurrection
terberg. With the arrival of Father Peter Tutko in Spring-
field, Vermont, a few years ago, the area now has two
young priests who are working to revive several of these
older parishes and utilize them as sources of new mission-
ary work in New England.
Connecticut
A parish unique in the history of the Connecticut Dean-
ery is the St. John the Baptist Church in Bridgeport. The
parish is currently served by a priest from the American
Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Diocese of Met-
ropolitan Orestes Chornock, but was part of the Deanery
for about 20 years. The St. John the Baptist Church is
unique in that it was not part of the general Orthodox
Church movement in Connecticut under the guidance and
leadership of Orthodox priests and hierarchs as described
earlier. Instead, it was founded in 1907 as a Uniate parish
composed almost exclusively of Carpatho-Russian immi-
grants.
Father (at that time) Orestes Chornock became the pas-
tor of the parish in 1911. Although he was a priest of the
Catholic Uniate Church, he and many others as well were
increasingly distressed by the latinizing pressures being ap-
plied by the Roman Catholics to the Uniate Church in
America. Matters were brought to a head when the rule of
celibacy was enforced on the Uniate clergy in America in
1929. As a reaction against these pressures, many Uniate
clergy and their parishes decided to leave the Catholic
Church. Father Chornock, by this time a widower, was con-
secrated as bishop for this group by the Patriarch of Con-
Church, Berlin, New Hampshire, 1915.
stantinople on September 18, 1938. A court case in the
parish in Bridgeport ensued and the property, church build-
ing and all, was awarded to the Roman Catholic Church
hierarchy for use by those parishioners who wished to re-
main Uniates. Those parishioners, along with Bishop Chor-
nock, who left the jurisdiction of Rome, erected the present
magnificent Church of St. John the Baptist on Mill Hill
Avenue in Bridgeport. In the late 1940’s, further difficul-
ties ensued, and the parish resolved to enter the Connecti-
cut Deanery of the Orthodox Church in America. Father
John Markovich served as pastor for about'half of the years
during which the parish was within the jurisdiction of the
Orthodox Church in America.
Following the ordination of Constantine Buketoff to the
priesthood and his assignment to the (then) Sts. Cyril and
Methodius Church in New Britain in 1907, a vast mission-
ary effort began under his guidance which led to the estab-
lishment of six new parishes in the Deanery. New Britain
was the ecclesiastical center for all the unorganized Ortho-
dox Slavic peoples residing in central and northern Connect-
icut. In his Daily Journal Father Buketoff notes that prior
to the organization of other parishes in the area as many as
500 people would attend Easter Resurrectional Services at
the tiny Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church in New Britain, a
building able to house less than 100 persons at a time! The
records he kept also show that as pastor of the New Britain
parish he traveled throughout the above-mentioned regions
in order to baptize and marry people according to the rites
of the Orthodox Church. He nurtured these initial contacts
into the eventual formation of parishes in Terryville (1908),
Meriden (1911) and Hartford (1914). For this missionary
work he was given a special award by Archbishop Tikhon on
June 7, 1908.
The situation in New Britain itself also changed dramat-
ically during Father C. Buketoff’s pastorate. As the parish
enrollment continued to grow and activities continued to
increase, the need for a new, larger church building became
more apparent. Father Buketoff led the parish in just sucha
project, and in 1913 a new church — given the new name of
the Holy Trinity — was erected. In 1914 Father Buketoff
was reassigned as rector of the newly-organized parish of All
Saints in Hartford. Following several other priests, Father
Joseph Dankevich became the pastor of the Holy Trinity
Church in New Britain in 1921. He served the parish until
his death in 1956 and is buried in the center of the parish
cemetery. Presently, the parish consists of about 350 com-
municants and is the focal point for eight parish organiza-
tions.
The Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church in Terryville ini-
tially consisted of about 12 families. In 1930 the parish en-
joyed a tremendous period of growth when 70 new families
joined the congregation. The present membership is given as
150 families. In 1957 a beautiful Russian Orthodox Com-
munity Center was constructed, and a new rectory was built
in 1969. Twenty-one priests have served the parish since its
founding, with the longest pastorate being that of the Very
Rev. Joseph Fedoronko, from 1938 to 1953. The Rt. Rev.
Joseph Pishtey, first chancellor of the Orthodox Church in
America, also served the parish from 1924 to 1932. Future
plans call for the erection of a new church, for which a
building fund has already been established.
The Sts. Peter and Paul Church in Meriden grew out of
the Brotherhood of the same name which had been formed
under the guidance of Father C. Buketoff in 1908. By
1913 a church building was erected and consecrated by
Bishop Alexander. Archimandrite Seraphim Oblivantseff
was assigned as the first pastor. Father Alexander Pogreb-
niak served as rector of the parish for the longest period,
from 1933-1948. A new church with a beautifully frescoed
Byzantine interior was built in 1956, during the pastorate
of Father John Mason (1954-1961). The parish presently
consists of about 390 communicants.
The All Saints Church in Hartford was consecrated by
Bishop Alexander on May 12, 1913. A rather large group of
150 families initially formed the parish. The longest pas-
torate was that of the V. Rev. Nicholas Wasilieff (1931-
1958). A spacious new church was erected on Scarborough
Street in Hartford in 1964 during the years that the parish
was served by the V. Rev. Michael Dirga (1958-1971). The
new church was consecrated by His Beatitude, Metropoli-
tan Ireney, during his tenure as Archbishop of the New Eng-
land Diocese. At present the parish consists of 315 commu-
nicants.
Following his assignment to Hartford, Father C. Buketoff
continued his organizing activities and guided three other
communities of Russian Orthodox believers to their forma-
tion as parishes: the St. Nicholas Church in Norwich (1915),
the Holy Trinity Church in Willimantic (1916), and the
156
Sts. Peter and Paul Church in Springfield, Massachusetts
(1916). Originally, the parish in Springfield was also known
as the St. Nicholas Church. It was reorganized and renamed
in 1938, After many years as a quasi-independent congrega-
tion, the parish, upon proper petition, was formally re-
enlisted in the rolls of the “Metropolia” and rededicated on
October 25, 1959, by Archbishop Ireney. Father Eugene
Pianovich, Chancellor of the New England Diocese, has been
pastor of the parish since November 1, 1958. The present
parish enrollment is 250 members.
The Holy Trinity Church in Willimantic was founded
through the organization of 14 members. A new church was
erected in 1958 and consecrated by His Eminence, Metro-
politan Leonty. Father Ilja Adamov was pastor of the parish
at that time. The parish presently consists of 92 communi-
cants.
Hence, after the establishment of the initial Connecticut
parishes in Bridgeport and Ansonia, New Britain became the
center for nearly all the new parishes founded in the Dean-
ery, and Father Constantine Buketoff was very much the
activator of these organizing and missionary endeavors.
From his stay in New England he is remembered as an ex-
cellent priest, pastor, teacher, musician, organizer and
builder of churches.
During the same period outlined above, two additional
parishes were founded in the southern part of the state: the
Assumption of the Theotokos Church in Stamford (1913)
and the Holy Transfiguration Church in New Haven (1915).
A new church was consecrated by Metropolitan Ireney in
New Haven in 1967, during the rectorship of Father Paul
Zlatkowski. The parish in Stamford is currently in the proc-
ess of formulating plans for the erection of a new church as
well. New property was purchased and Father Nicholas
Yuschak is guiding the parish in its efforts.
The last presently-existing parish to be established under
the jurisdiction of the Orthodox Church in America in the
State of Connecticut was that of St. Nicholas in Stratford.
It was founded in 1929 on the basis of Russian émigrés
brought to the United States to work at the Sikorsky Air-
craft plant near Stratford. From 1929 to 1942 the place of
worship for the parish was the present rectory on Lake
Street. The current church building was consecrated in
1942. Except for the first few months of its existence and
the last few years, the parish was served exclusively by the
V. Rev. Stephan Antonuk. Father Antonuk is currently
Bishop Ioasaph, head of the life of the Church in Western
Canada.
A parish was founded in Monroe, Connecticut, sometime
during the mid-1960’s, but has since closed.
Greater Philadelphia Area
St. Michael’s Church, Philadelphia
The original parish in Philadelphia, St. Andrews’ Russian
Orthodox Church, served as a “mother church’’ for the
greater Philadelphia area with people of various national-
ities coming together for services. Some Carpatho-Russian
and Galician people, however, first affiliated themselves
with the Holy Ghost Greek Catholic Church in South Phila-
delphia. With the latinizing pressure of the Uniate Bishop
Soter Ortinsky, a split occurred in the Holy Ghost parish
and the St. Michael’s Brotherhood withdrew from the par-
ish together with other dissatisfied parishioners to form the
nucleus of St. Michael’s Church. Their problems did not
end, however, and finally in 1909, a group decided to sever
all ties with the Unia and petition membership in the Ortho-
dox Church. Some difficulties over properties ensued with
Bishop Ortinsky appearing at the church on Good Friday in
1910 to lock the church doors. The priest and several pa-
rishioners were arrested but obtained their release in time
to conduct Easter services at an Episcopal Church, where
they continued to hold services for about three years. Con-
struction on a church building began on Spring Garden
Street and a basement church served the congregation for
10 years until 1923 when the city forced the parish to
move in order to widen the street. Finally, a former Dutch
Reformed Church building was purchased and remodeled
for use. Later a second parish home and chapel was located
closer to the suburbs and used for vespers and special serv-
ices on feast days. After later difficulties, the parish joined
the Moscow Exarchate and another parish was formed in St. Vladimir’s Church, Trenton, New Jersey.

the suburbs by those remaining in the Russian Metropolia.

St. Nicholas Church

A second parish was established near St. Andrew’s in
1917 when a group desired to form an independent parish
with control over its own property (a result of the dispute
with the Living Church group). The Second Reformed
Church on North Seventh Street was purchased and
remodeled for Orthodox use. On November 11, 1917, a pro-
cession of 5,000 people moved from St. Andrew’s to the
new parish of St. Nicholas. Various renovations followed
under the leadership of Father Alexis Gougnin, and in
October 1945, the church was rededicated by Metropolitan
Theophilus. Other renovations continue today to improve
the church properties and to beautify the temple.
Wilmington, Delaware
The earliest gatherings to form a parish began in Wil-
mington in January 1913. With the assistance of Father
John Zlobin (later Bishop John) in 1915, a home was pur-
chased and the church was founded. Icons and other reli-
gious articles were acquired from the Orthodox Church in
Pennsgrove upon its closing in 1921. The present church
was erected in 1950.
Other parishes developed during this period in the greater
Philadelphia area were Coatesville (1916), Assumption of
the Holy Virgin in South Philadelphia (1913), Chester
(1917) and Pennsgrove, New Jersey.
Manville, Alpha and Trenton
In 1915, three years after the Johns-Manville Corpora-
tion constructed its first building in Manville, New Jersey, a
group of Russian families met together with Father Peter
Semashko of South River, New Jersey, to organize an Ortho-
dox parish. By 1916, six lots were purchased and a wooden
chapel built on the property. In 1922, the chapel was de-
stroyed by fire, but a new and larger church building was
soon constructed. Another misfortune struck in 1935 when
the church was again destroyed by fire. Plans were made for
the construction of the present building which now has a
new iconostas and icons painted in traditional Byzantine
style. In nearby Alpha, New Jersey, the parish of St. John
the Baptist Orthodox Church was organized in 1916 and
dedicated by Archbishop Platon. In 1923 the parish went to
the jurisdiction of Bishop Adam because of its greater famil-
iarity with Carpatho-Russian customs and background, but
returned to the Metropolia in 1942. Also organized in 1915
was St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Church in Trenton, New
Jersey. Being the first Orthodox Church in Trenton, the
community soon attracted many members from neighbor-
ing Uniate parishes who decided to return to Orthodoxy.
A church building was constructed in 1916 and the parish
was incorporated in 1918. The first really permanent pas-
tor was Father Vladimir Lilikovich who arrived in 1926.
Since then the church has prospered and expanded. The
interior includes frescoes by Pimen Sofronoff and the par-
ish has become known for its Byzantine iconography.
Father Paul Shafran has served as pastor of the parish since
1949.
Other parishes organized at this time in New Jersey were
St. Michael’s Church in Newark (1906); St. John the Bap-
tist in Rahway (1915); Sts. Peter and Paul in Elizabeth
(1916); St. Spyridon in Perth Amboy; and Sts. Peter and
Paul in Bayonne (1922).
 Eastern Pennsylvania

Many more parishes were organized in the mining and in-

dustrial areas of eastern Pennsylvania during this period and
several returned to Orthodoxy as a result of the pressures
of Bishop Ortinsky to latinize the Uniate people. Most of
these people came from Galicia, Carpatho-Russia or Austro-
Hungary. Since the area was quite populated by Slavic
people and churches, they often journeyed some distance
to Wilkes-Barre, Mayfield, or some other town where serv-
ices were held and a parish organized. As more people
moved into new towns, local brotherhoods were formed
and eventually local parishes established. Such was the case
for most of the parishes formed or accepted into the Ortho-
dox faith at this time: Mt. Carmel (1907), Lopez (1907),
Jermyn (1909), Coaldale (1909), Berwick (1909), Edwards-
ville (1910), Minersville (1910), Nanticoke (1911), Lykens
(1912), Frackville (1915), Shenandoah (1916), Centralia,
Palmerton, Buck Run, and finally, Uniondale (1920).
Some of these parishes had been organized much earlier
as Uniate parishes. The example of Alden Station serves to
represent the early days and later struggles of this group.
In October of 1894, a group of immigrants from Galicia
and Hungary settled in Alden Station, Pennsylvania, and or-
OS oY ‘ INES
ganized a church for all Russian Orthodox Christians. Nativity of the Virgin Mary Church, Coaldale, Pennsylvania.
The following members of the group were elected to
serve on the first committee: President, Dimitrie Wowk;
Ortinsky as head of the Church in America and transferred
all property rights to him sometime between 1911 and
Vice-President, Paul Wasenda; Treasurer, Peter Warholic,
and Secretary, Michael Yadlowski. This committee, along 1912.
with the board members, acquired the use of a one-room Retaining a parish priest eventually became a problem
school building located on Main Street — now known as and there were periods up to three months that the parish
West Kirmar Avenue — as a temporary place of worship. had no priest. The congregation then decided to ask the
A priest from Shenandoah, Reverend John Volansky, trav- Orthodox mission in New York City for aid. Bishop
eled to Alden Station to conduct services at the newly Evdokim of New York then assigned the Reverend John
formed parish. Kushwara to the parish on December 1, 1915.
The committee next arranged to lease one acre of land The affairs of the parish progressed until April of 1916,
on Polander Hill from Alden Coal Co. for the sum of $1.00 when the Ukrainian bishop, with the aid of Reverend Orum
a year. A contractor was then engaged to construct a new of Nanticoke, and a group of Alden residents, had an in-
church on this site in November of 1894. The church was junction served on the congregation. The church was then
completed during the summer of 1895, and the cornerstone closed on Great Thursday of April, 1916.
was blessed by the Reverend Vladimir Molchany of Kings-
Foreseeing an unfavorable court decision, some of the
ton, Pennsylvania, on May 26,1895. The church was named
members again called on the Alden Coal Co. for a lot on
after St. Vladimir. which a new church could be built. This led to the acqui-
In 1909 the parish bought a cemetery cross and arranged sition of the present site of the Holy Resurrection Church.
to have it blessed by the Ukrainian Bishop Ortinsky. In his The parishioners decided to dig the foundation and hire a
sermon to the parishioners, the bishop stressed the differ- contractor to complete the basement where services would
ences between the various groups of European peoples and take place temporarily. Having only $125.62 in the treasury
admonished the parishioners to heed the rules and regula- the membership began a building fund drive in Alden Sta-
tions of the Pope of Rome. This created a great deal ofagi- tion and the neighboring towns.
tation, for in the parishioners’ place of origin all Russian
The Nanticoke Construction Company was awarded the
immigrants were considered to be Orthodox Christians.
contract for the first part of the church for the sum of
During 1895 and 1910, many Ugro-Russian priests served $4,500.00. On Green Sunday of 1917, the blessing of the
as pastors of the new church. From 1910 to 1914, however, cornerstone and the church took place. Recalling the in-
Ukrainian priests were assigned to the congregation with junction which had closed the old church just before the
orders from their bishop to guide the parish toward closer Easter holidays, the parishioners decided to name the new
ties with the Roman Church. Under the influence of these church the Holy Resurrection Russian Orthodox Church
priests, some committee members acknowledged Bishop of Alden Station, Pennsylvania.

158
 In the spring of 1924, completion of the church was
started by the Krug Construction Company of Berwick for
sum of $15,550.00. The church was completed in March of
1925 and was blessed by Bishop Adam. The church commit-
tee at this time was: President, Nicholas Rudowski; Secre-
tary Theodore Makara, and Treasurer, Stephen Rusinko. A
short time later with the aid of Prof. D. M. Ressetar, the
church choir was organized.
The years to follow brought about many additions to
the church, such as the rectory home that was located on
East Kirmar Avenue. This was later sold and a new rectory
was built next to the church for a sum of $4,575.00. In
1936 the church interior was renovated for a total cost of
$3,575.00
Under the guidance of the late Father Stephen Adamcio,
Church Sunday School was started in 1952. The following
year the church committee purchased the picnic grounds
and held the first picnic on the premises, realizing a profit
of $1,100.00.
Many more additions and contributions were made by
the committee and parishioners in the years that followed,
and today we see the results in the form of a beautiful
church dedicated to the Glory of God.
Although in more populated areas some mixed ethnic
parishes were beginning to divide according to national
background, the St. Nicholas Russian Orthodox Church in
Bethlehem was established in 1917 as a mixed Russian-
Serbian community. Two Brotherhoods — a Russian and a
Serbian — formed the basis of the community which was
located not far from Catasaqua, the first parish in the
Lehigh Valley.
Central Pennsylvania
The majority of the parishes in the present Altoona-
Johnstown deanery were formed between 1909 and 1917.
Among them were Vintondale, Werhum (1907), Black Lick
and Conemaugh (1908), Madera (1909), Boswell (1913),
Portage (1915), Altoona, Colver, Ganister, Irvona, Jerome
and Urey (1916), Central City and Pine Hill (1917), and
also Dixonville, Mt. Union, and Wood (Woodvale).
“
Mr. John Baycura, builder of the iconostas, in St. Andrew's
Church, Lyndora, Pennsylvania.
Parishioners in Lyndora, Pennsylvania.
Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania
In the year 1906 the Reverend Philip Sredanovich was
sent by the Russian Mission to serve the needs of the Ortho-
dox faithful of Russian, Serbian, Syrian, and Greek back-
grounds in the Butler area. A native of Serbia and educated
in Russia, Father Sredanovich arrived from the Serbian par-
ish in Wilmerding and began to hold services in a building
near the B&O Railroad station in Butler. Since most of the
Orthodox people lived in Lyndora, they persuaded Father
Sredanovich to relocate in Lyndora.
Thereafter, services were held on the second floor of a
private building on the corner of Chesapeake Street and
Bessemer Avenue. As the number of prospective members
grew, and the condition of the floor was found to be unsafe,
the services were transferred to the first floor of the same
building. The worshippers zealously participated in their
cherished Orthodox services. The income of these people
was meager in those days, but strengthened by their faith
and trust in the Divine Help, they undertook the task of
obtaining land and erecting a church building. By 1908
they were able to purchase one lot on Main Street in Lyn-
dora from the Kohler family for $700.00. Father Sredano-
vich began with his own hands in 1909 to build a wooden
church, measuring eighteen feet by thirty-six feet. It wasa
small structure, but at that time sufficient to meet the needs
of the people. With great spirit and determination these
faithful people had planted the seeds of Orthodoxy in Lyn-
dora.
The Russians, being in the majority among all the
nationality groups, purchased a piece of land on Penn
Avenue and Lehigh Street from Standard Steel Company in
1911. They were determined to build a larger and more
proper church. Hieromonk Ioanniky Keyko drafted the
plans, collected the funds, and directed the construction.
In September 1914 the cornerstone was laid, and in a short
time the church was completed, dedicated and ready for
services.
 the week. The crossing was made in small boats or skiffs,
sometimes propelled by gasoline engines that would sputter
and stop several times before they made it to the other side.
At other times, the crossing was made by rowboat with one
man rowing. The boats would be filled to capacity and at
times were only inches above the river level, even when the
river was swollen and choking with ice, but everyone made
it safely and they were often the first in church. By 1913
there were fifty families with approximately 30 children in
the Russian School. A meeting was called and the group
decided to organize a parish. A charter was obtained in
1914, and work began on a church,which was completed
under the leadership of Father Peter Tkach in 1917. The
First church in Ambridge, Pennsylvania. parish is currently served by Father Alexander Varlashkin, a
graduate of the Minneapolis Seminary and a priest for 61
years, who has faithfully led the community since 1931.
Two periods of parish development can be noted in
Western Pennsylvania: 1909-1910 in areas lying just outside Other parishes organized in the Pittsburgh area in this
and primarily north of Pittsburgh; and 1913-1920 for areas period were Jeanette (1910) and Export (1912), Curtisville
closer to the city and also in the Monongahela Valley and (1913-1918), Homestead (1914), Braddock-Forest Hills
west to West Virginia and Ohio.
(1916), McKeesport (1917), Aliquippa (1917), Canonsburg
(1918), Butler, New Castle, Jacob’s Creek, Arcadia, Her-
Father Peter Kohanik was instrumental in assisting
minie, Sts. Peter and Paul in Pittsburgh, and Woodlawn
several communities to organize, particularly those in
(1918). The Greensburg parish (1917) was formed by a
Carnegie, Ambridge and New Kensington. The growth of
group that had been commuting to Jeanette for services.
the steel industry resulting in companies like the Ambridge
South of the city, other parishes developed in the Monon-
Bridge Company provided jobs for new workers. The trip
gahela Valley, West Virginia and Eastern Ohio regions:
to Pittsburgh by train for services in one of the established
Masontown, Monongahela, New Salem, and a new incorpo-
parishes was just too long to make every Sunday, although
ration of the parish in Monessen (1914); West Brownsville
many made the trip every week. By 1905-1907 a small
community of over fourteen families in Ambridge estab-
(1915), Donora (1916), and Perryapolis were organized in
Pennsylvania. In Ohio and West Virginia, the Holy Trinity
lished a “‘make-shift” altar in May’s Hall in Ambridge, and
later also in the home of Samuel Evans, Sr., and then in a
little shelter located on a vacant lot on Third and Merchant
Streets. Fathers V. Sechinsky, Peter Kohanik, or Nicholas
Koshevich conducted services for the group. In October of
1907 under the direction of their pastor, Father Nicholas
Koshevich, two lots were purchased and a church erected.
Steel for the foundation was donated by the American
Bridge Company, and to show their thanks, the grateful
parishioners took down the icons from the walls of their
homes, gathered on the grounds of the industrial plant, and
glorified the donors with prayers and the singing of
““Mnohaya Lyeta.”
In the latter period, several parishes stemmed from the
development of other “mother churches” in Pittsburgh and
the Monongahela Valley. Illustrative of these parishes is that
in McKees Rocks. A group of about ten families settled in
McKees Rocks and joined St. Alexander Nevsky Church
which was located across the river in Allegheny. They par-
ticipated actively in the parish and persuaded the other
parishioners to establish a Russian school in McKees Rocks.
Between 1905 and 1910, two attempts were made also to
establish a church, but they failed for lack of support.
Those early years were replete with many trying incidents Peri laeg «9Me
that were sometimes even thrilling and daring, especially in =ae MMI
ie
Disadice
ae:
.
iti,
the winter months, when crossing the Ohio River was haz-
ardous. Yet everyone looked forward to each weekend
when they would trek down to the river in a body,
caren
singing and laughing and exchanging their problems of Nativity of the Virgin Mary Church, McKees Rocks, Pa.

160
 Old Par 1S hes Build Anew

ea
Wij

Yy
St Nicholas Church, Donora, Pennsylvania.

St. John the Baptist Church, Canonsburg, Pennsylvania

MPs
WWVMLP>

St. Nicholas Church, Duquesne, Pennsylvania.

16]

See
Holy Trinity Church, New Salem, Pennsylvania.
Russian Church in Steubenville (1915) and the Russian-
Serbian Church in Mingo Junction (1906) were the first
parishes to be established. The Steubenville church serviced
Orthodox people in all the smaller villages that were too far
from Pittsburgh or Cleveland, until other communities were
organized in Elkhorn (1912), Wolf Run (1916), Bellaire,
Ohio, Moundsville (1917), Weirton (1919), and Whitman,
West Virginia. Later, in the difficult years that were to fol-
low, two parishes were established to the north of Pitts-
burgh: Edinboro-Crossingville (1920) and Ellwood City
(1928).
Ohio and Michigan
Ohio
Many smaller parishes were formed in Ohio at this time,
which continually had to struggle for their existence in the
difficult years ahead. Among these were the parishes in
Robins (1912) and Lore City (1919) which also serviced
Belle Valley (1916). An example of the difficulties faced
was the lack of a truly permanent pastor — from 1912 to
1964, Robins had 32 “permanent” pastors and 18 tempo-
rary pastors. Finally in 1964 through the efforts of Father
Basil Slimak, the Robins and Lore City parishes combined
to build a centrally located church in Byesville which was
consecrated on June 11, 1967. The new parish now services
the southeastern Ohio area.
Other developments took place in the surrounding areas
of Cleveland in Akron (Holy Virgin Church) and East Akron
(St. Nicholas), Youngstown (Holy Resurrection) and East
Youngstown (Campbell - St. John the Baptist), Lakewood
and Lorain, most of which were organized in the period
1913-1918. Where two parishes were formed in the same
town, they were usually composed of people from different
areas of Galicia, Carpatho-Russia or Russia, or resulted from
a group having existed as part of a Uniate Church.
162
Sts. Peter and Paul Church in Lorain, Ohio, was formed
when a group of Russians, Carpatho-Russians and Galicians
settled in Lorain and Elyria. Most were single young men
who formed a brotherhood and began planning the estab-
lishment of a church. An organizational meeting was held
November 30, 1930, presided over by Father Basil Lisen-
kovsky of Cleveland. Services were first held in the home of
Nicholas Olszewski and later in a rented building. At the
time of its founding, the parish was the only Orthodox
church in Lorain and consequently all other ethnic groups
became part of the parish: Greeks, Serbians, Ukrainians,
Macedonians and Bulgarians. Although these groups later
founded their own parishes, they have continued to co-
operate in many areas, such as joint educational programs,
and have remained in close contact with one another. One
of the best remembered priestly families to serve the parish
was that of Father Andrew Glagolev (1942-1953) who is
noted for having arranged and compiled one of the first
complete books of liturgical music in English (which was
published by the FROC) and who was succeeded upon his
death by his son Father Sergei Glagolev. The parish later
suffered a court litigation with the Moscow Patriarchate,
but won the case after much suffering and internal strife.
Under its former pastor, Father Nicholas Gobora, the parish
stabilized itself and is again one of the more active parishes
in the Ohio Deanery.
Michigan
Father Jason Kappanadze of Cleveland was instrumental
in stimulating interest in the organization of a parish in the
Detroit area. It was he who came to celebrate the first
service at an organizational meeting of Sts. Peter and Paul
Church in 1907. Father Vasily Vasilieff was then appointed
as the first pastor and by the following year a site was pur-
chased for a church building. Monies to aid the parish were
contributed by parishes in Chicago, Cleveland, Brooklyn,
Bridgeport and Buffalo, in addition to those received by the
Mutual Aid Society. A school was built in 1910 and a rec-
tory purchased in 1914. In 1914 the parish contributed
$1,000 toward the purchase of the Episcopalian Methodist
Church for the new All Saints Parish; the present pastor of
Parishioners with Bishop of Detroit, Lorain, Ohio.

Holy Trinity Church, Detroit, Michigan
Sts. Peter and Paul, Father Isadore Salko, then moved to
All Saints to help in its organization. In 1915, a Russian
colony on Detroit’s east side received a donation of a ten-
lot site for a church from the real estate firm that was selling
property to the Russian people. With the expansion of the
automobile industry, many immigrants flocked to Detroit
where jobs were available and thus the population gave rise
to this third church in Detroit. In 1923, Father Averky
Bondarchuk was assigned to Holy Trinity parish where he
was to serve for 47 years. Holy Ghost Carpatho-Russian
Church began organizing in June 1917. With the arrival of
the first pastor, Father Peter Karaffa, in 1919, a building
was purchased and converted for use as an Orthodox
church. A new church was erected ona new site on Mound
Road in 1954.
Further out from Detroit, parishes were organized in
Flint (1916), Grand Rapids and Albion (1916). The Flint
parish was founded asa house church in 1916, but by 1917
Father Peter Solovey began the building of atemple which
was completed under Father Timothy Berkey. With the
arrival of Father Gilevich in 1918, the various ethnic groups
of Orthodox people — Russians, Slovaks, Serbs, Mace-
donians and Syrians — were brought together and a viable
community was established.
Greater Chicago Area
With the influx of immigrants between 1890 and 1909
into the Chicago area, the need became evident for a parish
on the South Side of town. St. Michael’s parish thus began
when Archbishop Platon came to Chicago in 1909 and
celebrated Liturgy in Holy Trinity Cathedral. A three-man
delegation from the South Side approached him to request
permission to organize a parish. The Archbishop gave his
blessing and admonished them not to delay, but to begin
their work immediately. By the following year, the corner-
stone was laid by Bishop Alexander, but the building was
not completed until the arrival of Father John Gratson. Fur-
ther improvements were made by his successor, Hieromonk
Timon, who unified the parish and helped to reduce its
Father John Gratson
The Right Rev. John Gratson was born in Chicago,
Illinois, on March 20, 1880, of Carpatho-Russian parents.
There being no Russian schools anywhere in the vicinity,
he was sent to Minneapolis, Minnesota, where he attended
the St. Mary’s Russian Orthodox Parish School. At the age
of 12 he was taken by Bishop Nicholas to travel with him
to different newly-organized parishes in Pittsburgh, Os-
ceola Mills and Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, to assist at
services as subdeacon and sing the services when necessary.
At the age of 14, John was sent to Sitka, Alaska, to
study at the Russian Mission School. After five years in
Alaska he returned to Chicago where he became a Psalm-
reader in the Russian Orthodox Church. The next appoint-
ments were to the North Side Pittsburgh church where he
stayed three years and Old Forge, Pennsylvania, with
duties also in the Scranton church.
In 1903 he married Miss Anna Duffala and had three
children.
When the first Seminary opened in Minneapolis, Minne-
sota, Father John was among the first students sent there
by Archbishop Tikhon, later the Patriarch of Moscow.
After graduation he was ordained to Priesthood, October
27, 1907 by Archbishop Platon in St. Nicholas Cathedral
in New York City.
His first parish was in Marblehead, Ohio, where he
served one year. Then he answered a call for an organizer
in Desloge, Missouri. There was a Uniate parish involved in
court litigation with a group that wished to return to
Orthodoxy. The Uniates won and the parishioners of
Father John built a beautiful church and a parish home.
He was in Desloge, Missouri, three and a half years.
Archbishop Platon sent Father John to Southside
Chicago to settle another dispute in the parish. He served
there for nine months. Then came a transfer to Benild,
Illinois, and later to Akron, Ohio, where he organized a
new parish. After serving in Lyndora for four years and
Elkhorn, West Virginia, for twelve years, he returned to
Pittsburgh where he served over 25 years. During this time
his parish suffered two great misfortunes — the great flood
of 1936 which ruined the church completely, and a fire
in 1947 which destroyed the rebuilt church. With faith
and hope the church was again rebuilt.
With all the work and worries on his shoulders, Father
John began to fail in health and was hospitalized for several
weeks, After 52 years of service as a priest he was forced
to retire in June 1959. For his faithful service he was
awarded all the honors of the Church, including the mitre.
163
 The “Foreign Colony” of Albion
In 1904 the Albion Malleable Iron Company of Albion,
Michigan, instigated a recruitment program to supply its
foundry with labor. Mr. A. H. Rosenthal was sent to New
York City to recruit immigrants and with his return and
the six men that he brought back to Albion, the Russian
Community (known by the 5,000 residents of Albion as
the “Foreign Colony’’) began.
By 1915 the “Foreign Colony” under the patronage of
Mr. Harry B. Parker (President of Albion Malleable Co.)
and the leadership of Mrs. Helen Alexandrovna Egnatiuk
(settlement coordinator and liaison person to Mr. Parker)
had grown to approximately 600 people. This group was
mainly White Russians and Little Russians, with small
groups of Polish, Macedonians, Serbians, Italians, and
Greeks,
Until 1915 a priest was sent to Albion once each month
from the “All Saints Cathedral” in Detroit, Michigan, to
serve the needs of the people, and many residents rode the
now defunct Inter-Urban Electric Railroad to attend
church services at Sts. Peter and Paul Russian Orthodox
Church on Gilbert Street and also at the All Saints Cathe-
dral on Hendrie Street in Detroit.
In 1915 it was decided to request permission to build a
church in Albion, and under the able leadership of Rev. I.
Salko of Detroit the building committee was elected.
Mrs. Helen Egnatiuk acted as liaison to the Malleable
Iron Co. and the townspeople. Through the efforts of Mrs.
Egnatiuk, Mr. Parker convinced other leaders of the City
of Albion to put on a fund drive and in conjunction with
the townspeople of Albion $5,000 was raised to construct
a church.
The generosity of the citizens of Albion was a thing of
wonder to the immigrants, the majority of whom neither
spoke nor understood English, for in addition to the mon-
etary funds, the Pinecrest Realty Company, comprised of
Mr. Homer Blair, Mr. A. L. McCutcheon and Mr. Frank
Culver, donated a double lot at the corner of State Street
and Austin Avenue. Mr. H. B. Parker donated the funds to
build a sidewalk from the church to the street, and also
purchased an 800 pound bell for the cupola and sent men
and equipment from the Malleable Iron Co. to raise and
install the bell. (A point of interest is that the bell has in-
scribed on it “The Salem Evangelical Lutheran Church,
Albion, Michigan, 1907.” It isa matter of record that Mr.
Parker paid $500 for the bell but until this day it is a
mystery as to how he came to acquire it from an active
church.) In addition there were other numerous donations
by various townspeople consisting of building materials.
The laying of the cornerstone took place on Sunday,
April 30, 1916, by Father I. Salko and assisted by a local
164
choir of 40 voices. The O. J. Teller Construction Company
of Albion completed the building during the summer of
1916 and the building was consecrated by Bishop Arseny
of Detroit on Thanksgiving Day 1916, assisted by Father
I. Salko and Father M. Vishgorodzeff. Father Michael
Vishgorodzeff then became the first resident priest of this
parish. It was during the first few days of the new parish
that the first parish council was elected: President, Mr.
Harry Parchkotic (Hendricks), Mr. Naum Dubina, Mr.
Thomas Slavoff, and Mr. Alexander Dimitruk.
From 1916 until 1927 the life of the parish was rather
uneventful. World War I caused some of the single men of
the parish to return to Russia and the Russian Revolution
caused considerable stir in the community.
The advent of World War II brought about a further
reduction in the size of the parish, as many of the second
generation moved to larger cities and many of the single
men who joined the service did not return to Albion after
the war. The parish was being further reduced in size due
to a steadily larger number of the original immigrants
passing on. By 1955 the parish membership was approxi-
mately 50 people, this being the pointed result of three
factors: 1) the unwillingness of most Displaced Persons
to become members of the church because of its steadfast
allegiance to the Metropolia and adamant refusal to trans-
fer to the jurisdiction of the “Russian Church in Exile”;
2) lack of converts; and 3) the unsuccessful efforts on the
part of the parish to adopt the English language.
In 1955 Father A. Diachenko was appointed to the
parish, and although he was close to retirement, his re-
organization of the parish and the enthusiasm he inspired
in the parish quickly restored the faith and ambitions of
the people. Through his untiring efforts, the church and
the rectory facilities were updated, and the church became
an active part of the Albion community. Social events
sponsored by the church brought us out of debt and into a
state of financial solvency. It was with great regret that his
retirement was accepted in 1959, but it was his desire to
retire.
Since 1959 the parish has not had a resident priest, and
from 1968 to 1970 there were no services held with the
exception of an occasional wedding or funeral. Early in
1970 a group of parishioners headed by Mr. Ivan
Sudnykovych, including Mrs. Steffanida Sawchuk and Mr.
and Mrs. Chester Collier, requested that a visiting priest be
assigned to this parish. Several priests have since been to
Albion for short periods of time to serve the parish. It is
ferverently prayed that the parish be assigned a priest with
missionary zeal to rebuild the Holy Ascension of Christ
Church of Albion, the outpost of Orthodoxy in central
Michigan.
 Three St. Mary’§ Church buildings, Gary, Indiana, erected by Father Benjamin
debt. Until 1932, St. Michael’s was the only Russian parish
to minister to the needs of the people living on the South
Side. In that year, Father Peter Semkoff arrived from the
parish in Albion, Michigan, to organize a group of families
that had just returned to the Orthodox faith from the Unia.
Sts. Peter and Paul Church was established and is still served
by Father Peter and his son, Father Nicholas Semkoff.
Meanwhile, the steel industry had moved into the area
just east of Chicago on the southern shore of Lake Michigan.
Slavs of various origins settled there around 1907 and in
1911 a group of them gathered at the home of Kondrat and
Anna Krenitsky to organize and petition Archbishop Platon
for a parish. Present at the meeting were Father Vladimir
ARCHPRIEST BENJAMIN KEDROVSKY
Kedrovsky.
Alexandrov and Father John Gratson of Chicago. Father
Jacob Korchinsky was assigned as the temporary pastor.
On November 12,1911, Father Benjamin Kedrovsky arrived
in Gary to assume his duties as the permanent pastor ofthe
new church. Father Kedrovsky remained there until his
death in November 1968, having led the parish for 57 years.
During his tenure, three church buildings were erected to
serve the continually growing needs of the congregation.
Also organized during this period were the Church of the
Descent of the Holy Spirit in East Chicago, Indiana; St.
Nicholas Church in East Hammond, Indiana; St. Nicholas
Church in Kenosha, Wisconsin and St. George Church in
Chicago.
Father Benjamin Kedrovsky was born in Vologda,
Russia, on August 28, 1888. He attended the local paro-
chial schools and completed his formal education at the
Vologda Theological Seminary. His entire family was com-
pletely involved in the life of the Church, and his three
brothers, Alexander, Raphael, and Appolinary, eventually
became missionary priests in Alaska. The future Father
Kedrovsky arrived in the United States in 1909 and
served as a reader in Simpson, Mt. Carmel and Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. He was ordained to the diaconate by Bishop
Alexander on October 28, 1911, and to the priesthood the
following day. Father Kedrovsky was then immediately
sent to Gary, Indiana, to organize a parish, where he served
until his death on November 25, 1968. Father Kedrovsky
was also instrumental in establishing St. Nicholas Church
in Hammond in 1916 and the Church of the Descent of
the Holy Spirit in East Chicago in 1914. As a priest,
Father Kedrovsky was active both in the diocese and the
national church. He served as president of St. Tikhon’s
Russian Orthodox Society, which promoted religious
education and Christian culture from its center of activities
at Holy Trinity Cathedral in Chicago. He wrote for a
number of periodicals including Russian-A merican Ortho-
dox Messenger, Our Way, The Light (Svit), and the local
Russian newspaper in Chicago. Father Kedrovsky was on
the Chicago Diocesan Council many times and served as
Dean of the Chicago area. He also represented the diocese
at many public functions in various capacities. In addition
to his other activities, Father Kedrovsky wrote a book on
the history of the first twenty years of Orthodoxy in
northeastern Indiana, entitled On God’s Threshold.
165
 buried on land in Royalton owned by the mining company,
which gave the land to the church to be used as an Ortho-
dox cemetery. Each year on October 27th a solemn Memo-
rial Service is offered by the parishioners for the repose of
the souls of these thirteen men. In addition to these
churches, parishes were also organized in Kansas City,
Kansas (1915) and Sioux: City, Iowa (1916).

Upper Midwest
in an approximately twenty-page handwritten report,
Father Vasily Kuvshinov, Dean of the Minnesota deanery
in 1923, described to Metropolitan Platon the life and
activity of the nine parishes in the states of Minnesota,
Wisconsin and the Dakotas. Existing by this time were
in Royalton, Illinois, 1914. parishes in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Chisholm, and Holding-
ford (Two Rivers), Minnesota; in Clayton, Cornucopia,
Southern Illinois, Missouri and Kansas Lublin, and Huron, Wisconsin; and a parish in Wilton,
North Dakota, which serviced families scattered throughout
Coal and lead mines attracted new immigrants further
that state. In addition, two other parishes existed in Minne-
west to Southern Illinois, Missouri and Oklahoma. The first
sota at this time which may have been supervised from
community organized as a result was Hartshorne, Oklahoma,
Canada: Caribou — at the very northernmost point of the
in 1897, Further north, lead mining developed near Desloge,
state, and Bramble, about 60 miles north of Chisholm.
Missouri, and a group of Eastern Europeans settled there in
Other parishes not officially under Father Vasily’s juris-
the early 1900’s. In 1908, Father John Gratson was called
diction but some falling in the Syro-Arabic vicariate or the
to Desloge to organize a group of former Uniates who de-
sired to return to Orthodoxy. A court litigation was in- Serbian administration were: two Syro-Arabic parishes in
itiated which the Uniates won, but Father John mobilized Ironwood, Michigan, and St. Paul, Minnesota; a Serbian
the remaining people and built a church and parish home. parish in Chisholm; and two Greek parishes in Minneapolis.
The church was consecrated in 1910 by Bishop Platon. Father Kuvshinov’s report details the conditions of the
parish buildings — churches, rectories, schools, halls — and
Soon others began to be attracted to the city, and a
the care of their liturgical appointments. He found several
need was realized for a parish in St. Louis. In 1909 a group
buildings in need of repair, especially the former mission
was Officially organized as a church, and rented stores were
school building in Minneapolis, which also lacked some
used to conduct religious services. Later a house was pur-
items. Most of the parishes did not have an adequately
chased and converted for use as a church, a meeting hall,
trained person to sing the responses during services or to
and living quarters for the priest. The first priest was Father
direct a choir. The highest monthly wages ran from $80 to
Michael Pazdry. In 1927 under the leadership of Father
$100 in the larger parishes, while the priest in Lublin, for
Joseph Hunchak ground was broken for a new church
example, received only $20 as a part-time salary. Six par-
which was dedicated by Metropolitan Platon in 1929,
Father John Tertichny, who had been a priest in Benild at ishes operated some form of parish school on Saturdays
(St. Paul, Chisholm, and Holdingford), in the summer
that time was called to St. Michael’s in 1932 and has re-
months (Clayton), or on a daily basis (Minneapolis); a total
mained there until the present day, though he is now in
retirement.
Miners also settled in the areas of Royalton, Benton,
Buckner, Dowell, Muddy and Livingston, Illinois, and organ-
ized parishes in these areas. St. Joseph’s Church in Muddy
was built in 1913, Nativity of the Holy Virgin in Buckner
in 1916, and Protection of the Holy Virgin in Royalton in
1914. Soon after work had begun on the church in Royal-
ton, disaster struck. On October 27, 1914, an earth-
shattering explosion took place in the Franklin County Coal
Company Mine. In the aftermath of the disaster, it was soon
learned that thirteen Orthodox men had been killed in the
mine that day. One of the founders of the parish, Frank
Derbak, miraculously escaped the explosion with his life.
The Orthodox people in Royalton lived the following days
and weeks in a state of shock. But instead of closing their
work on the new church, they continued with renewed
vigor. The mine disaster gave further impetus to the erection <<

of the church. The thirteen men killed in the mine were Father Vyacheslavov and the Russian school class, Royalton, III.

166
 of 252 children attended these schools which taught mainly
Russian and/or Slavonic reading and writing and catechism.
The total income and expenses of the six operating parishes
Prengpaa Ae Cs ena totaled for that year $20,096.38 in income and $19,505.08
Sa
peacccasod Colrme mua. Haereat: Missnacena ,Bisctnrsinns
in expenses. There were 175 baptisms, 28 weddings, and 29
* z
stale funerals that year. The population of the parishes was as
follows:
eaepgeenesatTi Men Women Total Children Families
Minneapolis 1200 1400 2600 300 400
St. Paul 450 188 638 54 60
Chisholm 100 50. 150 52 45
Clayton Jou" exon mls? 52 36
Holdingford 84 96 180 24 19
Lublin 35 230 261 Ae
1945 1842 3787 524 589
In addition, Father Kuvshinov estimates an additional 1,000
more Orthodox Christians who were not linked directly to a
parish.
In conclusion to the report, Father Kuvshinov gives an
overview of the spiritual condition of the deanery, in terms
of the spiritual life and behavior of each priest in particular
and the laity in general. He does not hedge the conflicts and
problems that were existent in several parishes and which
reflect the troubled years the church was suffering after the
Russian Revolution (cf. Chapters V-VI). This report is the
second lengthy Deanery report by Father Kuvshinov that is
Deanery reports of Father Vasily Kuvshinov, 1922 and 1923. extant in the Archives of the Orthodox Church in America.

beast Renata lintel teed el coed ee ee ed t

™~,

.
|i
aX

oem
te

2 '
oy
hte
sem
ales Z '
tee 7 whiten & - es areeseanes REON ey i
I iy Nt nny % cg,
i | a }
Se Se ae

167

A Parish Is ‘“Found”’
In 1918, a group of farmers from the Slavic regions of
Europe settled in northern Minnesota hoping to establish a
community at the midway point of a proposed railroad line
from Winnipeg to Duluth where a refueling station would
be needed. The railroad line never developed, but the com-
munity remained, supporting themselves by small farms and
probably working in the mines or lumber camps in the sur-
rounding territory. In the 1960’s, the Minnesota Historical
Society discovered the church building and cemetery and
wanted to purchase the church as an historical site. Remain-
ing parishioners made inquiries to the clergy in Hibbing and
Chisholm which reached the Orthodox Dean in Minneapolis
who previously had no record of the existence of the parish.
Concurrently, an Episcopalian minister discovered the par-
ish and persuaded the parishioners to reopen the old church.
Ecumenical groups from northern Minnesota and even
Minneapolis assisted in the refurbishing of the church.
Archbishop John of Chicago came on the feast of Sts. Peter
and Paul to bless the church which now holds an annual
celebration each summer to commemorate its “discovery”
and founding.
Orthodox community in Honolulu, Hawaii, 1915.
168
Zaeea ee Ww ise: site e% AP
Renovated SS. Peter and Paul Church, Bramble, Minnesota.
1
ot
First Orthodox Church In Hawaii
The first contacts in Hawaii were made from Alaska dur-
ing the time of Alexander Baranoff and the Russian Ameri-
can Company for trading purposes. (cf. Hector Chevigny,
Russian America). Later in 1915, having been informed of a
large number of Russian immigrants from Australia living in
Hawaii, Archpriest James Korchinsky took the initiative to
go to Honolulu to establish a parish. In addition to the esti-
mated one thousand Russians, there were also Orthodox
Greeks and Koreans living there. While on the island, Father
Korchinsky was informed by the faithful about a certain
self-consecrated Greek priest who ministered to the Ortho-
dox during annual visits, charging exhorbitant prices for the
services of the Church. News was spread throughout the
islands that a vigil and Divine Liturgy would be served at an
Anglican Church in Honolulu on the weekend of November
28-29, 1915. About three hundred Orthodox believers at-
tended the Liturgy with fewer numbers at the vigil. The
choir was composed of local people who were acquainted
with the order of church services. The following year, in his
proposed budget to the Holy Synod, Archbishop Evdokin
included a budget request for continued missionary work in
Australia and Hawaii.
 DIARY OF A PARISH:
In Homestead, Pennsylvania there was a lonesome young
man named Maxim Lemena who missed his church back
home very much. He walked and talked, pleaded and
begged. “Get me fifty dollars and I'll get you a church.” He
got his fifty dollars and started negotiating for a wooden
structure on Fourth Avenue, which served as the Protestant
church. These negotiations fired the imagination of all
Russians in the colony which pressed against the Fourth
Avenue mill gate. Maxim was Bratchick in the Brotherhood
which was formally organized in 1912. With the
Brotherhood as the base of operations, the enthusiasm for
the church waxed hotter and hotter. So hot and impressive
was the desire for a new church, that the owners of the
building were caught up in it too, and reduced the price to
such a ridiculously low figure that even poor people could
afford it. The Protestants even brought pressure on the
bank to make the necessary loan.
The people came and worshipped. What were these
people like? Just common, hard-working people, the salt of
the earth, who first loved God, then their families, the
children, Russia and the United States. At that time the
working day was twelve hours long and the wages two
dollars per day. No wonder finances were the church’s
major problem. Life was quite simple. There were no
televisions or even radio. The main source of entertainment
was visits, exchange of news (novosti) and story telling
- (baiki). Instead of potato chips, they munched on
sunflower seeds (shemki).
And they worked around the church. Those of you who
know about the difficulties of construction will really
appreciate the problem of making the bellfry and the
placing of three heavy bells and the large wooden cross
without the aid of a crane. The love for America grew, and
a one hundred ten foot high steel flag pole was erected. All
this was done under the excited eyes of the children. These
children, too, who are now the older generation, became
part of the church life.
The Russian School
The Russian school often had an enrollment of over
seventy-five. There were four rows of desks at one time.
Each row was a different grade. Each desk was about six
feet long with a bench attached. It would seat three large
children and four smaller ones. Heat was supplied by one
pot-bellied stove.
If you had an apple, you were allowed to bake it on the
stove. Everybody brought an apple and took turns baking
Homestead, PA
them. There is nothing in the world that smells so sweet or
tastes so good as an apple baked in Russian class. Classes
started by singing a prayer at five o’clock and closed with a
prayer at seven o’clock. Classes started two weeks before
the American school opened and lasted until two weeks
after the American schools closed. These classes ran for five
days a week. They learned to read and write in Russian,
catechism and Russian History. The advanced class learned
Slavonic. Everybody knew all of the prayers. At the end of
the term examinations were given by a Bishop, Arithmetic,
geography, and the rest were studied in the American
school, which was dismissed at four o’clock. You see, there
was only an hour after the “regular” school, to eat supper,
relax or play, before Russian school started. There was also
choir practice twice each week, which everybody attended.
Vespers services were held at four o’clock on Saturday and
Sunday; everybody attended these, too. There were no
delinquents in those days. They were too busy. Punishment
was quick and often. No one complained to their parents
about their punishment, because if they did, they got a
double dose at home. There was tuition, too. It cost
twenty-five cents per month and you paid for your own
books.
There was fun, too, the favorite games were tag, drop
three, Russian hockey, run-sheep-run and skating on an ice
slide.
At the time of renovation of the church, school classes
were held in an old store front about a block away from the
church on Third Avenue between McClure and Ann Streets.
This building was occupied by Efim Zaremba, a church
member who was a carpenter by trade and to whom was
assigned the work of making a Cross which was to be placed
at the newly bought cemetery in Homeville, Pennsylvania.
The children often came early to class just to watch Mr.
Zaremba at work. The Cross was erected with solemn
ceremony sponsored and participated by Brotherhood
members.
While the children studied, the parents worked. The
Iconostas was repainted and gold leafed, the church was
bricked, and every year before Easter, the church was
cleaned from top to bottom. Someone was always around
the church doing something.
Crisis
In the year of 1918, when the world was plagued with
the flu, many hearts were broken with the horrible toll of
(Continued next page)
169
 deaths of our parishioners and especially of the children.
Evidence of the heartbreak can be seen today at the old
section of our cemetery which had just then been acquired.
The long row of small graves along the fence with tiny,
some broken, headstones, attests the magnitude
sadness within our church.
The financial status, which had always been poor, grew
worse. The stipends paid the priest and deacon became
delinquent by three months, unpaid bills piled up. Even the
bill for candles, which were purchased, sold and burned,
could not be paid. There was just no money at all. All the
hard work that had been done seemed to be for nothing.
The church stood on the threshold of disaster and ruin. The
worse part of all was that the spirit of the men was broken;
they cried and were ready to give up.
But, the women didn’t give up. How could they? Didn’t
they just organize into a new Sisterhood called Pokrov?
What about the children? No! They couldn’t give up. They
went to work. They held a bazaar and filled the basement
of the church with all sorts of prizes. Beautifully knit and
crocheted handwork, toys which they begged from local
merchants, chickens, ducks, geese and sheep donated
parishioners who had small farms. The bazaar lasted a week.
It was a huge social success and the financial profit was
unbelievable. All overdue bills and salaries were paid and
there was some money left over. The church was saved! The
Pokrov Sisterhood had a right to be proud.
The ““R” Club
About ten years before the twenty-fifth anniversary, the
young people organized into an “R’” Club, which was a
branch of the Federated Russian Orthodox Clubs. The
Homestead “R” Club got off to a good start. The
membership was large. There were many social affairs called
tea socials each more profitable than the last.
The Russian school waned from four rows of desks to
two.
The “R” Club prospered; there were more funds in the
Homestead “R” Club treasury than there were in the
Pittsburgh District combined. Substantial gifts were given
to the church. The Club was so active and popular that
members were attracted from Braddock and Rankin. There
were dances, tea socials, picnics and swimming parties. The
main mode of transportation was by truck. Everyone had a
wonderful time. The membership grew and so did the
treasury.
The Russian school needed only one row of desks.
The “*R”’ Club sponsored a basketball team and after a
poor start, they won most of their games. Basketball floor
rental was expensive as was the cost of chartered
The treasury dwindled. Delegates were sent to the
convention and the treasury dwindled some more. There
were no fund-raising affairs because it interfered with the
basketball schedule. Since only five could play basketball at
any one time, the membership waned. When the treasury
was depleted, the Homestead “‘R” Club was no more. There
were several attempts to revive the ““R”’ Club and after brief
170
period of moderate success, interest waned and the Club
disbanded.
Now, the Russian school was attended by only a small
handful of children, and met just on Saturdays instead of
of the
five days a week.
The youth of the church then occupied themselves with
softball and basketball on Sundays after church. Their
meeting place was on First Avenue, in front of Danchenko’s
house. Danchenkos and Kalupanovs let the boys use their
house as a dressing room.
Even this came to an end, because of marriages. Too
many of these marriages took place outside of our religion
and those who were the children of the new church were
lost tq us.
World War I] — A New Church
When World War Il was eminent, the country needed
more steel, and fast. The best steel was made in Homestead
and this was where the new mill would be. All properties
below the tracks were acquired and demolished, including
our church building. We received seventy-five thousand
by dollars for land and building. The contents we could
remove and keep.
John E. Figner, the only business man of our church,
was the secretary. He served for eight years. He negotiated
the sale of the old church, then founded and contacted Mr.
Vasily Verhovskoy, the architect lauriate of old Russia, and
they, together with Dr. Andrey Avinoff, Director of the
Carnegie Museum in Oakland, worked out the design of a
truly Russian church. An exact transcript of the meeting is
not available, but the specifications were brought forth in
this manner. “Our church,” said one member, “‘should have
the holiness of the Mother Church in Russia.’ Another said,
“It should have the beauty of the Cathedral in Moscow.”
Another said, “It should have the splendor of the East,”
and another, “It must have the strength of a mountain, the
grace of a birch tree, the brilliance of the sun,” added still
another, “It must have the warmth of spring, the color of
the rainbow, the dignity of very old age,” they all said.
Upon hearing such imposing demands, Mr. Verhovskoy
asked, ““And how much money is there?” Seventy-five
thousand, he was told. “Very well,” he said with kindness
and understanding, “‘we shall see what we can do.”
The old West home, which was over a hundred years old
was purchased. It was a big home and was on a large lot.
The house was where the church should be! So a new
foundation was built, and the house was moved.
The porch was closed in and served as the sanctuary,
after the Altar was placed and icons hung, a wooden cross
busses. on the roof of the porch completed the new church. This is
where the people worshipped. The living room was for the
choir, the dining room was the main auditorium, and the
kitchen, too, on Christmas and Easter.
Hardship Again!
There was no Russian school or Sunday school. The
seventy-five thousand dollars dwindled to thirty-five thou-
sand dollars. There was a round of inflation and costs went
up. The church was in trouble, again!
All that was left was an Iconostas, parts or which were
scattered everywhere, three bells stored in the back yard,
some paintings stored somewhere, two sets of worn out
risas, the Altar tools, some Icons, an Altar made of
packing box wood, and thirty-five thousand dollars, which
became less and less valuable with each round of inflation.
John, who spoke, read and wrote both English and
Russian, developed the bookkeeping system we now use.
He induced younger people to accept membership into the ©
church committee. He trained them: He found and hired an
architect, took our money out of the checking account,
where it seemed to be slowly dwindling, and placed it in
savings accounts, where it would accrue interest.
There were fund-raising campaigns followed by fund-
raising campaigns. Some money did come in, but it was
disappointingly small. In fact, inflation not only wiped out
the gains, but left the church worse off than before.
The hardships of worshipping in the crowded quarters of
a dilapidated house wore on the nerves of everyone.
John had the basement of our present church built. The
lower section of the Iconostas was placed on the stage and
separated the Sanctuary from the main auditorium. There
was more room. Yet physically and financially we were in
bad shape. The cost of the new building kept going up from
sixty-five thousand, to eighty-five thousand, to ninety-five
thousand, to one hundred thirty-five thousand and money
kept coming in at an agonizingly slow pace. People were
impatient, tempers became sharp.
The young people, trained by John Figner, made up a
large part of the church committee. It was decided to go
ahead with plans to build the new church. A contract was
signed, with the provision that work would continue on as
long as there was money. When the money ran out, work
would stop. Pledge cards were distributed.
There was a kick-off banquet. Over six thousand dollars
was pledged. This, together with the fund we had, and the
twenty-thousand dollars loaned by the Brotherhood,
insured construction of the outer shell. There would not be
enough for lights, plaster, linoleum or windows. The bells
were blessed, sponsors named and another banquet was
held. More funds came in.
Pledges were paid and new ones made and paid, and
renewed again. Ten thousand dollars more was borrowed
from the Brotherhood. Contributions came in at such a rate
that the church was completed even to the walk around the
church without work stoppage because of lack of funds.
Sunday income from collection was about twenty-six
dollars, candle sales about thirteen dollars. This is about
what the income was when wages were two dollars per
twelve hour day.
By August 30, 1933, ten thousand dollars, borrowed
from the Brotherhood was repaid. The remaining twenty
thousand dollars debt was forgiven, and on that date a
mortgage burning was celebrated with a special liturgy.
Bishop Benjamin was in attendance and a banquet was held.
There was great joy: men wept openly, and their wives,
too. There was no loud cheering during the flame, only
prayers, tears and kisses.
All was well again, there were no debts at all, and a
modest bank account was established.
There was neither church school nor Sunday school.
Church attendance began to wane. The roof leaked.
Attendance picked up. The leak was repaired. Attendance
waned. Attendance went from bad to worse.
Lightning struck the front cross and split the beautiful
stone spire from top to bottom. The next Sunday, the
church was filled to overflowing! Attendance remained
good until the spire was repaired. Attendance fell again, and
lightning struck the front cross, again, and knocked it to
the ground.
A New Generation
A Sunday school was started and grew and church
attendance stabilized at an acceptable level.
By this time, the plaster was dry and was painted. Art
work was donated and placed throughout the church. The
Sunday school grew larger and so did church attendance.
There were many young ladies not associated with any
group who wanted to do something for their church. They
organized and called themselves the Trinity Guild. They got
off to a good start and are still going strong. They dressed
up the basement beautifully, made cash contributions,
donated the Trinity (Troytsa) candles and helped in too
many other ways to report in this short history.
There were more and more young members on the
church committee. They were not really young compared
to the ages of our founders, but they were younger than we
had before. They dared, and with the priest’s permission,
to have pews installed. They even dared to institute an
envelope system, against vigorous objections. The church
prospered in attendance and funds.
Many more improvements were made. The dear old
packing box Altar and other stands were replaced with
sturdier pieces which were much more in harmony with the
artistic motif of the already beautiful church. A set of new
robes were purchased and added even more color to the
already colorful surroundings. The new parish home was
built and property was added to the cemetery which was
ecoming overcrowded. ...
This brief outline is not a story, so it has no end. The
period is now. There is a substantial mortgage which could,
but shouldn’t cause any trouble. The roof still leaks. There
are other repair and maintenance problems. These will be
troublesome, but can be handled.
(Compiled for the 1964 Golden Anniversary Book of the
Homestead Parish by Mr. Peter Mock on the basis of
records of Dr. Avinoff and others.)
171
fiz
Ue

UOISSaD01g
JO ‘AB.49|9 ‘moosow apisino
“3g s,jIseg ‘leapayred
“LLGL
004Yg) Asazinoo
yo jeuoineN s1ydesBoas (auizebey
CHAPTER V
The year 1917 was a year of rapid change in Russia,
both for Church and State. Soon after the March Revolu-
tion and the establishment of the provisional government,
official announcement of the convening of an All-Russian
Sobor was finally made in April. Plans for this Sobor were
begun a dozen years earlier, but, for various reasons, the
actual convening was postponed time and time again. Many
other events in the life of the Church of Russia gave a
glimmer of hope that a new era of positive growth and re-
newal was beginning: in June, a convention of clergy and
laity met in Moscow; the same month, the office of Ober-
procurator of the Holy Synod was abolished; on July 5, a
second official announcement of the Sobor was made. Many
among the clergy as well as the laity saw a renewed interest
in a more active lay participation in ecclesiastical activities,
a policy that had been followed in the North American
Diocese since the Mayfield Sobor in 1907.
The leaders of the North American Diocese offered their
ideas and visions to the Sobor’s Planning Commission in
June of 1917. It was hoped that the Church in Russia would
be free in its internal administration, being managed by a
Sobor to be called every three years rather than through
the established order of the State’s administrative machin-
ery. In addition, the recommendation called for more lay
participation in Church life. It was also suggested that the
Russian Church be divided into Metropolitan Districts. The
North American Diocese would constitute one of the
Metropolitan Districts, but with the following peculiarities:
(1) The American Diocese would be divided into six dis-
tricts: Alaska, Canada, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Brooklyn
and New York. (2) It would have broader rights of self-
government, since it was impossible to maintain close rela-
tions with Moscow. (3) Members would be elected from
each Deanery to the central administrative body for a term
of three years. (4) All-American Sobors would be called to
decide the activities within the Diocese.
The Opening of the All-Russian Sobor
The Sobor finally opened on August 15, 1917, in Mos-
cow. The North American Diocese was represented as an
integral part of the Russian Church by its Archbishop,
Evdokim, as well as by Father Alexander Kukulevsky,
pastor of Holy Trinity Church in Chicago and chosen as a
Sobor delegate by the Diocesan administration, and by
Father Leonid Turkevich, who attended in his capacity as a
Cathedral Dean. Father Kukulevsky served as a member of
the Sobor’s commission for drafting parish statutes, based on
the Normal Statutes prepared by the North American Dio-
cese in 1909.
Crisis ANd TRANSITION
1917-1922
With his departure to attend the Sobor, Archbishop
Evdokim made the following decision concerning the ad-
ministration of the North American Diocese:
June 24, 1917
INO, SW, SATA
I ask that the administrative records be sent to
Bishop Alexander for confirmation. The performance
of services is entrusted to Bishop Stephen, in case he
receives such invitations; (this includes) even conse-
crations, which are approved by Bishop Alexander.
Archbishop Evdokim
In case of necessity, I ask that the consistory invite
Bishop Alexander to participate directly in adminis-
trative meetings wherever they are held. — A.E.
This decision was sent to Bishop Alexander Nemolovsky in
Canada who, in turn, made the following resolution on
August 1, 1917:
It is clear from the decision of His Eminence that
without my approval the decisions of the consistory
have no power and, henceforth, I am in fact the Ad-
ministrator of the Mission. In view of the extra-
ordinary importance of this moment in history, and
in view of the moral and financial crisis which the
entire Mission is going through, I have decided to
come to New York.
A further decision from Archbishop Evdokim, a cablegram
dated August 18, 1917, further confirmed Bishop Alexan-
der’s position: “ . .. beg Bishop Alexander to take over the
government of the mission...”
Bishop Alexander was faced with problems from the
beginning of his administration, and the resolution of
August 1, as noted above, clearly acknowledges this fact.
Two basic difficulties plagued and weakened the North
American Diocese. The first was the canonical problem that
arose over the very appointment of Bishop Alexander, a
dispute initiated by a group of clergy who were inspired by
certain reform movements in Russia, as well as by the deci-
sion of the All-Russian Sobor concerning the election of
Diocesan Bishops. The second problem centered on the
financial situation of the Diocese, a problem inherited by
Bishop Alexander and ultimately to reach its climax when
all financial assistance from Russia was forever terminated.
The October Revolution
The Revolution of October 1917 brought about what the
late Metropolitan Leonty called “the turning point in our
173
 ARCHBISHOP ALEXANDER NEMOLOVSKY

Perhaps the least known of all American primates is

Archbishop Alexander Nemolovsky. Little has been said
about him save that he was unable to manage the critical
situation of the American Diocese following the Russian
Revolution. Often he is blamed for initiating many of the
ills which have and continue to beset us. Over fifty years
have passed since Archbishop Alexander departed from
America and only now, through researching the facts and
evaluating them in an unbiased manner, can we begin to
assess his reign as primate of the North American Diocese.
Father Alexander Nemolovsky left Russia for America
during the rule of Bishop Nicholas (1891-1898) and arrived
in the United States with several other missionary priests,
including Fathers Alexander Hotovitsky, Theodore Pash-
kovsky, Peter Popoff and Jason Kappandze. Besides labor-
ing as a missionary priest, Father Alexander was active in
working with new immigrants. He also was editor of a
Russian-language daily newspaper, the Russian Immigrant.
In 1909 Father Alexander took the monastic vows and
was consecrated Bishop of Alaska, replacing Bishop Inno-
cent Pustynsky, who returned to Russia. In his capacity of
Bishop of Alaska, Bishop Alexander was extremely active
in traveling to the remotest outposts of his far-reaching
Diocese, counseling and offering guidance in all facets of i
church life. Issues of the Russian-American Orthodox Mes- ba

senger of his time contained almost monthly reports of his
activities, as well as articles and monographs which he wrote
concerning the life and development of the Church in Alas-
ka. It was also as Bishop of Alaska that Bishop Alexander
served from July 1914 to March 1915 as Temporary Admin-
istrator of the North American Diocese, pending the arrival
of Archbishop Evdokim who succeeded Archbishop Platon.
With the creation of a new episcopal see in Canada,
Bishop Alexander was transferred to fill this position in
1916, with headquarters in Winnipeg. Archimandrite Philip
Stavitsky was consecrated as his successor as Bishop of
Alaska. While in Canada, Bishop Alexander attempted to
organize Church life there, which was greatly impaired by
Protestant efforts to minister to the immigrants. Unfortu-
nately, Bishop Alexander’s stay in Canada was a short one,
as with the departure of Archbishop Evdokim for the All-
Russian Sobor in 1917, Bishop Alexander once again was
named Temporary Administrator and, in view of the many
crises which had arisen both internally and as a result of the
Russian Revolution, he left Canada for New York, placing
Archimandrite Adam Philipovsky as administrator in Winni-
peg.
With the announcement that Archbishop Evdokim would
not be returning to America, as he had joined the reform
movement in Russia which was later to become the “Living
Church,” the Second All-American Sobor of Cleveland, held
in 1919, elected Bishop Alexander as primate of the Amer-
ican Church. Confirmation later came from Russia, thus
firmly establishing Alexander as Archbishop of the North
American Diocese.
From the very beginning of his rule, Archbishop Alexan-
der was faced with many problems. His greatest difficulty
was the financial chaos which he inherited as Temporary
Administrator and which was further complicated by the
termination of funds from Russia. Although Bishop Alexan-
der grossly mismanaged the entire crisis, one wonders if,
in view of the complexity and magnitude of the financial
crisis, he was not simply cornered by a situation with which
he was perhaps unfamiliar and incapable of solving. Certain-
ly we must admit that, although he was no doubt aware of
the debt which he inherited from Archbishop Evdokim,
which exceeded $100,000, he must have been taken totally
by surprise by the unexpected termination of the regular
allocations from Russia with the October Revolution.

174
 Unfortunately, Archbishop Alexander turned to the
mortgaging and sale of church property in order to alleviate
the debt and meet incoming bills. Not only did this policy
further increase the debts of the Diocese, but it also pro-
vided cause for Archbishop Alexander’s enemies, particular-
ly Father John Kedrovsky and his small band of dissident
priests, to rise up against him.
While, in the words of the Russian Ambassador in Wash-
ington, Boris Bakhmetev, Archbishop Alexander was devoid
of financial and administrative capabilities, he nevertheless
sincerely wished to help the American Diocese meet its
problems. His complication of the financial crisis was chiefly
due to his hasty and unwise financial policies, which he in-
creasingly turned to when the official plan to alleviate the
debt, which was passed at the Cleveland Sobor, that of as-
~ sessing every parish and priest a percentage of their income,
failed because of a lack of cooperation on the part of all.
It may be assumed then, that his further entanglements
with property mortgaging were in part a reaction to the
ineffectiveness of the percentage assessment plan.
Archbishop Alexander’s enemies accused him of flagrant-
ly spending the Church’s money. According to Kedrovsky,
Archbishop Alexander Nemolovsky and the Metropolitan
Platon “have compromised themselves in the eyes of the
believers by their scandalous living and by the dissipation of
the Russian people’s wealth . . .”” Metropolitan Platon, who
obviously realized Archbishop Alexander’s faults, neverthe-
less characterizes him as one who did not, in his unsuccessful
financial struggles, pursue his own private goals or interests:
Personally, Archbishop Alexander was hardly a
money grubber, and in obtaining money in a faulty
and dangerous manner, he thought of his own personal
needs least of all, often himself living in total poverty
and destitution ...
It is harder to determine where popular feeling toward
history,” opening the doors to revolution, Bolshevism, the
>
severance of ties with the Mother Church, the end of
material assistance, inner chaos, and the growth of personal
weaknesses and passions among certain bishops, priests and
laymen. The Revolution occurred on October 25, 1917, in
the midst of the All-Russian Sobor; the Provisional Govern-
ment of Kerensky was abolished; the Tsar and his family
subsequently were brutally executed. Five days after the
initial revolt, the Sobor decided to restore the Moscow
Patriarchate, which had been abolished by Peter the Great,
and, on November 5, Metropolitan Tikhon of Moscow was
elected Patriarch. His enthronement took place on Novem-
ber 21. While the Church within Russia proved stable
enough to meet the initial shock of the Revolution, the
dioceses outside the Russian borders suffered greatly. Not
only did the Revolution introduce new problems into the
American Diocese, but it also provided the setting in which
hitherto latent difficulties were able to explode. In the
words of Bishop Alexander himself:
It seems as if all the powers of hell have gathered
to sink our Church in the waves of anarchy and
Archbishop Alexander lay. While his financial policies,
especially the placing of St. Tikhon’s Monastery as security
on two occasions, drew upon himself the suspicion and
blame of all, it is still a fact that the majority of parishes
remained firmly behind him, especially in the attempts of
Kedrovsky and his colleagues to gain control, not only of
parish properties, but of the Diocesan Administration itself.
Archbishop Alexander also experienced difficulties with
the Church in Canada and its administrator in Winnipeg,
Archimandrite Adam Philipovsky. There was a growing
factionalism in Canada, with the immigrants dividing into
Russian and Ukrainian factions. The idea of a Ukrainian
Administration within the Diocese, similar to the Albanian
or Serbian Adminsitrations, was raised at the Cleveland
Sobor, and the reactions were positive. After the Sobor,
however, Archbishop Alexander dismissed the matter, ob-
viously feeling that Ukrainians were Russians and therefore
not in need of a separate Administration. This policy,
coupled with the Archbishop’s mismanagement of the idea
of a special Sobor for Western Canada, greatly angered the
Administrator, who published several pamphlets and articles
against Archbishop Alexander. Many laymen were also dis-
appointed by the decision and, in due time, a separate
Ukrainian Orthodox Diocese was organized outside the
jurisdiction of the North American Diocese.
Due to the complications which had grown within the
Diocese, Archbishop Alexander deemed it best for the
Church to leave America, perhaps feeling that a stronger
administrator, Metropolitan Platon, could better correct the
ills of the Diocese. He left America for Europe on June 20,
1922. Before leaving, however, he addressed a letter to
Metropolitan Platon, requesting that he assume the duties
of Ruling Hierarch.
Priest John Matusiak
atheism; serpents, in human form, create trouble for
our Mission .. . covering themselves with reformation
and progressiveness, they attempt to destroy the
Church with axes, hammers and sickles.
Immediate Difficulties after the Revolution
Bishop Alexander intended to correct the ills of the
North American Diocese, but with the unexpected revolu
tion, new difficulties developed, especially concerning his
own position and the financial position of the Church.
As Kartashev notes, the revolution proved to be a psy-
chological catastrophy for a portion of the clergy in Russia,
and groups of clerics attempted to organize Church life and
administration on an independent basis. This problem
spread to America also, where certain priests interpreted
the Revolution as a call to fight against all authority. Con-
sider, for example, the following appeal of an American
priest to his parishioners: “Russian people! Don’t be afraid
of the Bishop’s threats. Their days are numbered. They feel
the approach of doom, when they will have to face the
175

Bishops and ‘delegates to the All-Russian Sobor, Moscow
representatives of the people.” Official organization of
clerics of this persuasion occurred with a meeting of the
“progressive party” of Orthodox clergy in New York City
on October 31, 1917. They decided to propose radical
Church reforms at the forthcoming All-American Sobor,
which Bishop Alexander planned for January of 1918.
Among their reforms were married bishops and permission
for widowed priests to remarry. Father Basil Lysenkovsky
outlined the actions of these priests, led by Father John
Kedrovsky of Hartford, Connecticut, in the Russian-
American paper Golos Tserkvi:
Not long ago, Bishop Alexander, administrator of
the Diocese, issued an order concerning the convoca-
tion of the National Sobor on January 30, 1918, in
New York City.
Following this announcement, | received a circular
concerning a meeting of priests — representatives of
the New York, Yonkers, Hartford and Philadelphia
deaneries — in which they ignore the orders of the
Bishop and call an “extraordinary” sobor for October
31 in New York City.
Why? Who authorized them and gave them the
right to make such a decision and such demands?
Only one thing is clear: the group of “reformers” is
striving to overthrow Bishop Alexander and take
power into their own hands.
176
y
é
@ oO
1917-1918. (Photo courtesy of National Geographic Magazine)
(They are) exactly like the Bolsheviks now in Rus-
sia. They have, for some time, carried on powerful
agitation with all kinds of “comrades” and “‘national-
ists’ against Bishop Alexander, and they appeal to
participants of a special meeting in New York — it
startles one’s imagination! True, far from a majority
of Deans took part, not even all pastors from city
churches .. . but rather, only the small group headed
by Father John Kedrovsky, who is truly a fanatic —
the atheist Okuntsov, in his newspaper, glorifies him
as a “progressive-minded priest” .. .
What exactly gave birth to such a movement? The one
event that served as a springboard for this group’s illegal
meeting was the publication of the Holy Synod’s “Provi-
sional Statutes” concerning parishes, diocesan government,
and the right of each diocese to elect its own bishop. In
Russia, therefore, diocesan hierarchs were elected: in Mos-
cow, Archbishop Tikhon was chosen Metropolitan, and so
on. But while bishops were being elected, others were not
reelected, such as Bishops Anthony Khrapovitsky of Khar-
kov and Seraphim Chichagov of Tver. The absence of Arch-
bishop Evdokim complicated matters; hence Father Kedrov-
sky and his group called the illegal meeting of clergy with
the idea of electing a new American primate. They stressed
the fact that Russia could no longer guarantee a new bishop
for America because of the political situation. The “Federa-
tion of Laity and Clergy of the Russian National Orthodox
Church” was formed with the intention of replacing Bishop
Alexander through the elections guaranteed by the All-
Russian Sobor and establishing an American Church “‘not
under royal regimes and decrees.”
Bishop Alexander, along with the faithful clergy of the
Diocese, began an energetic movement to restore order and
put an end to the work of the Federation. Thus, in January
of 1918, Bishop Alexander issued a resolution suspending
several priests involved in the dissident movement. In
August, a council of clergy was summoned in Pittsburgh.
Numbering 140 priests, this meeting resolved the following
in light of the growing dissent: ‘
.. . to find the source from which clearly false infor-
mation about the Diocese was originating; that if the
persons participating in such activities are within the
Mission, the diocesan administration will be asked to
dismiss them without delay . . .; to censure those who
clearly sympathize with and are friendly toward those
who are presently harming the Mission; to express full
confidence, love and support to the Ruling Bishop
Alexander in his activities.
Another clergy meeting was held on September 5, 1918, in
New York City. Considering the statements of eight priests,
the meeting determined that they were composed in an
“obviously demagogic and Bolshevik spirit, contrary to the
basic laws of the Church,” and Bishop Alexander was re-
quested to suspend the eight, which included Father Ked-
rovsky.
A number of laymen were also influenced by the revolu-
tionary spirit in Russia and organized into various socialist
groups. The “Russian Socialist Party,’ a branch of the
American Socialist Party, had chapters in New York City,
Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Cleveland and Boston. At its
first convention in 1915, there were 18 chapters with about
300 members. By the spring of 1917, the federation grew to Ye
include 29 chapters with 600 members. Meetings often were
held concurrently with church services and featured lectures
on such themes as “The Truth about God” and “Religion
and State.” Occasionally the local priest would undergo
harassment. In one instance, a priest complained that of
his congregation of 1000, scarcely one-tenth remained loyal
to the Church.
The spirit of dissidence was fought from the very begin-
ning by Bishop Alexander and the majority of the faithful
American clergy. Ultimately, it did not find proper soil to
grow in America, but it soon was to bear fruit in Russia in
the “Living Church” movement.
Initial Financial Crisis
The American Diocese, being perhaps the largest mission-
ary diocese of the Russian Church, depended heavily upon
the Mother Church for financial assistance prior to the
October Revolution. In 1916, the American Diocese re-
quested that the allotments made to her be increased, as the
previous sums had grown insufficient. Of the $1,000,000
requested by the Diocese, the Holy Synod of Russia alloted
$550,000. With the Revolution, however, all funds were cut
off permanently, and the North American Diocese was
thrown into economic chaos by the sudden and unexpected
need to depend on its own resources and communicants for
financial support.
When Bishop Alexander assumed the position of tempo-
rary administrator in 1917, he inherited debts which already
exceeded $100,000. This debt accumulated precisely be-
cause the funds previolsly allocated were insufficient. Un-
fortunately, since the Diocese was so dependent upon the
Mother Church for funds, a systematic plan for gradual self-
sufficiency was never developed. Bishop Alexander, finding
that funds were not available to pay the increasing debt, was
gradually being cornered by a situation which could no
longer be managed.
The termination of funds from Russia with the Revolu-
tion left the North American Diocese on its own, as the
Imperial Russian Ambassador, Boris Bakhmetev, notes in a
letter to Metropolitan Platon in 1921: “The termination of
the regular allocation from Russia, combined with the diffi-
culties related to the disorders in the financial situation of
the Diocese, made the situation almost catastrophic.” The
termination of funds from Russia was especially felt by the
priests, who were entirely dependent upon the Mother
Church for their salaries and pensions. Records show that as
early as March of 1917, the monthly clerical salaries were
not paid, and that from April to June of the same year,
expenses were not met at all.
Measures to alleviate the problem were taken by the
administration. For example, at the meeting of the adminis-
tration on June 6, 1917, it was resolved to assess parishes a
percentage of their collections. The plan was never realized,
and the situation worsened. In what was obviously a last
resort, Bishop Alexander desperately turned to the mort-
gaging of Church property in 1918, with the churches in
Cleveland, Ohio, and Gary, Indiana. This only served to
complicate matters further, as not only were the finance
companies demanding delinquent principal payments, but
interest was also compounding. Once again, the already sus-
pended priest John Kedrovsky, leading his band of dissident
priests, filed suit against Bishop Alexander in civil court.
Kedrovsky accused the Bishop of negligent treatment of
Church property, and asked the court to appoint a trustee
for the properties of 115 parishes. The court granted Ked-
rovsky’s request late in 1918, but the matter was not
brought up again for several years.
Despite Bishop Alexander’s concern and good intentions,
the emerging financial crisis grew worse by his gross mis-
management. Ambassador Bakhmetev called for urgent
action “‘not just for the salvation of the Mission from final
destruction, but for the preservation of the good name and
dignity of the Russian Church in America,” since so much
of the crisis within the Church was being reported in the
American press. Concrete action to give the Church a firm
financial base was to come with the convening of the All-
American Sobor of 1919.
The Second All-American Council — 1919
Plans for the convening of a Second All-American Sobor
had already been formulated by Archbishop Evdokim. With
the delay of his return from Russia, the clergy conference
of 1917 in Pittsburgh expressed the desire that the Sobor
take place after the All-Russian Sobor, when Archbishop
Evdokim would return and elaborate on its decisions. After
a telegram from Archbishop Evdokim arrived, stating that
the All-Russian Sobor was to continue until after Christmas
of 1917, it was decided that the All-American Sobor would
be held at the earliest in January 1918. Meetings of the
Sobor’s planning commissions were held, and the agenda of
the Sobor was formulated. Plans were also made to convene
separate conventions for other groups within the Diocese,
such as the Syrians, Albanians, and the parishes in Western
Canada.
A lack of funds postponed the Sobor, although planning
meetings were still being held. At the planning committee
meeting of September 1918, held in New York City, an
appeal was made to the Russian Embassy in Washington for
financial assistance for the Sobor, in view of the fact that
“such a meeting is considered very important and necessary.”
Finally, after a delay of over one year, the Second All-
American Sobor opened in Cleveland at St. Theodosius
Church on February 12, 1919. In accordance with the All-
Russian Sobor, the meeting was composed of the hierarchs
clergy and elected parish representatives, with the bishops
serving as presidents and elected clergy and laymen func-
tioning as vice-presidents. Representatives from the various
ethnic groups within the Diocese were also present.
The Sobor opened with the Divine Liturgy, followed by
the usual business matters. Father Alexander Kukulevsky,
in outlining the agenda, declared that “our Sobor has the
same important meaning and pursues the same goals as the
Moscow Sobor, though for the future of the Mission in
America.” The first official act of the Sobor was the elec-
tion of a new primate for the Diocese, as Archbishop
Evdokim had become involved with the “Living Church”
movement in Russia and had no plans of returning to
America. Bishop Alexander declared that the election was
imperative in view of the financial crisis and the lack of a
universally recognized head of the Diocese. The motion to
elect Bishop Alexander as head of the North American
Diocese came from Father J. Sechinsky of New Salem,
Pennsylvania. His motion met with general approval, and
the delegates rose and sang “‘axios,” although several dis-
satisfied priests left the hall as a sign of protest. A vote was
taken, and Bishop Alexander received 242 of the 268 votes.
The hierarchy and other representatives of the ethnic groups
within the Diocese unanimously approved the election.
Bishop Aftimios said that “the Syrians express joy to hear
that the Sobor has elected Vladyka Alexander’; Bishop
Stephen expressed his approval of Bishop Alexander as the
“Jogical choice”; Archimandrite Mardary said that “‘all Ser-
bian people joyously welcome today’s election”; while
Archimandrite Theophan Noli expressed the joy of the
30,000 Albanians he represented. In conjunction with the
178
election of an Archbishop, the Sobor also took steps to re-
organize the Diocese, and established a Presbyter’s Council
(Metropolitan Council), a Finanacial Administration, and
other necessary organs.
The other major problem facing the Sobor delegates was,
of course, the financial crisis. In view of the termination of
allocations from Russia, the mortgaging of church property,
the increasing amounts of unpaid interest, and the threat of
bankruptcy, the Sobor carefully considered the current
expenses and bills of the Diocese. It was evident that the
debt must be eliminated in some fashion, since it exceeded
$200,000, and that a closer control of Diocesan finances
should be instituted since, even during the time of Arch-
bishop Evdokim, there was a certain amount of mismanage-
ment.
The Sobor passed two measures to alleviate the financial
burden of the Diocese. The first was the creation of the
Financial Administration to assume all legal debts of the
Diocese. This body would be composed of three members
of the Presbyter’s Council and three laymen. The second
measure stated that both priests and parishes must contrib-
ute a certain percentage of their income to the Central Ad-
ministration. It was decided that every parish contribute 5%
of its gross income and every priest and assistant pay 2% of
their salaries to the Diocesan headquarters. It was further
decided that, in view of its underutilization, the National
and Immigrant’s home would be sold in order to further
reduce the debts of the diocese.
On February 15/28, the last day of the Council of 1919,
discussion at the morning session centered on the problems
of ethnic groups and their interrelations within the North
American diocese.
The first question considered under this rubric was the
“Ukrainian question.” Archbishop Alexander reported that
Ukrainian Uniates in Canada seeking to enter the Orthodox
Church were insisting on being called the Ukrainian Ortho-
dox Church. He stated his opinion that the term Russian
Orthodox should be applied to them. At this point, Father
Alexander Kukulevsky, as a participant of the Ukrainian
Church Council in Kiev (1917-1919), provided information
on the Ukrainian question in its political and religious as-
pects; he recommended that the Ukrainian Orthodox be
recognized as such. After some discussion from the floor,
Archbishop Alexander requested the Council to make its
decision, promising on his part to abide by the Council’s
determination. Father Kukulevsky, as Vice-chairman of the
Council, proposed the following resolution:
The Church Council of the North American Ortho-
dox Church resolves to admit into the Orthodox
Church Uniates desiring to be reunited to Orthodoxy
and being of the Ukrainian party, giving them the
right to be called “Ukrainians” and consequently to
call their Church the “Ukrainian Orthodox Church.”
The resolution was adopted by the Council. Only six votes
were recorded against the resolution.
A report on the Syro-Arab churches was presented to the
Council by Archbishop Alexander, since Bishop Aftimios
 FATHER ALEXANDER KUKULEVSKY

Protopresbyter Alexander Yurievich Kukulevsky was

born in Kiev on October 28, 1873. He was educated at the
Kiev Theological Academy, where he was a classmate of
the future Metropolitan Theophilus. Arriving in the United
States in 1901, he was assigned as a reader and teacher
in Galveston, Texas, and later in Allegheny, Pennsylvania.
With the founding of the Minneapolis Seminary in 1905,
he was appointed as a teacher by Archbishop Tikhon. The
following year, Kukulevsky returned to Russia to marry
Valentina Dimitrievna Momansk, the daughter of a priest,
and then returned to America. On September 17, 1907, he
was ordained to the priesthood by Archbishop Alexander
and for the next two years served as a parish priest in
Minneapolis in addition to his teaching duties at the
seminary. From 1909 to 1911, Father Kukulevsky served
in Osceola Mills, Philipsburg, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
In 1912, he was transferred to Holy Trinity Cathedral in
Chicago.
Father Kukulevsky was part of the American Delega-
tion to the All-Russian Sobor of 1917-1918 in Moscow,
| along with Archbishop Evdokim and Father Leonid Tur-
kevich (later Metropolitan Leonty). Upon returning to the
United States, he remained in New York from 1920 to
1922 and was assigned to St. Theodosius Cathedral in
Cleveland during 1923. At the same time, he edited and
published the monthly Voice of the Church. From 1923
to 1925, Father Kukulevsky served the parish in South
River, New Jersey. He was later transferred to Holy Trinity
Russian Orthodox Church in Brooklyn in 1925 and re-
mained there until 1941. Father Kukulevsky served Holy
Ghost Parish in Bridgeport, Connecticut, from 1941 to of the Church in America which were accepted by the
1947, and then Holy Virgin Mary Church in Los Angeles 1937 All-American Council at Cleveland. When St. Vladi- |
until his retirement in 1957. He was a close advisor of his mir’s Seminary opened, he was on the faculty and lectured
friend Metropolitan Theophilus and was involved in the in Pastoral Theology. Father Alexander Kukulevsky con-
preparation of reports for the All-American Councils. tinued to serve the Church until his death on January 1,
Father Kukulevsky prepared the first draft of the Statutes 1963.
had already departed from Pittsburgh. 1) Every Syrian It is tragically evident that the Council of 1919 was truly
priest having a certificate from Bishop Aftimios is to be a “lost opportunity” for the Orthodox Church in America.
received by Russian Orthodox clergy as a brother. 2) No The proceedings and resolutions of the Council show that
Russian priest must recognize any Syrian priest not having a the next 60 years of the Church’s history in America did
certificate from the Bishop of Brooklyn. 3) Russian priests not have to be years ofdivision, alienation and chaos. Even
should not serve Syrians where a Syrian church exists. The in the confusion of 1919, unity had been maintained in an
three-point statement reveals, on the one hand, a certain organic way. The plan outlined by Patriarch Tikhon in 1905
tension and desire to maintain separate identities on the governed the mind and conscience of the Church.
part of the Syrians and Russians; on the other hand, the
canonical and practical unity of Syrians and Russians in one Subsequent Difficulties
Church is also revealed.
Finally, the Council resolved that Archimandrite With the election of Archbishop Alexander by the Cleve-
Theophan Noli of the Albanian Church in America and land Sobor, his regularity as the successor of Archbishop
Archimandrite Mardary of the Serbian Church in America Evdokim was acknowledged. The canonical situation of the
should be consecrated bishops if the Albanian and Serbian North American Diocese was confirmed in a series of resolu-
Church Councils duly elected them. Both nominees were tions from Russia. The first resolution was that of the Holy
present at the Second All-American Council and took part Synod, No. 2475, dated August 27, 1920, which confirmed
in the deliberations. the election of Archbishop Alexander:

179
 Archbishop Alexander ruled with the assistance of the
Presbyter’s Council, which in November of 1919 changed
its name to the Diocesan Council. Together they dealt with
TRE ALBANIAN ORTHODON CHURCH OF america
The Very Rev. Archimandrite fan S Noli,Administrator
the old problems and carried out the decisions of the Cleve-
land Sobor. In addition, they dealt with many of the
internal problems that had earlier upset the normal life of
the Diocese. For example, in 1920 identification cards were
REPORT oF

THE GEWERAL COUNCIL oF

issued to all priests in order to assure their affiliation with
| RHE- ALBANLAN ORTHODOX cuURoH . the Diocese, as opposed to affiliation with various inde-
pendent and dissident groups. But of all the problems still
THE General Gouneil of the Alkanian Orthodox Church of North facing Archbishop Alexander, the financial situation re-
“America was held at Franklin Union Hali,Franklin Sui\iing, Corner of
mained by far the most urgent and difficult.
q ‘Borikeley |and Appleton streets,foston,Massachusetts,on Narch Third
. old style ( March sixteenth now style }, in the ysar of our Lord While Archbishop Alexander did not create the financial
A one thousand nineteen hundred and ninteen,for the purpose of electing
crisis, his own lack of understanding of a viable way to
_ Archiwandrite Theofan Woli as bishey of Bosten and head of the Albanian
Orthodox Mission under the jurisdiction of the Russian Archbishop of
eliminate the debts led to further distress. Ambassador
Ser York » His Grace , the Most Reverend Archbishep Alexander ( Nemo= Bakhmetev observed that Archbishop Alexander, while
ovsky ),head of the Russian Orthodox Church of North America presi= being “a hierarch totally deprived of economic and adminis-
ne doa as chairman ox officio. trative ability,’ nevertheless “sincerely concerned himself
The Council was composcd of ofRutak Albanian clergymen,
with helping the Church.” The measures taken at the
d of official Albsnian Jayman delegates of various semmmitics pand

afficiel utzovaiech ‘{ Rounanians of Macedonia and Albaniar) Laywan

delegates , @ @ver one thousand Albanian laymen attended the Seunott Cleveland Sobor to alleviate the debt were all but dis-
en account of the fact that it was the expressed desire of His Grace regarded. Father Peter Popoff, treasurer and elected member
a ehance ta spesk out is mind
ok Archbishop to give to every Albanian
of the Financial Administration established at the Sobor,
on this important question.
The Albanian clergymen whe attended the Council were listed in his report for 1922 some of the sad realities of the
the followings day. According to the report, only four parishes paid their
The Vary Neveremd Archimandrite Theofan S.Noli,administrater of
5% assessment, while twenty-eight priests remitted their 2%
the Orthadex
to the Diocesan administration between September and
December of 1921. The total income during this same
period amounted to only $671 and the entire year 1922
Albanian Council of March 3/19, 1919 confirms election of
Archimandrite Theofan Noli as bishop of Boston and head of the yielded only $2,557. Clearly this negligible income could in
Albanian Orthodox Mission. no way meet the growing debt.
Archbishop Alexander again resorted to loans and further
mortgaging. This policy was unpopular among the laity and
To the pro tempore Administrator of the North many priests, and it naturally provoked sharp displeasure
American Diocese, the Most Reverend Alexander, and, in certain cases, open protest by the parishioners.
Bishop of Canada Court cases and lawsuits were opened, and the threat of
property passing into the hands of independent and dissi-
With the blessing of the Most High Patriarch, the dent priests grew, especially with the renewed activity of
Holy Synod adopted the decision to fill the vacancy Kedrovsky. Father John Kedrovsky apparently saw in this
in the post of the North American Archbishop, in complex situation another possibility of gaining power and
view of the telegram received concerning this from control of the North American Diocese. In order to combat
New York. Kedrovsky’s increasing efforts, Archbishop Alexander or-
It has been resolved that Your Eminence shall be ganized the “Highest Economic Council” on April 14, 1921.
appointed Archbishop of North America, which is to Under the presidency of Metropolitan Platon, who recently
be brought to your attention by this resolution. had returned to the United States, the Council was com-
August 27/7, 1920, No. 2475 posed of three clergymen and three laymen. On June 7,
*Metropolitan Sergius, 1921, statutes by which church property was to be listed
Member of Synod in the name of the parish were promulgated, with the reten-
P. Smerdynsky, Chief Clerk tion of the Archbishop as trustee. In this way, not only
Another resolution, that of Patriarch Tikhon issued on were many parishes saved, but they refused to recognize the
October 7, 1920, is of direct importance, for it directed power struggle initiated by Kedrovsky later on, after he had
each diocese unable to have regular communication with been appointed Bishop of America by the “Living Church”
the proper Church authority to conduct its own affairs in October of 1923. In addition, the parishes were protected
independently, until such time as it should be possible to from the internal disruptions caused by certain Protestants
resume regular relations with the Patriarchate of Moscow. who supported Kedrovsky, such as L. O. Hartman, editor
Thus, the North American Diocese, having regularized the of the Zion Herald of the Methodist Episcopal Church.
position of its primate, found itself officially, yet temporar- The real savior in the financial crisis was the organization
ily, independent of the Mother Church in Russia. of the “Society for the Help of the Russian Church,” com-

180
posed of various individuals with the common intention of His Eminence Alexander, Archbishop of the Aleu-
aiding Archbishop Alexander and saving Church property. tians and North America, in a letter of June 7, 1922,
This society was organized in 1920 by Ambassador Boris addressed to His Eminence Metropolitan Platon, repre-
Bakhmetev and was instrumental in saving St. Nicholas sentative of the Most Holy Patriarch in North Amer-
Cathedral in New York City before it was scheduled to be ica, requested that the Metropolitan accept direct
sold at public auction. Approximately $200,000 was con- administration of the Diocese with all rights as Ruling
tributed and raised by the Society in its endeavor to revive Hierarch, and he further declined for himself all rights
the financial state of the American Church. of primacy upon such acceptance by Metropolitan
The Departure of Archbishop Alexander Platon.
His Eminence Alexander is leaving for other areas
With his growing problems, Archbishop Alexander hum-
of Church work. In accepting the administration of
bly decided that perhaps it would be best to turn the ad-
the Diocese upon himself, with full rights as Ruling
ministration of the Diocese over to Metropolitan Platon,
Hierarch, Metropolitan Platon declared that from now
who had recently returned to the United States as a refugee
on, only papers and decisions may be effected with
from Russia. Archbishop Alexander requested Metropolitan
his own signature.
Platon to take over the Diocese ina letter of June 7, 1922.
Evidence exists, however, that Patriarch Tikhon himself had The story of Archbishop Alexander is one of tragedy,
earlier felt that Platon should replace Archbishop Alexander. both for himself and the Diocese which he administered.
In a letter dated June 3, 1922, the Patriarch writes that “‘it Clearly his objectives and motives were, in most instances,
would be useful for the calming of the unrest, that Metro- positive and in the interest of helping the American Diocese
politan Platon should take charge of the entire Mission, and through its darkest hour, but his means did not accomplish
that Archbishop Alexander should go to Canada...” On this end.
June 20, 1922, Archbishop Alexander left the United States
for Europe, where he continued as a bishop and met with Father John Matusiak and
certain successes. The following official statement appeared Father Leonid Kishkovsky
in the Russian-American Orthodox Messenger concerning,
Archbishop Alexander’s departure.
Pet rog racl
Patriarch Tikhon after his election, Moseew 1917-18.
(Photo courtesy of National Geographic Magazine)
a»

18]
 ‘vOBRbIE H CBBTCKIE PEBHATENN RPABOCNABIA Bb C, AMEPALS>
NEPEATO ANACKHHCKATO ENMCKORA — #HHOKERTIA
4
Auta: REMAMHHORA (18411, _ ROWAME RPEMA— 1937
‘KOMSUSILIA CEEPETAPA COWO3K RIXOBEACTBA,
IPT.TETRA KOLA.

Significant parishes, clergy and lay leaders of the North American Church. Prepared by Father Peter Kohanik, 1937
182
CHAPTER VI

Nationalism or Local Church?

1923-1930
Overwhelmed by the financial crisis, Archbishop Alexan-
der departed from the United States on June 20, 1922,
leaving Metropolitan Platon in charge of the North Ameri-
can Diocese. But the departure of Archbishop Alexander
could not of itself resolve the Church’s difficulties. In fact,
in One important respect, the situation was complicated by
the Archbishop’s departure. It was now necessary to estab-
lish Metropolitan Platon as the undisputed legal and canoni-
cal head of the Diocese. The Third All-American Council
was convened October 25-27/November 7-9, 1922, in Pitts-
burgh in order to ensure the proper transfer of authority to
Metropolitan Platon. The members of the Council trusted
him as a hierarch of great experience, able to guide the
Church firmly through the confusions of the time; and on
the basis of Patriarch Tikhon’s oral directive appointing the
Metropolitan to administer the American Diocese, the Coun-
cil solemnly elected him as the new head of the Diocese,
with the title of “Metropolitan of All America and Canada.”
Though accepted by the great majority of the American
faithful, Metropolitan Platon’s position did not go un-
challenged. Two groups, one headed by Bishop Stephen
(Dzubay) and later by Bishop Adam (Philipovsky), the other
by “Archbishop” John Kedrovsky of the Living Church,
claimed the leadership of the American Diocese and control
of its property.

Bishops Stephen (Dzubay) and Adam (Philipovsky)

Bishop Stephen (Dzubay), a former Uniate priest, had
been consecrated Bishop of Pittsburgh in 1917 by Arch-
bishop Evdokim, for the special purpose of persuading more
Uniate parishes to return to Orthodoxy. In this mission he
was largely unsuccessful. However, in 1922, he was instru-
mental in causing more trouble to the North American Dio-
cese by challenging Patriarch Tikhon’s oral appointment of
Metropolitan Platon as the successor of Archbishop Alexan-
der. On October 26, 1922, as self-proclaimed “‘acting head”
of the Diocese (he had been a senior auxiliary under Alexan-
der), he consecrated Adam (Philipovsky) as bishop of Can-
ada.
In November 25-27, 1922, however, the All-American
Sobor elected Metropolitan Platon as head of the diocese
and this election was eventually confirmed by Patriarch
Tikhon (see above). Bishop Stephen eventually rejoined the
diocese and participated in the Detroit Sobor (1924).
Almost immediately, however, he returned to the Unia and
died in 1933. Bishop Adam, however, became the leader of
an independent Carpatho-Russian group of parishes. In
1935, he rejoined the Diocese, then under the leadership of
Metropolitan Theophilus, successor of Metropolitan Platon.
In 1943, he submitted to Moscow’s Exarch, Benjamin.
Metropolitan Platon during his second term.
The “Renovated” or “Living’’ Church
In 1922, as Patriarch Tikhon was under arrest in Moscow,
a group of priests, with the active help of Soviet authorities,
illegally seized the administration of the patriarchate and
fully cooperated with the government in depriving the
Church of all its valuables, including consecrated objects
necessary for liturgical use, a step which Patriarch Tikhon
had been unwilling to allow. They also proceeded with the
adoption of drastic and quite uncanonical reforms, such as
the elevation of married men to the episcopate and the per-
mission of remarriage for priests. Upon his release from
prison, the patriarch severely condemned and anathematized
the usurpers. However, the government continued to give
them support and, although the vast majority of the laity
gathered around the patriarch, allowed the usurpers the use
of most churches. In 1923 a “‘Council” of the “Renovated
Church” deposed Patriarch Tikhon. The same “Council”

183

appointed a married priest, Father John Kedrovsky, who in
1918 had been suspended for his insubordination by Arch-
bishop Alexander, as “Archbishop of North America.” In
March of the following year Kedrovsky began a court action
to gain control of St. Nicholas Cathedral in New York City,
claiming that he was the lawful bishop of the diocese.
The Fourth All-American Council — March 1924
In the same month a decree bearing the signature of
Patriarch Tikhon appeared in the Russian press in America,
accusing Metropolitan Platon of engaging “‘in public acts of
counter-revolution directed against the Soviet State and
with disastrous consequences for the Orthodox Church”
and dismissing him from the government of the North
American Diocese (text of the complete decree in Archi-
mandrite Seraphim, The Quest for Orthodox Unity in Amer-
ica p. 125). The force of this announcement, no doubt
made under duress, is taken away by the next clause of the
same decree, which notes that the dismissal is to take effect
when the Hierarch appointed to succeed Metropolitan
Platon personally announces the decision to him, i.e. in the
unforeseeable future. Even so, it was clear that relations
with the Mother Church were growing more precarious. Not
only was the Russian Church unable to provide the funds so
desperately needed, but even canonical authority and reli-
able administrative guidance could not be conveyed from
Moscow to New York. To deal with the Kedrovsky claims
and relations with the Russian Church, the Fourth Council
was convened in Detroit, March 20-23/April 2-4, 1924.
Again the Church referred its problems and questions to its
conciliar conscience.
184
1Vth All American Church Sobor (Council): Declaration of temporary
The Council began without Metropolitan Platon. The
Metropolitan had decided to stay away in order to forestall
any accusations that the Council made its decisions under
the pressure of his authority. The three bishops present as
the Council got under way — Stephen, Theophilus and
Apollinarius — were asked by the Council to be honor-
ary chairmen until the arrival of the Metropolitan. Father
Leonid Turkevich reported to the Council on the develop-
ments that led to its convening. He reviewed the election of
Metropolitan Platon in 1922, his confirmation by Patriarch
Tikhon in 1923, and the ominous rumors that the Metro-
politan was about to be recalled by the Patriarch. Since the
rumors of the Metropolitan’s recall were based on state-
ments of Mr. Kedrovsky, their authoritativeness was in some
doubt. However, the danger posed by forthcoming court
cases was real. The Metropolitan, therefore, wanted to
know the mind of his diocese. What is the opinion of the
Council concerning the future of the Orthodox Church in
America?
The Council turned first to the problem of how best to
ensure the stability and continuity of archpastoral leader-
ship. Ina document signed by all participants of the Council,
Metropolitan Platon’s election in 1922 was re-confirmed.
The resolution stated that the Metropolitan’s continued
leadership was essential to the well-being of the diocese;
without him the diocese might well collapse. It was stressed
that the Council was supporting Metropolitan Platon even
if it were true that the Patriarch signed a document relieving
the Metropolitan of his North American diocese; the re-
moval of the Metropolitan could have legal force only if the
autonomy, Detroit, Michigan: March 20-23, April 2-4, 1924.
due process of canonical procedure were followed in this
removal. Finally, the Patriarch was asked to be mindful of
the love and respect which the entire diocese bore him.
Then the Council turned to the fundamental question of
the canonical and administrative relationship of the North
American diocese to the Russian Church. This document
was also signed by all the delegates. The Council resolved to
declare the Russian Orthodox diocese in America a “tem-
porarily self-governing Church, governed by its elected
Archbishop together with the Council of Bishops, a Council
composed of elected clergy and laity, and periodic Councils
of the entire American Church.” Further, Metropolitan
Platon was asked to take charge of the drafting of a perma-
nent statute for the American Church; the committee
the statute was charged to use the decisions of the Russian
Church Council of 1917-1918 as its guideline. It was stipu-
lated that spiritual contact and communion with the Rus-
sian Church were not to be broken, that prayers should be
offered for its well-being and all possible assistance should
be rendered to it, and the Patriarch should be commem-
orated as the head of the Church of Russia.
On the Council’s second day, April 3, Metropolitan|
Platon arrived and was officially informed of the decisions
that had been made. Under his chairmanship the Council
went on to approve a detailed statement regarding the
claims of John Kedrovsky and the Living Church. The
statement, once again signed by all Council delegates, ex-
posed the spuriousness of the Kedrovsky and Living Church
claims to authority and property in the Church; particular
attention was paid in this document to the property rights
of the Church as a whole and the parishes in particular to
provide a line of defence against Kedrovsky encroachments.
The Fourth All-American Council was a new departure
for the North American diocese. When Patriarch Tikhon, as
bishop of North America, had written about autonomy and
even autocephaly for the North American Church in 1905,
he certainly thought that self-government would be achieved
with the help and active co-operation of the Church of
Russia. In 1924 it was the very helplessness and inaccessi-
bility of the Russian Church which made it imperative for
the North American diocese to proclaim itself self-governing.
Anything short of self-government would expose the
Church in America to increasing administrative paralysis
on and spiritual impotence.
Further Russian Divisions
For another ten years, until his death in April 1934,
Metropolitan Platon presided over the autonomous diocese,
which continued to be plagued by splits and schisms among
Russians of various persuasions and tendencies. The threat
posed by the Living Church was a serious one. Though ul-
timately unsuccessful in his litigation for the control of
some 115 parishes, chiefly in Pennsylvania, and in a number
of other suits, Kedrovsky did gain the Metropolitan’s own
St. Nicholas Cathedral by a 1925 court decision, forcing
Metropolitan Platon to accept the kind offer of Trinity
Episcopal Church to hold services in its St. Augustine’s
Chapel on Houston Street. Separatist hierarchs like Stephen
and Adam came and went, sowing confusion. And in time,
185

A COUNTER-SOBOR
On December 5, 1922, Bishop Stephen convened a
“Diocesan Assembly” in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This
meeting was called by Bishop Stephen on the grounds that
he, and not Metropolitan Platon, was the head of the North
American diocese. Bishop Stephen challenged the genuine-
ness of the appointment of Metropolitan Platon by Patriarch
Tikhon and claimed that he, as the senior auxiliary bishop,
was by rights the interim head of the diocese. The same
parishes and clergy which received the summons to the
Council held in November 1922 in Pittsburgh were also in-
vited to the “pseudo Council” in Philadelphia. In fact,
Bishop Stephen published an appeal to all clergy and people
in the diocese exhorting them not to participate in the
Council in Pittsburgh. This challenge was decisively rebuffed
by Metropolitan Platon and the Diocesan Council. Legal
action was instituted by Bishop Stephen against Metropoli-
tan Platon; this action sought to prevent Metropolitan Platon
from exercising the duties of diocesan bishop. Early in 1923
Bishop Stephen admitted his error, withdrew his action
against Metropolitan Platon and was accepted once again as
the auxiliary bishop of the diocese. The clergy who had
sided with Bishop Stephen but had also seen the error of
their ways were reintegrated by Metropolitan Platon into
the life of the diocese. This is an interesting example of the
manner in which the unity of the diocese was threatened as
a result of the rupture of normal communications with
Patriarch Tikhon.
186
both the Russian Orthodox Church in Exile and the Patri-
archate of Moscow entered the American scene, each in its
own fashion standing for the faithfulness to the Russian
inheritance and stressing the Russian connections of Amer-
ican Orthodoxy.
The Karlovtsy ‘’Synod-in-Exile”’
Headed by the Metropolitan of Kiev, Anthony (Khrapo-
vitsky), the Karlovtsy Synod was organized by bishops who
had fled their Russian dioceses in the course of the civil war
and had found refuge first in Constantinople (where they
extended pastoral care to refugees with permission of the
Ecumenical Patriarch) and then in Karlovtsy, Yugoslavia, as
guests of the Serbian Patriarch. Metropolitan Platon him-
self, as Metropolitan of Kherson and Odessa, was part of the
group before his departure for America in 1921. The “Kar-
lovtsy” bishops proclaimed themselves to be the “Supreme
Ecclesiastical Administration Outside-of-Russia,” invoking a
decree of Patriarch Tikhon (November 20, 1920, No. 362),
allowing for dioceses separated from the patriarch by the
front lines to organize themselves on the basis of temporary
independence. The decree obviously did not apply to in-
dividual bishops who had abandoned their dioceses, and
could not be invoked to justify the existence of the Kar-
lovtsy “Administration.” Nevertheless, in 1921-1922, the
Administration organized a “Sobor” or Council which, on
behalf of the Church, made several right-wing political
statements, including a call for the restoration of the
Romanov dynasty in Russia.
Counter Sobor led by Bishops Stephen and Adam, 1922.
Pee ren Karlovtsy Synod meeting in Yugoslavia in 1935. Present are: (sitting left to right), Metropolitans Theophilus and Evtogy, Patriarch
Varnava, Metropolitans Antony and Anastasy; (standing), Archbishops Theophan and Germogen, Bishop Dimitri.
Evlogy
On May 5, 1922 (Decree No. 398), Patriarch Tikhon and
the Holy Synod of Moscow dissolved the Karlovtsy Admin-
istration and entrusted Metropolitan Eulogius, formerly of
Volhynia, with the administration of all the Russian parishes
in Europe. In a gesture which he later recognized as a great
mistake, Metropolitan Eulogius himself offered to share his
new canonical powers with the émigré bishops of Karlovtsy
and himself organized a “Synod of Bishops.” Metropolitan
Platon, while invested with unquestionable canonical rights
by the Patriarch, also considered it possible to cooperate
with the “Synod” of Karlovtsy for the sake of ecclesiastical
peace. However, the “Synod”’ pretended to exercise power
over both Metropolitans Eulogius and Platon, and they were
both forced to break relations with the emigré body in
1926. In return the Karlovtsy Synod ceased to recognize
him asruling bishop of the North American diocese. Bishop
Appollinary (Koshev) — formerly a vicar-bishop of Metro-
politan Platon in Russia — was appointed in his stead to be
followed in the next decade by Archbishop Tikhon
(Troitsky), Bishop Ioasaph (Skorodumov), Bishop Ieronim
(Chernov), and Bishop Vitally (Maximenko).
The Exarchate
More painful and canonically significant was the gradual
estrangement and eventual schism that separated the North
American Diocese from its Mother Church in Russia. The
S4H7/¢ ,My
1924 Detroit All-American Council had resolved “not to
break all the spiritual ties and communion with the Russian
Church, but always to pray for her good, give her every
cooperation and mention the Most Holy Patriarch as the
head of the Russian Mother Church to which the American
Church is obliged for her existence” (text in Archimandrite
Seraphim, The Quest for Orthodox Unity in America, p.
126). Yet the Council also had been compelled to proclaim
the Diocese “temporarily self-governing,” in accordance
with the letter and the spirit of Patriarch Tikhon’s decree of
1920, which allowed self-government to dioceses separated
from the patriarch by military or political barriers. Hence a
further resolution, “‘to leave the final regulation of ques-
tions arising from the relationship of the Russian and the
American Churches to a future Sobor of the Russian
Orthodox Church which will be legally convoked, legally
elected, will sit with representatives of the American Church
under conditions of political freedom, guaranteeing the
fullness and authority of its decisions.”
This de facto estrangement between Moscow and Amer-
ica lasted until 1933. Meanwhile, Patriarch Tikhon died
(+April 7, 1925); no new patriarchal elections could take
place; the patriarchal locum-tenens, Metropolitan Peter, was
in exile in Siberia; the patriarchal administration was in the
hands of an “acting locum-tenens,” Metropolitan Sergius
187
(Stragorodsky). Since 1927 the latter — clearly under Soviet
pressure — was requiring from all clergy a written promise
of “loyalty” to the Soviet government. In 1931, the re-
quirement caused Metropolitan Eulogius to accept tempor-
ary status as Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch. In 1933, a
“temporary Exarch” of Moscow, Archbishop Benjamin
(Fedchenko), came to America and required the “‘promise”’
from Metropolitan Platon (March 27, 1933, No. 319). Upon
the latter’s refusal, Exarch Benjamin established a separate
jurisdiction, the ““Exarchate,” which existed until the grant-
ing of autocephaly in 1970.
Despite the establishment of the various rival Russian
groups, well over 90% of the faithful and clergy remained
loyal to Metropolitan Platon. Yet the uncertainties of the
time — particularly the machinations of Kedrovsky and the
Living Church — left their mark on parish life. Ona parish
level the question became: “Who is our bishop?” “Did the
Patriarch send him and approve him?” The minutes of par-
ish council meetings from the early 1920’s begin to speak of
“episkopskaia smuta” (“episcopal trouble”). Given the
major role thatthe bishop had played in the life of the
young American Church, the question of who was the
bishop became absolutely crucial: he held title to properties,
he assigned and dismissed priests, he checked the parish’s
financial books and minutes of meetings, he approved or
refused to bless the election of individuals to parish offices,
he brought clergy from Russia, he paid salaries, he settled
disputes. Very few accepted John Kedrovsky as a real
bishop; parish records testify to his general repudiation.
Yet as the duly appointed representative of the only
“Church” officially recognized in Russia by the Soviet
government, he had a certain pseudo-legality on his side.
The result was a series of expensive law suits in parish after
parish. While St. Nicholas Cathedral in New York City was
lost to Kedrovsky, he fared less well elsewhere.
The pivotal case in the New England area was over the
control of Saints Peter and Paul Church in Meriden, Connec-
ticut, in which the court in 1928 ruled that the “Sobor”
appointing Kedrovsky was not a legal Sobor of the Russian
Church, and hence Kedrovsky’s claims were unjustified. On
the basis of this decision, and others often based on it,
church properties were saved from Kedrovsky’s encroach-
ments. But throughout the country further protective
actions were taken. Properties were sold back to the parish
for nominal fees by the bishops; deeds were returned; new
trusteeships or corporations were set up in the parishes;
holding power for properties was granted solely to trustees
elected from the parish, whose duty became to protect
parish property from Kedrovsky and others like him in the
future. But such protective actions, though necessary at the
time, could be directed not only against usurpers but against
any bishop whatsoever. Hence the rise of ‘‘independent”’
parishes and clauses limiting episcopal authority exclusively
to the “‘spiritual.” This distrust of any episcopal authority —
so alien to the spirit of the early days of the Church in
America — is one of the unhappy legacies of the chaos
following the Russian Revolution.
188
The Breakdown of Orthodox Unity in America
The unity of the Church in America was broken not only
by rival Russian groups. Throughout the 1920’s and 1930's,
the creation of various “jurisdictions” had proceeded with
seeming irrevocability, as the churches of Constantinople,
Antioch, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania and Albania assumed
supervision of the “nationals” in America. And in turn, the
North American Diocese looked increasingly inward, con-
centrating on its own problems and relating itself to the
Russian identity of the flock that was left to it. (In the
terminology of the period, the Church was often referred
to as the ‘“‘American Orthodox Rus’.
pe ded
At times, establishment of these new jurisdictions took
place for political and ‘‘phyletistic’ (or nationalistic)
reasons. At other times it took place (and on occasion with
the cooperation of the Russian hierarchy) because of the
precarious position of the North American Diocese or be-
cause the Diocese was no longer able to care adequately for
the spiritual needs of the group in question. But whatever
the reason, the earlier vision — and fact — ofa united pan-
ethnic Orthodox Church in America was shattered, and
canonical chaos swiftly ensued.
Establishment of the Greek Archdiocese
The decade prior to the outbreak of World War I and the
years which immediately preceded the end of the war were
key years for Greek immigration to the United States. The
number of immigrants from Greece in the period from
1903-1921 was to nearly match the number of immigrants
admitted from all other countries combined. The bulk of
these immigrants colonized east of the Mississippi and north
of the Ohio River in New England and New York. Chicago
appealed to many and was later to boast the third largest
Greek concentration in the world, surpassed only by Athens
and Salonika. The first churches were organized in New
York, Boston, Chicago and Lowell. By 1904 churches were
established in Philadelphia, Newark, Milwaukee, Birming-
ham and San Francisco. Between 1907 and 1909 churches
had formed in Galveston, Salt Lake City, St. Louis, Los
Angeles, Pueblo, Omaha, Kansas City and Minneapolis. In
all, by 1918, 130 churches were performing services for
Greek colonies throughout the country.
The first Orthodox ecclesiastical body to be organized in
America on a purely ethnic basis and independently from
the canonically established territorial North American Dio-
cese, was the Greek Archdiocese. The initiative was taken
unilaterally by one of the most exceptional and contro-
versial personalities of the Orthodox Church in the twenti-
eth century: Meletios Metaxakis. Elected Archbishop of
Athens in 1918, he was forced to leave Greece in 1920,
after the overthrow of his uncle, Prime Minister Eleftherios
Venizelos. He came to America, where Greek parishes had
no unified organization. As we have seen above, some ofthe
parishes to which Greeks belonged (in the West and South
particularly) were clearly in the jurisdiction of the North
American Diocese of the Russian Church, others were

Archbishop Meletios, Founder of the Greek Archdiocese.
without affiliation, although in principle, a ““Tomos” of
Ecumenical Patriarch Joachim III had specified that they
should obtain their priests from the Church of Greece. Ina
matter of months, Archbishop Meletios provided leadership
for those dispersed groups and incorporated a “Greek Arch-
diocese of America, North and South,” in the jurisdiction
of the Synod of Athens, of which he still considered him-
self the head.
By a surprising reversal of fate, on November 25, 1921,
Meletios was elected Ecumenical Patriarch of Constanti-
nople. At his enthronement address on January 24, 1922,
he spoke of his sojourn in America where he “‘understood
the measure in which the name of Orthodoxy would be
exalted... if the two million Orthodox Christians of Amer-
ica were organized into one united ecclesiastical organiza-
tion, as an American Orthodox Church” (text in B. Zoustis,
Hellenism in America, in Greek, New York, 1954, p. 147).
This clearly expressed vision of a canonically united
Church in America unfortunately was not followed up by
concrete actions. Of course, Meletios saw Orthodox unity
primarily under the Ecumenical Patriarchate of which he
was now the incumbent. He immediately transferred the
Greek Archdiocese of America, previously established by
him in the jurisdiction of Athens, to dependence on Con-
stantinople. However he made no practical move towards
unity of all the Orthodox in America, and his unilateral
establishment of a “Greek” archdiocese resulted in fact in
the continuation of division, not in the achievement
unity. It is noteworthy, however, that the original canonical
structure of the Greek Archdiocese included, under the
archbishop, three other dioceses. The bishops formed a
synod, enjoying the status of “autonomy.” Unfortunately
the archdiocese, headed by Archbishop Alexander, appoint-
ed by Meletios, soon faced a political division between
“Royalists” and “Venizelists.”” The “Royalists” proclaimed
a de facto autocephaly.
Both political divisions and autonomy were, however,
eliminated with the tenure of Archbishop Athenagoras
(1930-1949). Separate dioceses were suppressed and all
bishops became auxiliaries of the one ruling archbishop.
Membership in the archdiocese was formally reserved to
ethnic Greeks. However, the new archbishop was personally
open to the idea of cooperation with other Orthodox. He
opened a Theological Seminary in Pomfret, Connecticut,
(which was later transferred to Brookline, Massachusetts)
and greatly developed the life of the Greek Orthodox com-
munities in America. Athenagoras centralized the arch-
diocese, expanded the Clergy-Laity Congress in their work,
Archbishop Athenagoras
Archbishop Athenagoras of the Greek Archdiocese of
North and South America, later Patriarch of Constanti-
nople, was born as Aristokles Spirou in Vassilikon, Epirus,
Greece, on March 25, 1886. On graduation from the
Patriarchal Theological School at Halki in 1910, he was
ordained to the diaconate, taking the name Athenagoras.
After serving as Archdeacon of the Diocese of Pelagonia,
he became secretary to Archbishop Meletios (Metaxakis)
of Athens (1919), and in 1922 he was raised to the epis-
copate as metropolitan of Corcyra (Corfu). On August 30,
1930, he was appointed Archbishop of North and South
America by Patriarch Photios II of Constantinople, at the
suggestion of Metropolitan Damaskinos, who had been
sent to America on a “trouble-shooting” mission in 1930.
Assuming his new charge on February 24, 1931, Arch-
bishop Athenagoras faced the difficult task of bringing a
measure of unity and harmony to the diocese, which had
been racked by dissension between Royalists and Venizel-
ists for almost a decade. The ecclesiastical administration,
which before had divided the country into the practically
independent dioceses of New York, Boston, Chicago and
San Francisco, was centralized in the Archdiocese, with all
bishops hereafter being auxiliary bishops, appointed to
assist the archbishop in his duties but without dioceses
and administrative rights of their own. In addition, he ex-
panded the work of the clergy-laity congresses, founded
|many new communities, and established the Holy Cross
School of Theology. Despite much early opposition, he
soon gained the love and devotion of his flock.
Archbishop Athenagoras was elected Patriarch of Con-
stantinople on November 1, 1948, and was flown to Istan-
bul in President Truman’s personal plane. As Patriarch, he
led his see into active involvement with the World Council
of Churches and into closer relations with the Roman
Catholic Church, meeting on several occasions with Pope
Paul VI. His death in July 1972 was mourned by millions
of
of Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike.
189
and founded Holy Cross Theological School, among his the Greek Star, Thessaloniki (now Greek Press) of Chicago,
many actions. As Patriarch he appointed the Metropolitan and the Prometheis and California of San Francisco. These
of Corinth, Michael, as the new prelate to America in publications were often criticized for the dissention they
1950. Archbishop Michael continued the work of his pred- caused by their political stance (liberation vs. loyalism),
ecessor and was to firmly establish the Greek youth organi- particularly during World War I, and for their failure to ac-
zation (G.O.Y.A.), establish uniform parish by-laws, and quaint the immigrants with the English language and Ameri-
was the first Greek cleric to deliver an invocation at a can ways.
presidential inauguration in 1957. He was succeeded by
Archbishop Iakovos whose active leadership not only The insistence on the ethnic “Greek” character of the
strengthened the administration of the Archdiocese, but archdiocese itself did not prevent the Ecumenical Patriarch
also brought an awareness of the Orthodox’ Church into from invoking occasionally its interpretation of Canon 28
American life. With the arrival of new waves of immigrants, of the Council of Chalcedon (451): According to this canon,
the Greek Archdiocese became the largest Orthodox body the Patriarchate of Constantinople is given the responsibility
in America, while remaining in tight administrative depend- for bishops in “‘barbarian” lands; this stipulation was inter-
ence upon Istanbul and a strongly Greek character. preted to mean that Constantinople has jurisdiction over
The Greek language press bridged an important gap that all territories outside of the political boundaries of “Ortho-
existed because of the language barrier. Through this media dox” lands. America was thus identified as one of the
the Greek communities were kept informed of events in “barbarian,” i.e. non-Byzantine, territories. On the basis of
Greece and significant news of other Greek communities. this interpretation, in the late 1930’s, the patriarchate re-
Many such publications were to dissolve as quickly as they ceived in its jurisdiction a sizeable group of Carpatho-
appeared, but those worthy of mention were the Atlantis Russian parishes, returning from the Unia (headed by
(started in 1894 in New York City), which began as a tri- Metropolitan Orestes Chornock); a group of Ukrainian par-
weekly, later to become a daily; the National Herald (also ishes (headed first by Bishop Bohdan and later by Bishop
in New York City), and lesser known publications, such as Andrei Kushchak); and two Albanian parishes (headed by
Archbishop Iakovos of the Greek Orthodox Archdio-
cese of North and South America was born as Demetrios
Coucouzes on July 29, 1911, on the island of Imbros, Archbishop lakovos
Turkey. In 1934 he completed studies for the Master of
Orthodox Theology degree at the Ecumenical Patriar-
chate’s theological school at Halki and in the same year
was ordained to the diaconate, assuming the ecclesiastical
name of Iakovos (James). On coming to America, he
served on the faculty of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox
Theological School, then located in Pomfret, Connecticut,
and as Archdeacon of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese.
After ordination to the priesthood in 1940, he soon be-
came Dean of the Annunciation Cathedral in Boston,
Massachusetts (1942-1954). During this period he received
the Master of Sacred Theology degree from Harvard Uni-
versity (1946). He was elected Bishop of Melita on Decem-
ber 17, 1954, and consecrated on February 6 of the
following year. From 1955-1959 he served as the repre-
sentative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate to the World
Council of Churches, in Geneva, Switzerland. On February
14, 1959, he was elected Archbishop of North and South
America after the death of Archbishop Michael (July 14,
1958), and on April 1, 1959, he was enthroned.
With the aid of twelve auxiliary bishops, Archbishop
Iakovos carries on the difficult task of shepherding Amer-
ica’s nearly 2,000,000 Greek Orthodox. However, his
pastoral concern is not limited to his own archdiocese.
He served as a co-president of the World Council of
Churches from 1959-1968 and has been chairman of the
Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in
the Americas since its formation in 1960. In addition, his
presence and witness, be it at presidential inaugurations or
in freedom marches in Alabama, has made him a widely
recognized spokesman for Orthodoxy in America.

190
Bishop Mark Lipa). The bishops of these groups, while en-
joying large independence of action, have the canonical
status of auxiliary bishops of the Greek archbishop and are
given “titles” as bishops of ancient Greek cities (Agothoni-
keiz, Nyssa, Eukarpia, and Leuke).
The Carpatho-Russian Diocese
Another self-governing body appeared in the framework
of American Orthodoxy in the late 1930’s. A new wave of
Carpatho-Russian Uniates returned to Orthodoxy. The new
move was a reaction to the papal decree of 1929 which en-
forced celibacy among Uniates in America and severely
limited the freedom and independence of Greek-Catholics
in the New World to govern their life according to their
unique traditions and practices of the Eastern rite.
Rejecting obedience to the Vatican and desiring to foster
their own traditional way in America, the Carpatho-Russians
petitioned the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople
to recognize their parishes as a diocese and to consecrate
one of their leaders, Father Orestes Chornock of Bridgeport,
Connecticut, as bishop. The group was received by the
Ecumenical Patriarchate, and the diocese was founded as
Father Chornock was consecrated in Constantinople on
September 13, 1938, as Bishop of Agathonikeia. Technically
the new bishop became an auxiliary to the Greek Orthodox
Archbishop of America, but his diocese has had a de facto
independence in all internal affairs.
The fact that the new Carpatho-Russian diocese turned
directly to Constantinople, and not to one or another
American diocese, was determined by the desire of the
group’s leaders to have the highest ecclesiastical sanction of
the Orthodox Church as they understood it, and also to be
free to perpetuate and practice their uniquely Carpatho-
Russian customs and traditions as they had desired in their
break from Rome. They especially feared that their particu-
lar Carpatho-Russian ways would not be respected or per-
mitted should they seek unity with Orthodoxy through the Bishop Orestes Chornock
local Russian Orthodox Metropolia.
A number of parishes from the original group, however, Since 1966, Bishop Orestes, who was granted the title
led by Father Stephen Varzaly and Father Andrew Slepecky, Metropolitan, has been assisted by Bishop John Martin, a
broke from the diocese in the early 1950’s and formed a former Greek-Catholic priest who was consecrated as Bishop
special administration within the Russian Orthodox Metro- of Nyssa by hierarchs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in
polia, retaining their Carpatho-Russian practices. This new America.
“administration” of Carpatho-Russians within the Russian Further Ethnic Separatism
Metropolia caused deep hostilities between that group and
The unilateral establishment of an ethnic Greek Arch-
the original diocese which are only being overcome today.
._ diocese did not mean that the Russian leadership of the
The “‘administration” is now dissolved, with the majority
North American Church abandoned its mission, as it was
of its parishes returning to the original diocese, and the few defined under Patriarch Tikhon. Meeting on February 12,
remaining churches becoming parts of the local dioceses of
1919, in Cleveland, Ohio, the Second All-American Sobor
the Orthodox Church in America. is a good example of this. Using its diocesan right, as de-
The Carpatho-Russian diocese has made great progress fined by the Moscow Sobor (Council) of 1917-1918, to
since its inception in 1938. Led by the priests, Frs. Peter nominate its bishops, it elected the temporary administra-
Molchany and John Yurcisin, the diocese has its Cathedral tor, Archbishop Alexander, as ruling hierarch. The successor
in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, where its seminary of Christ of Bishop Raphael (+1915) as head of the Syrian mission,
the Savior is also located. The seminary has produced a Bishop Aftimios (Ofiesh) of Brooklyn, was a full member
number of dedicated priests who have served the diocese of the Sobor, which proceeded to elect two additional
well and have expanded its size to approximately 65 bishops: Archimandrite Mardary (Uskokovich) for the Ser-
parishes. (Continued Page 193)

19]
 The Serbian Diocese

Following the Russian Revolution, the situation of the

Serbian Orthodox parishes in the United States could often
be described as chaotic. Although they were supposedly
under the canonical authority of the Russian Archbishop of
North America, there was actually no central authority or
figure to give direction to the parishes. Attempts were made
to solve these problems, but nothing was carried out. At the
1919 Cleveland Sobor of the Russian Orthodox Church in
America, five Serbian priests were present, and Archiman-
drite Mardariye Uskokovich was recommended to the Ser-
bian Metropolitan of Belgrade to be advanced to the rank of
bishop and to organize a Serbian Orthodox Diocese in
America. At the time, the Russian Church in America was
unable to consecrate the future Bishop Mardariye without
an order from Patriarch Tikhon and written communica-
tions were totally impossible.
Later in 1919, Archimandrite Mardariye left for Belgrade
as the candidate for bishop of the Serbian Orthodox Dio-
cese in America, but instead he was assigned as head of the
Rakovitsa monastery and principal of its monastic school.
During his absence from the United States, the majority of
Serbs in America requested the newly-elected Patriarch
Dimitriye of Belgrade to send the already famous Bishop
Nicholai (Velimirovich) of Ohrid as the diocesan bishop.
Dimitriye sent Bishop Nicholai to administer the diocese in
his name and to investigate the situation. Nicholai adminis-
tered the diocese for two years with Mardariye as his
deputy. Archimandrite Mardariye continued to administer
the diocese after Bishop Nicholai’s departure and was finally
called to Belgrade to be consecrated as bishop for America
on April 26, 1926.
Bishop Nicholai Velimirovich

Convocation of Serbian Diocesan Clergy with Bishop Damaskin presiding, Chicago, 1938.

12
 BISHOP MARDARY
The future Bishop Mardariye, Ivan Uskokovich, was born
in Podgoritsa, Montenegro, in 1889. In 1907, he became a
monk at the Studenitsa monastery and went to Russia to
study at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. After
graduation, he was ordained in the Russian Church, asked
to be sent to Alaska for missionary work and later came to
the United States proper. While serving as deputy first to
Bishop Nicholai and then Patriarch Dimitriye, Father Mar-
dariye carried out most of the actual work of organizing the
diocese. He served as parish priest ih Chicago and at that
time purchased the land for St. Sava Monastery in Liberty-
ville, forty miles from Chicago, out of his own funds. After
his consecration, Bishop Mardariye arrived in the United
States on May 8, 1927.
From the moment of his return to America, Bishop
Mardariye sought to put the diocese in order and to estab-
lish a measure of unity. He called the First National Church
Assembly in Chicago for May 29-30, 1927. At the historic
Mayski Sobor, delegates assembled to begin the organization
of the diocese. However, problems continued despite the
efforts of Bishop Mardariye, who was gradually slowed
down by an advancing case of tuberculosis. At a 1931 clergy
| conference in Youngstown, Ohio, Mardariye called upon all
of those present to forgive each other and work for the
good of the diocese. Through his kindness, patience and
reluctance to use punitive measures, Bishop Mardariye
achieved a great measure of unity within the diocese by the ‘
time of his death on December 12, 1935, at the age of
Bishop Mardary (Uskokovich)
forty-six.

(Continued from Page 191)
bian parishes and Archimandrite Theophan (Noli) for the
Albanian parishes. Unfortunately, the bishops present in
Cleveland did not proceed with the consecrations because
they considered it canonically necessary to await for a_pa-
triarchal confirmation from Moscow. The latter was difficult
to obtain because Russia was in the midst of civil war.
Eventually, the Patriarch confirmed the election of Arch-
bishop Alexander (1920), but apparently no response came
for the other bishops-elect.
A significant step was also taken in Cleveland concerning
the Ukrainians of Canada. After much debate and after
positive information received from Metropolitan Platon, the
former head of the American diocese (1907-1914) and who
had become the head of the newly established “autono-
mous” Church of the Ukraine, it was decided to recognize
them as a separate ethnic group, with a status similar to that
of the Syrians, Serbs and Albanians.
It is clear, therefore, that the Council of Cleveland,
which also took measures to clarify the financial and ad-
ministrative structure of the Church, was fully committed
to the ideal of Orthodox unity with rights of self-
government recognized for ethnic groups. Unfortunately,
through either timidity or administrative incoherence, the
healthy decisions of the Council largely remained a dead
letter. Eventually, the bishop-elect Mardary was consecrated
in Belgrade by the Serbian Patriarch Dimitri (April 1926)
and became the head of a “Serbian Eastern Orthodox Dio-
cese of America and Canada.” The Albanian bishop-elect,
Theophan Noli, returned to Albania where he was made
Metropolitan of Durazzo (1923) and later he too returned
to America (1932) and also organized a separate diocese.
The’ Ukrainians of Canada, on the other hand, were con-
fronted with a formal disavowal of Archbishop Alexander:
contravening the Cleveland decision, he formally refused to
recognize them as a separate ethnic group (Pastoral Letter,
September 10/23, 1919: “The Ukrainians are not a separate
people, nor a nation, but only one of the Russian political
parties”). As a result, the Ukrainians began to look for an-
other canonical connection. First, they sought the leader-
ship of a Syrian metropolitan Germanos (who was on a
fund-raising tour in America) and later, in 1924, accepted
as their head the “archbishop” John Teodorovich, who had
been “consecrated” in Kiev by simple priests, i.e. without
apostolic succession. Thus, separatism led to real ecclesio-
logical heresy.
The various ethnic groups were not alone responsible for
the breakdown of canonical unity. It must be recognized
that Russian bishops, hard pressed as they were by the
events in Russia and their consequences in America, did not

193
always exercise the best of leadership. No wonder, there-
fore, that non-Russian groups formed their own ecclesiasti-
cal organization. Bulgarian parishes established a connection
with the Exarchate in Sofia in 1922, although a bishop was
appointed only in 1938. Romanians decided to affiliate
themselves with the Archbishop of Sibiu in Transylvania
(1923), and since that was a complicated and slow proce-
dure, they placed themselves temporarily under the pastoral
care of the Protestant Episcopal Church. This action is
rather hard to believe today. It is, nevertheless, attested by
a formal decision of the National Council of the Episcopal
Church (The Christian East, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1923, pp. 103-
104).
The Syrians and an Early Attempt
at American Autocephaly
Under Bishops Raphael (+1915) and Aftimios, conse-
crated by Archbishop Evdokim in 1917, the Syrian Ortho-
dox mission remained an integral part of the North
American Diocese. Its peace was troubled, however, by the
intrusion of a metropolitan Germanos Shehadi of Seleucia
and Baalbek. Disavowed by his patriarch, he nevertheless
incorporated a separate “‘mission” of his own (1918) which
eventually included the Ukrainians in Canada (see above).
Finally, on September 11, 1924, the Patriarchate of
Antioch, having decided to follow the example of other
churches which were, one after another, establishing sepa-
rate ethnic jurisdictions in America, consecrated Victor
Abu-Assaly as the head of the Syrian Church in America.
However a substantial number of Syrian parishes remained
faithful to Bishop Aftimios.
The latter became the center of an ill-fated attempt at
creating an autocephalous church in America, totally inde-
pendent of foreign intervention. It was sponsored by the
ruling primate of the North American Diocese, Metropolitan
Platon himself, and his bishops; and it undoubtedly re-
flected the aspirations for American autocephaly that were
spurred by Archbishop Tikhon as early as 1905. Unfortu-
nately, the procedures followed by the initiators of the
project and also their inconsistency in pursuing it led to
inevitable failure.
On February 2, 1927, a solemn act was signed by Metro-
politan Platon himself, as well as by Aftimios, Archbishop
of Brooklyn; Theophilus, Bishop of Chicago; Amphilochy,
Bishop of Alaska; Arseny, Bishop of Winnipeg; and Alexey.
Bishop of San Francisco. The act charged Archbishop
Aftimios “‘with the full responsibility and duty of caring
and providing for American Orthodoxy in the special 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 canonical Orthodox
Catholic care ..., or who may wish to attach themselves by
the properly and legally provided means to an autonomous,
independent, American Orthodox Catholic Church.”’ Obvi-
ously, the organizers thought of anew American, unrestric-
tive ethnic jurisdiction, and not a loose confederation of
194
the existing jurisdictions. The new church was to “‘preserve
at all times its brotherly and filial relationship to the Ortho-
dox Church of Russia, represented in Russia by the Patri-
archal Authority of Moscow and All Russia and in America
by His Eminence, Metropolitan Platon, and his canonically
established and recognized successors as Archbishop of the
American Jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Moscow and
All Russia” (cf. Archimandrite Serafim, The Quest for
Orthodox Unity in America, New York, 1975, pp. 34-36).
The same Act also proclaimed the election of Father
Leonid Turkevich (the future Metropolitan Leonty), who
had recently become a widower, as assistant bishop to Arch-
bishop Aftimios.
The relationship of Archbishop Aftimios to Metropolitan
Platon was not clear. On the one hand, the Act seemed to
maintain an authority of the latter over the former; but on
the other hand, Archbishop Aftimios was regarded as the
head of the local church. Father Turkevich’s episcopal con-
secration did not take place in the framework of the
‘American Church,” but two bishops of Syrian background
— Emmanuel Abo Hatab and Sophronius Bashira — were
successively consecrated to the Sees of Montreal (1927) and
Los Angeles (1928) by Archbishop Aftimios. An excellent
monthly, the Orthodox Catholic Review was published in
New York from January to August 1927 under the auspices
of Archbishop Aftimios. The initiative provoked violent
protests on the part of the Greeks. Also, Metropolitan
Platon himself seems to have acted rather inconsistently,
having soon lost confidence in the new “American Church.”
Eventually, real disaster came: Archbishop Aftimios aban-
doned his episcopal rank, having been married in a civil
ceremony in April 1933. Bishop Emmanuel died in May
1933, and was buried by Metropolitan Platon. Bishop
Sophronius, de facto independent, died in 1934.
These events lead the Syrian parishes to adopt a new
canonical status. Since 1924, Bishop Victor Abu-Assaly had
been trying (without much success) to rally parishes to the
jurisdiction of Antioch. He died on April 19, 1934. His
parishes were administered for several months by Archi-
mandrite Antony Bashir, one of the future leaders of Amer-
ican Orthodoxy.
Antony Bashir came to America in 1922 and assumed
the rather strange capacity of “a missionary to the un-
churched Syrians of America,” on the payroll of the Prot-
estant Episcopal Church. His activities in that capacity had
been denounced as subversive by the ruling head of the
Syrian mission, Archbishop Aftimios (The Orthodox Catho-
lic Review, 1927, No. 4-5, p. 151). After 1934, however,
Antony Bashir provided a needed leadership to the dis-
associated Syrian communities. On April 19, 1936, he was
consecrated archbishop in the jurisdiction of the Patriarch
of Antioch, at St. Nicholas Cathedral in Brooklyn, by the
Metropolitan of Tyre and Sidon, Theodosius, and the Rus-
sian Archbishop Vitaly of New Jersey. However, on the
same day, other Russian bishops (Leonty, Adam and
Arseny) were consecrating Samuel David as Syrian Arch-
bishop of Toledo. This was another example of contra-
 ARCHBISHOP AFTIMIOS (OFIESH) re) :
Archbishop Aftimios was born as Abdullah Ofiesh on
October 22, 1880, in Mohiedhthet, Lebanon. Educated at a
theological seminary in Beirut, he received the monastic
tonsure and was ordained to the diaconate in 1898. In
1902, he was ordained to the priesthood and later emigrated
to America. After serving in several parishes, including
Montreal, Canada, Aftimios was elevated to the rank of
archimandrite in 1915, following the death of Bishop
Raphael, head of the Syro-Arab Mission of the American
Diocese. On May 31, 1917, he was consecrated as Bishop of
Brooklyn and head of the Syro-Arab Mission. For his work,
Aftimios was elevated to Archbishop by Metropolitan
Platon in 1923. He was later given responsibilities for the
English-language mission, and on February 2, 1917, he be-
came head of an autocephalous American Orthodox Church
proclaimed by Metropolitan Platon. Archbishop Aftimios
worked closely with Fathers Boris Burden and Michael Gel-
singer in organizing the church and producing The Orthodox 2
Catholic Review. As his writings in the periodical indicate, 2*
2
he had a great vision of the need for a united Orthodox %
¥
Church in America and for its content and goals. However,
2
o
‘4
|
it soon became apparent that this first venture to create a »

local church was opposed by the various autocephalous

Orthodox churches and that it would receive little support
from Orthodox immigrant groups. Eventually, Metropolitan
Platon also withdrew his support, and Archbishop Aftimios
became increasingly more isolated from the mainstream of
Orthodoxy in America and the world. Aftimios married a
young Syrian girl on April 29, 1933, and was deposed by
his followers. After many years in virtual isolation, he died
in 1971.

dictory behavior by the Russian bishops, who were neither parishes, but still found time for writing, translating and
fully consistent with their “territorial” rights in America, other literary activities. His gift of leadership was recog-
nor with the de facto ethnic divisions. Eventually, Metro- nized in 1936, when the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate
politan Antony won the allegiance of the vast majority of of Antioch named him archbishop of the North American
Syrians, but the schism initiated in 1934 continued until Antiochian Church, to succeed Archbishop Victor Abu-
1975. Assaly. As archbishop, he moulded the archdiocese into
an efficient, tightly-knit and financially sound organism.
More importantly, he recognized the need for promoting
an American expression of Orthodoxy. He introduced the
Archbishop Antony Bashir extensive use of English in worship, encouraged church
and the Antiochian Archdiocese school education, accepted many converts into the Church
and ordained many to the priesthood, and translated into
Metropolitan Antony Bashir was born on March 15, English and published more than thirty books on the
1898, in Douma, Lebanon. He studied at the Balamand Orthodox faith. Recognizing the need for Orthodox co-
Theological School until his ordination to the diaconate operation and unity, he was instrumental in the formation
in 1916 and then extended his education at the Law on the Federation of the Primary Jurisdictions of the
School of Baabda, Lebanon, and at the American Univer- Orthodox Greek Catholic Churches in America in 1942
sity of Beirut, where he later taught Arabic literature. and in its reorganization in 1960 into the much more
After active work for the Church in Lebanon, he was sent effective Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox
in 1922 to America by the Patriarch of Antioch and the Bishopsin the Americas, which he served as Vice-Chairman.
to the rank of archimandrite.
following year was advanced He fell asleep in the Lord on February 15, 1966. His
He traveled throughout North America for the next 13 successor, Archbishop Philip (Saliba), has continued his
years, Organizing societies, building churches and serving tradition of energetic leadership.

195
 PRESENT AND FUTURE OF ORTHODOXY IN AMERICA
IN RELATION TO OTHER BODIES AND TO ORTHODOXY ABROAD
by HIS EMINENCE, AFTIMIOS, ARCHBISHOP OF BROOKLYN
(The Orthodox Catholic Review, Vol. I, No. 1V-V, April-May 1927, U.S.A.)
With a possible three million or even greater number of
Her communicants residing in North America, the Holy
Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church should be
one of the major religious bodies in America. That it is not
is due solely to the failure of its responsible leaders to come
together as one Orthodox Catholic body for the organiza-
tion of the Church in this country. Though the Orthodox
Church boasts a litany in Her daily Divine Service beseech-
ing God “for the peace of the churches and the union of
them all,” She is Herself in America the most outstanding
horrible example of the disastrous effects of disunion, dis-
order, secret strife, and open warfare that this country of
divided and warring sects can offer. It is true that She is at
one and at peace on questions of faith, teaching, and liturgi-
cal practice. One would suppose that, therefore, She should
find united ecclesiastical organization and administration
an easy adjustment. It would seem that, given unity and
uniformity of faith, teaching, rite, and practice, Orthodoxy
in America ought to present a most edifying example of
that Unity for which all Christian bodies are so loudly call-
ing and for which they are so blindly seeking. On the con-
trary, there is no central organization to which all the
Orthodox of all racial, national, or linguistic derivation in
America yield obedience. There are seven nationalities
represented in American Orthodoxy, and these are divided
into eighteen distinct groups of churches without any co-
ordinating organization, and almost without any pretense of
harmony or cooperation among them. It is time that Ortho-
doxy in America should take serious note of the causes and
effects of its divided condition, and consider the steps
necessary to bring about unity and progress for the future
of the Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic
Church and Faith in the New World.
The foundation and development of Orthodoxy in
America under the benevolent authority and guidance of
the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Moscow and All-
Russia was calculated to result in an autonomous province
or autocephalous and independent American church of the
Orthodox Catholic Communion. For a hundred years the
Russian leadership and control over Orthodoxy in America
was unquestioned, and tended steadily toward the unity and
ultimate autonomy or independence of the American
Province of Orthodoxy. During this time thousands of
Russians, following the first Orthodox settlers in the New
World, had made their homes in America; thousands of
Eskimos, Aleuts, Indians, and other American natives had
been converted by Russian Orthodox Catholic missionaries;
thousands of Greeks had come to America and established
communities with churches; Serbians and Syrians had done
likewise; in lesser numbers there were also Bulgarians,
Albanians, Romanians, and those various Balkan Slavic
196
people later to be more accurately known as Czechs, Slo-
vaks, Galicians, Croatians, Ugro-Russians, etc. Whatever their
language or national origin, all these people in America
looked to the Bishop or Archbishop of the existing Russian
Orthodox foundation and Diocese of North America for
their spiritual care and ecclesiastical administration. For
them all, the Russian Bishops and Holy Synod made pro-
vision as was required. In many places several different
nationalities and languages worshipped in a single congrega-
tion. When the majority of the congregation ceased to be of
one language, the Russian Bishop provided, on request, a
priest of the language preferred by the majority. Special
advisers and administrators were provided for various
national or linguistic groups. As these groups grew in impor-
tance and membership, provision was made for Bishops of
several languages or nationalities; and a plan was proposed
to the Holy Synod of Russia for the organization of the
American Province as an autonomous unit under a Synod
of its own, representing all the groups in America and
governing all Orthodoxy in this country. The late Patriarch
Tikhon when Archbishop of the North American Province
laid this plan before the Russian Holy Synod. Unfortunately
for the Church in America, there was a change in adminis-
tration, and in Russian Church affairs at home, before this
was put into effect. The transfer of Archbishop Tikhon
from America to Russia iri 1907, the World War, the Russian
Revolution and subsequent collapse, and the shortsighted
and misguided patriotism and ambitions of the various
groups and leaders in America, have destroyed the work
that had been done for a united and autonomous American
Orthodox Church.
The World War and the triumph of the slogan of Democ-
racy, “Self-determination,” fanned into destructive flame
that smoldering but ever superabundant nationalism in the
Eastern Orthodox people, which, with unconscious irony,
the Patriarchate of Constantinople has condemned as the
new heresy of phyetism — love of one’s race or nationality
above the love and obedience due to Holy Church and Her
interests and canons. Each little group or tribe now aspired
to become a distinct nation, and each nationalistic party
determined to have a separate and distinct national Ortho-
dox Church or, indeed, a Patriarchate. This brought con-
fusion and disorder enough in the Church in Europe where
new or revived states sprang into existence; but its reaction
on the Orthodox population of America where there was no.
corresponding political development to justify or excuse
new ecclesiastical organizations, was chaotic and disastrous.
Each little group of Orthodox people produced some new
party or leader who wished to set up in America a Church
based solely on the national or racial derivation of its ad-
herents. The inclusive unity and coordination of Orthodoxy
as such in America regardless of nationality or language was
forgotten in this sudden over-emphasis upon political or
tribal distinctions based upon the reorganization of the map
of Europe. The true ideal of one Orthodox Catholic Church
in America for the growing thousands of Americans born
and reared in Orthodoxy was lost in the over-zealous patri-
otic desire of the immigrant generation to parallel in Amer-
ica the national resurrections taking place in Europe. The
situation was most favorable for ambitious and self-seeking
ecclesiastical adventurers and politicians, and these appeared
in every group.
With a strong and well supported administration the
Russian Archdiocese might have maintained and developed
the united federation of American Orthodoxy planned and
begun under Archbishop Tikhon. Unfortunately, the
strength and support of the Russian Administration of
Orthodox America was suddenly and completely cut off by
the Russian Revolution and by the disruption of the Rus-
sian Church at home. Not organized to be self-sustaining,
the Church in America was unprepared for the collapse of
the prestige and financial support of the Russian Mother
Church. Discipline, order, and unity became most difficult
of preservation in the face of the nationalistic agitation and
factional strife in politically divided groups.
The internal difficulties tending to disrupt and divide
Orthodoxy in America have been powerfully aided and in-
creased by the relations with other religious bodies in this
country. Every separation of a national group from the rest
of Orthodoxy in America, every schism and division, every
uncanonical intrusion and disturbance that had broken
American Orthodoxy into discordant and warring factions
has been assisted and abetted directly or indirectly by the
unfortunate and misguided zeal of non-Orthodox, Protes-
tant bodies whose friendly but misdirected assistance has
invariably resulted in loss to Orthodoxy. Leaders of the
Orthodox Catholic Church have defied the Canons and set
at naught the Fathers and Councils of the Undivided Catho-
lic Church in order to fraternize illegally with Protestant
heresy and secure the help of Protestant bodies. The only
result has been the further distress and division of Ortho-
doxy. Obviously, it is time for intermeddling between Or-
thodoxy and Protestantism to cease, if Holy Church is not
to suffer still further . . . . (Editor’s note: Here Bishop Af-
timios cites severai examples of Church difficulties with
non-Orthodox groups.) These are only a few of the out-
standing instances of loss and disgraceful trouble to the
Church, and danger to the souls of the faithful of Ortho-
doxy, that occur constantly in consequence of Orthodox
Prelates and Clergy unlawfully permitting the alien hands
of Protestants to interfere in Orthodox Catholic affairs.
The letters and documents on these and other cases are full
of instructive warning of the increasing gravity of the dan-
ger to American Orthodoxy in such relations. Surely it is
not necessary that Orthodox groups in America should go
outside their own Catholic Faith and Church to seek help
from Protestant bodies and alliance with them. A united
American Orthodoxy would have sufficient numbers and
strength to care adequately for all the needs of every Ortho-
dox group in this country. Is it not the plain duty of our
people and Prelates to unite into one Orthodox Catholic
Church and Synod for all Orthodoxy in America? Most of
our people will agree that it is. It only remains for our
Prelates to act.
The consideration of a united Orthodox Catholic Church
in America under its own Synod representing and governing
all the Orthodox groups in this country at once raises the
question of what the relations of Orthodoxy in America
would then be to Orthodoxy abroad. The solution of this
problem must be such as to promote the general good of
Orthodoxy, especially in America. At the same time, it must
not be such as would directly contravene the Sacred Canons
and Traditional Practice of Holy Church in Her administra-
tion and discipline. Further, it must be practically workable
and applicable in the face of the present situation in Ortho-
doxy both in America and abroad. In order to elucidate
such a plan, we must consider Orthodox conditions abroad
in their relation to America, and the Practice and Canons of
the Church in the light of present necessities and circum-
stances. : :
Orthodoxy in America, unlike that in any previously
existing Orthodox Province, is made up of people of all
languages and from all political, racial, and ecclesiastical
allegiances within the Church. It is not a homogeneous body
of people of one language, race, or nation. Only two things
are common to all Orthodox in America — the fact of their
Grthodox Faith, and their residence in this country. In
other particulars their interests, thought, feelings and prej-
udices are diverse and, too often, mutually antagonistic. It
is not practical for all of them to be under the discipline
and authority of Bishops of any one foreign Orthodox
national Church. Aside from the difficulty of a multiplicity
of languages and dialects, the racial and national prejudices
and antagonisms are too strongly felt to make such an
existence harmonious. Furthermore, no foreign national
Church is in a position to undertake effective administration
of the Church in America. In every National Church abroad
Orthodoxy is either divided and crippled in its administra-
tion, or is just emerging from the pre-war conditions and
beginning to face new problems that will take all Her energy
and attention for years to come. Nor could the peculiar
situations incident to American conditions be dealt with
intelligently by absentee government. These facts seem to
preclude the possibility of American Orthodoxy coming
under any one foreign national jurisdiction. Yet the exist-
ence of numerous overlapping and interpenetrating juris-
dictions in the same territory is canonically impossible and
illegal.
What, then, is the canonically lawful and proper jurisdic-
tion of Orthodoxy in America? To this there are three dif-
ferent answers, each supported by a respectable weight of
Orthodox opinion and authority. It is quite unlikely that all
Orthodoxy in America or abroad will ever agree on any one
of them. They arise out of the fact that the history and
situation of America is without precedent, and had no
parallel in the period when the Apostolic and Conciliar
determinations for the guidance of the Church were devel-
oped. The first is that of the Russians, who claim exclusive
197
American jurisdiction by virtue of evangelization and hier-
archial establishment maintained in this territory for three
times the canonical thirty years without dispute or rival.
This, by the authority or application of the second canon
of the Second Ecumenical Council, and the seventeenth
canon of the Fourth, and the hundred twentieth canon of
Carthage, should give exclusive and permanent American
jurisdiction to Russia. To my own mind, it is the strongest
claim canonically and historically. The second claim to
canonical jurisdiction over America for all the Orthodox is
that of the Greeks of the Phanar, and of those who support
the claims of Constantinople. This asserts that America falls
within the diaspora — the scattered and barbarian territory
not assigned to any of the ecclesiastical divisions of. the
Empire of Conciliar days, but ascribed to the general care
and protection of Constantinople as Ecumenical Patriar-
chate. It would seem that the actual holding of American
jurisdiction by Russia in accordance with the canons cited
would dispose of this claim — that America thereby ceased
to be of the diaspora when for thirty years Constantinople
made no claim. Butit is not likely that many Greeks nor the
Phanar canonists will take this view. The matter remains
deadlocked between Russians and Greeks. The third view of
the question is designed to brush aside both the others in
favor of the theory that no precedent or Conciliar Prescrip-
tion applies to the facts of the American situation. America
was not then in the knowledge of the Church and Her
Councils. America is not diaspora in the sense of the Canons
and practice of the Church. America is not borderland terri-
tory between or on the edge of rival or adjacent jurisdic-
tions. America is not primarily or to any great extent a
territory evangelized or converted by Orthodoxy; it is
chiefly a land into which Orthodox groups from all the
existing Patriarchates and National Churches have moved
and where they have established communities in the midst
of an unchanged pagan or heretical environment. No such
land as this was thought of or provided for in the formula-
tion of the Canons and Practice of the Church. There is,
therefore, no basis on which any National Church can claim
exclusive jurisdiction and each Church is free to establish its
own American jurisdiction. This last seems to offer a solu-
tion, but the fact remains that overlapping or interpenetrat-
ing jurisdictions where two or more Bishops administer the
same territory are not permissible under the Canons.
Canonically, then, there is no answer to the problem at once
strictly correct and also practically applicable to the situa-
tion unless American Orthodoxy be independently organ-
ized and dispose Her own affairs by Her own Synod’s
application of Canonical practiceto each separate problem.
Would such an American Synod for all Orthodoxy in this
country meet the needs of future growth and development
of the Church in America and benefit Orthodoxy at large?
More than half the Orthodox in America today are the
American reared and educated children of the Orthodox
immigrants. These young people and their children are to be
the Orthodox of America tomorrow. They know little and
care less about the racial and national prejudices and juris-
dictional quarrels of Europe. Those things are very foreign
198
and strange to their American training and interests. A
Church that bases its claim to their membership and alle-
giance on the language, nationality, or racial prejudices of
their grandfathers will mean nothing to them. They rightly
demand a Church that is concerned primarily with their
own conditions and problems in America rather than with
the politics of the Balkans, Greece, Russia, or Syria. That an
American Church should include all those nationalities on
the common basis of their Orthodoxy and American resi-
dence is natural and fitting. That it should then look to
some foreign national church for the government and juris-
diction over them all as Americans is absurd, unnecessary,
and most embarrassingly inconvenient. The formation of an
American Synod of Orthodoxy would meet the natural and
proper expectation and demand of the American children
who are to be the Church of the future.
But an American Synod of United Orthodoxy in this
country would do much more than merely meet the nat-
urally expected course of development of the Church in
America. Given the support of any considerable portion of
the various groups, it would be able to maintain a position
of authority and dignity that would secure more adequate
discipline and order in American Orthodoxy. It would be
able to found and support Orthodox schools and theological
seminaries for the training of American Orthodox youth in
their own Faith and for the Priesthood of their own Church.
Such seminaries and schools could prepare clergy and
teachers to meet the American need for trained men in the
Church who can use any one of the several Orthodox litur-
gical languages as well as English. Ultimately the union and
development of American Orthodoxy would enable us to
send teachers and help back to the despoiled and impover-
ished homelands of the Church in Europe and the Near East.
The prime necessity for Orthodoxy in America and at
large today is to bury the causes of Her divisions and set
forth anew on a road of peaceful and united progress for the
good of Holy Church and the Kingdom of Christ. Orthodox
Catholic Bishops and leaders should come together in the
spirit of the love and the humility of their Master, and
sacrifice themselves and their personal or nationalistic am-
bitions to the cause of their Church and their God. No more
should they seek to secure the support of those outside the
One Fold of the Catholic Church and Faith, but, having full
confidence and faith in their own Church and Divine Call-
ing, they should join themselves together for the common
interests of Orthodoxy and do the work that has been com-
mitted to their trust in America and elsewhere. The very
survival and future existence of Orthodoxy depends on the
rapid and firm organization and development of the Ortho-
dox Catholic Church as one unified body in America. The
safety and salvation of thousands of the faithful committed
to our trust rests with our defense of the Church and Faith
in this country and abroad from the errors and disasters of
internal division and external interference and false alliance.
Let the Orthodox of America unite for their common Faith
and Church at all costs and begin to do the work that lies
before them in this land. In spite of all obstacles the Power
and Grace of God in our Holy Eastern Orthodox Catholic
and Apostolic Church can prevail.
The Fifth All-American Council — 1934
The minutes of the Fifth Council, held in Cleveland,
November 20-23, 1934, show the existence of a dichotomy
between organizational chaos and a certain internal stabili-
zation and growth of inner certainty. The main report on
the canonical situation of the Church, given by Father John
Chepeleff, does not hide the bad effects of ecclesiastical
anarchy. The report’s frame of reference, however, reveals
stability and clarity in its reference to the concept of the
local church. In his report, Father Chepeleff does not throw
doubt upon the “‘validity” of the Patriarchal Exarchate and
the Russian Church Abroad. Both are tecognized as authen-
tic Orthodox Churches. What is questioned is the relevance
of their concerns and canonical arguments to the Church in
America. The Council of 1934 thus re-affirmed the auton-
omy of the Church in America, declaring its unequivocal
support of the Church’s canonical stance in the previous
decade under the leadership of Metropolitan Platon.
An interesting glimpse of what might be called “‘institu-
tional development” is given by the Minutes of the Council
of 1934. In 1930 the Council of Bishops had declared the
Church in North America a metropolitan district. Since a
statute had not been worked out yet, there was no clarity
of terminology or organization. In some respects the Church
continued to function as one diocese; in other respects it
understood itself as a metropolitan district composed of
several dioceses. The minutes of the Council of 1934 record
some of the questioning and searching for adequate defini-
tions that marked the change from diocese to metropolitan
district.
The main purpose of the Council of 1934 was the elec-
tion of a new Metropolitan. Here too there was procedural
uncertainty. Is the metropolitan elected by the bishops (six
were present at the Council) or by the full Council? The
bishops did not feel they could elect without the Council;
the Council felt it could not elect without the bishops. In
the end, the bishops and the clergy and lay delegates con-
curred in the election of Archbishop Theophilus as metro-
politan. Canonical and ecclesiastical instinct compensated
for the absence of procedural definitions.
The Sixth All-American Council — 1937
In 1936 Patriarch Varnava of Serbia invited representa-
tives of Russian dioceses and exiles not administered by the
Patriarchate of Moscow to Serbia for a consultation. The
purpose of the meeting was to hammer out temporary
arrangements that would allow the ecclesiastical organisms
separated from the Church of Russia to co-exist and co-
operate. Due to the importance of the invitation extended
by the Patriarch of Serbia, its implications were discussed
at a joint meeting of the Council of Bishops and Diocesan
Council, convened in extraordinary session by Metropolitan
Theophilus. It was decided that Metropolitan Theophilus
should attend the consultation; the Metropolitan
authorized to enter into temporary agreements with the
other hierarchs invited, on condition that the self-
government of the Church in America would be fully pre-
served. Upon the return of Metropolitan Theophilus the
Council of Bishops (this time including the bishops of the
Church Abroad residing in North America) met in May
1936 and ratified the agreements made in Serbia, again
stressing that the autonomy of the Church in America re-
mained inviolate. The Sixth All-American Council, meeting
in New York, October 5-8, 1937, confirmed the agreements
entered into by Metropolitan Theophilus and stated yet
again that the autonomy of the Church in America was not
impaired in any way thereby. 105 voted for ratification; 9
voted against; 122 abstained. The large number of delegates
abstaining indicated that many had reservations about the
“union” with the Church Abroad but were willing to follow
the leadership of the Metropolitan.
The Sixth Council, in one of its actions, signaled that the
Church was recovering from its most difficult and arid
period. The establishment of two institutions of theological
and pastoral training was approved. One, St. Vladimir’s
Seminary, was based on the principle that Orthodox priests
need to have a liberal arts college education as the founda-
tion for their theological training. The other, attached to St.
Tikhon’s Monastery, was to provide pastoral training. Since
1923 there had been no theological school in North Amer-
ica. This inevitably threatened the Church with a shortage
of clergy and with the lowering of clergy standards and
education. The Council of 1937 marks the Church’s halting
emergency from an educational desert.
Another important achievement of the Sixth Council
was the definition, in the form of a statute or by-laws, of
the duties and rights of the metropolitan, the Council of
Bishops, the Diocesan Council, and the dioceses. The docu-
ment left undefined other dimensions of the Church’s life,
in particular the parish. It laid a foundation, however, for
the organizational and procedural development of the
Church.
The Seventh All-American Council — 1946
In the interval between the Council of 1937 and the
Council ,of 1946, the world erupted in the unprecedented
violence of World War I. For almost a decade it was not
possible to call a Council. Indeed, events had overtaken the
Orthodox Russian dioceses and hierarchs living in the Dias-
pora of the Balkans, the Far East and Western Europe. The
Far Eastern Metropolitan District, for the most part, fell
under the occupation of Soviet forces; its hierarchs and
clergy were largely absorbed in the Patriarchate of Moscow;
while some succeeded in emmigrating to the Western Hemi-
sphere and Australia. The Western European Metropolitan
District, presided over by Metropolitan Evlogy, which had
in any case passed under the jurisdiction of Constantinople
after the World War entered into an ambiguous relationship
with the Moscow Patriarchate, never officially obtaining a
release from the Patriarchate of Constantinople; Metropoli-
tan Evlogy was therefore in the anomalous situation of be-
was ing the Exarch of the Patriarchs of Constantinople and
Moscow simultaneously. The Russian hierarchy, clergy and
people in Serbia were engulfed by the events of World War II.
199
 METROPOLITAN THEOPHILUS

Theodore Nicholaevich Pashkovsky, the future Metro-

politan Theophilus, was born into a priestly family on
February 6, 1874, in the province of Kiev. He was known
as a hard working and disciplined student at the Kiev Theo-
logical Seminary Preparatory School. While still a student,
he developed a bone infection which doctors believed was
incurable; however, the already famous Father John of
Kronstadt prayed for him while visiting the school and
young Theodore suddenly was completely healed. In grati-
tude, he vowed to become a novice at the Kiev Lavra of the
Caves and fulfilled this in 1894. His life was changed when
Bishop Nicholas of North America visited the Lavra in
search of workers for the Mission. Theodore was invited to
America and upon arrival in San Francisco late in 1894, he
was assigned as secretary of the Mission Administration.
He married a girl from the city’s Serbian community and
was ordained to the priesthood on December 4, 1897. After
Following the death of Metropolitan Platon, Bishop
serving in San Francisco, Father Theodore returned to
Theophilus was unanimously elected Metropolitan of All
Russia with Archbishop Tikhon in 1906.
America and Canada by the Fifth All-American Sobor in
Initially, he assisted Archbishop Tikhon in the adminis- Cleveland in 1934. With the failure of the Tenafly Seminary,
tration of the Wagsaw-Vilna Diocese. With the outbreak of Metropolitan Theophilus saw the need for a theological
World War I, Father Theodore served as a chaplain and academy and helped to establish St. Vladimir’s Theological
later, along with Dr. Basil Bensin, in the Young Men’s Seminary. A pastoral school and an orphanage were opened
Christian Association Famine Relief Program on the Volga on the grounds of St. Tikhon’s Monastery in South Canaan,
River. After the Russian Revolution, Father Theodore was Pennsylvania. In 1943, the Church acquired Holy Virgin
given advice and instruction for the North American Dio- Protection Cathedral in New York City as its spiritual and
cese in secret meetings with Patriarch Tikhon, who also administrative center. Under Metropolitan Theophilus a net-
expressed the desire to have him become a bishop, since his work of Sunday Schools with a program of religious educa-
wife had died while he was in Russia. Returning to America tion was established in the parishes of the Metropolia.
in 1922, he was tonsured a monk and consecrated Bishop of Recognizing that death was near on June 27, 1950, he
Chicago by order of the Holy Synod on December 3, 1922. called Archbishop Leonty to his bedside in San Francisco
Bishop Theophilus remained in Chicago until he was trans- to give final instructions for the future of the Church in
ferred as Bishop of San Francisco in 1931. America.

200
 The “Synod-in-Exile” eventually transported itself to No agreement was reached. The conditions proposed by the
Munich and then to New York (1950), losing all contact Patriarchate were clearly politically and psychologically un-
with any canonical “territory.” In 1946, the Sobor of acceptable to the American Church. Another twenty years
Cleveland, Ohio, considered that the ‘‘temporary arrange- were to pass before new negotiations --started ona totally
ment” of 1935 was not in effect any more. By that time, new basis — led to American autocephaly, i.e., a spiritual
the ““Synod-in-Exile” was deprived of the patronage of the and sacramental unity with the Mother Church (which the
Serbian Church, which secured at least some connection American Metropolitanate always wanted to maintain) but
with canonical Orthodoxy, while the American Metropoli- also total administrative independence and freedom.
tanate reaffirmed its goal of becoming a local American The Council of 1946 was the last effort to define the
Church, in communion with all the other Orthodox existence of the Church in America in terms of an organic
Churches of the world. canonical connection with another Church body. Even so,
Originally supported by only a handful of faithful the definition of the autonomy insisted upon in 1946 was
around Bishop Apollinarius, the ‘‘Synod-in-Exile” gained in reality autocephaly by another name. This the Patriar-
strength after World War II with the immigration of dis- chate of Moscow was unable to accept. As a result, by the
placed persons into America. time Metropolitan Leonty succeeded Metropolitan Theophi-
lus in 1950, the Metropolia was permanently free of the
During the Second World War, patriarchal elections took impulse to seek its identity in agreements or arrangements
place in Russia, with Metropolitan Sergius (1943-1944) and with either the Patriarchate of Moscow or the Church
then Alexis (1945-1970) elected patriarchs. This news-was Abroad.
greeted with joy in America. The name of the patriarch was
re-established in liturgical commemorations. In 1945 a dele- Contributors: John Erickson
gation of the American Metropolitanate went to Moscow to Father John Meyendorff
participate in the Council, clearly interpreting it as a fulfill- Father Leonid Kishkovsky
ment of the hopes expressed in Detroit in 1924: it was Father Dimitry Grigorieff
thought that a conciliar solution of the relations between
Russia and America was forthcoming. However the Amer-
ican delegates were not admitted to concelebration. They
were handed a document signed by Patriarch Alexis which
demanded reunification with the Mother Church and re-
quired that the head of the American Church always be
confirmed by Moscow. It also required that the American
Sobor “in the name of the American Orthodox Church de-
clares its abstention from political activities against the
USSR and gives corresponding orders to all parishes” (text
in The Quest for Orthodox Unity in America, pp. 135-136).
The Seventh Council convened in Cleveland, Ohio,
November 26-29, 1946. Its debates and decisions were
colored by the emotions engendered in the American
people by World War II; Russia and its people were regarded
with great sympathy on account of the wartime suffering
that had been inflicted upon them by the German invasion.
The changes in the situations of the Orthodox Churches in
Europe and the Far East also had a decisive impact. The
Council’s consensus, expressed by a vote of 187 against 6,
was to petition the Patriarch of Moscow, Alexis, to accept
the North American Metropolitanate under his spiritual
leadership. The resolution specified that the “‘present auton-
omous status and the right to self-government” were to be
retained and that the All-American Councils were to con-
tinue to be the “Supreme Legislative and Administrative
body of our Church.” It was further specified that the
Church, through its Councils, “continues to elect its own
metropolitan and makes and adopts its own laws by which
the Church in North America, in all respects, (is) governed.”
As a result of this decision, a delegate of the Patriarch,
Metropolitan Gregory (Chukov) of Leningrad, came to
America to attempt an accommodation between the claims
of the patriarchate and the decision of the Cleveland Sobor.

201
 EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY 1923 — 1950
In 1923, with the closing of the North American Theo-
logical Seminary (located in Tenafly, New Jersey, from
1912-1922, and in New York in 1923), the graduates of the
Seminary organized the Alumni Association of the North
American Theological Seminary. Its aims were to promote The Orthodox Sunday School
the reopening of the Seminary, to hold annual reunions, to
publish a monthly bulletin — the Alma Mater, in which
With the Blessing of Revised iy
general problems of the Church in America were discussed, His Bminence Hie Grace
Theophilus, Leont
and to establish a special Educational Department devoted Metropolitan af
4
B
¥,
o
to the problems of religious education in the parishes. The North America a Bishop of Chicaga

Department (which was probably founded in the early

Intermediate Pre-Pentecustal
1930’s) was headed by Bishop Benjamin of Pittsburgh, who Clase Leswon Ke. 4
served as its chairman, and Basil Bensin, former Seminary rong hatte enrrinee

instructor, who served as the secretary. The Educational

Department published several leaflets in English and Rus- THE SUNDAY OF THE WOMAN OF SAMARIA
(Theme: GOING $0 CHURCH)
sian for Sunday Schools, and a book dedicated to the
The lesson begins by the recitation, in unison, of the Open-
American-born Russian Orthodox youth, the Divine Liturgy ing Pravers and Tropar, as given on the separate leaflet.
of St. John Chrysostom, which included a short catechism (lf ike Sunday School mecte wfter the celebration of the Bie
Liturgy, the teacher should ask the wepile te eammarize the sermon (hat
and daily prayers in Slavonic and English. Later, Bishop wa preackih at thal Servier. Ii, ov the other hand, the Sunday Schout
wects befare the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, then the pupils should
Theophilus published a ‘“‘Catechism of Orthodox Faith,” sommarize the serman preached on the Sunday previous.)
The teacher has the pupils recite, one by one—
and “Church History and Ritual” in English for young
people. THE GOLDEN TEXT:
“God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him
On August 15, 1935, Metropolitan Theophilus appointed must woresi Him in spirit and in truth.”
St, Jahe DY: 24.
a special Educational Council for the unification of parish The Golden Text should he learned by heart by each pupil before
religious education. Bishop Leonty of Chicago was appointed coming io the Sunday School}
‘The teacher then reade-—
as chairman with Father Michael Iljinsky (later Bishop
THE GUBPEL FOR THE DAY
Makary) the former Dean of the Seminary, as vice-chairman. The Gnapel aecording tw St. Tot, IVs 48, |
The Educational Council organized special district school Pye Then come ntls +
vt at Jac
is galled Sychar, near
ih.
conventions in New York, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Chicago, s well was the
i$ thus on the wo: and 4 w:
#, being wearied with
“eth hoy.
water: Jvevs saith
Cleveland, Bridgeport and Salem, Massachusetts, under the pineth &# Women of Maitaria
meto drink.
ta d
inciples were gone away unto the city to buy ment.)
supervision of the district deans. The aim of these school en saith the woman of Bararia unte him, Tow ia it that thou,

conventions was to adopt general school policies for the

maintenance of religious education programs in the par-
ishes. The Sunday School system as we know it today, was
not in existence at this time and there was some suspi-
cion of it in Orthodox circles. The conventions, however,
adopted a general plan for evening parochial schools and
Sunday Schools. They also studied the need for a proper
text book for the study of the Russian language. After the
conventions the Educational Council decided to publish a
Russian textbook with a parallel English vocabulary and to
inaugurate a series of instructional leaflets for the Sunday
School. The feast of Sts. Cyril and Methodius (May 11/24)
was proclaimed as School Day in all parishes. For the sup-
port of the Educational Council, each parish school was to
pay a monthly $1.00 fee during the school year. Dr. Basil
Bensin was appointed by Metropolitan Theophilus, upon
nomination by the Council, as Supervisor of parochial and
Sunday schools. In March 1936, the newly-consecrated
Bishop Makary (Michael Iljinsky) of Boston succeeded
Bishop Leonty as chairman of the Council.
In 1935, publication began on a number of English Sun-
day School leaflets entitled ‘““The Orthodox Sunday School,”
published by The Orthodox Publication Fellowship of
America, located at 1770 Church Street N.W. in Washington,
D.C. Each four-page leaflet contained a short Bible verse as
the key to the theme of the day, a Gospel lesson, ques-
English Sunday School Materials published in 1935.
tions for students and instructions to teachers. The lessons
generally followed the Sunday Gospel readings and included
a brief introduction to the life of a saint. An attempt was
made to integrate the liturgical, biblical and spiritual mate-
rial within a single theme. The lessons were edited and re-
vised by Bishop Leonty of Chicago.
With the establishment of the statutes of the All-
American Council in 1937, administrative and educational
guidelines were developed. In December of 1939, a direc-
tive was published that included the following procedures
for establishing educational programs in parishes. Under the
title of Religious Instruction and Charitable Institutions,
the
following rules were established:
54). Every parish must have a number of ecclesiastical
parochial schools answering to the requirements of the ele-
mentary education of children of school age, in the spirit
of Orthodoxy and the national spirit of the parish.
55). The care of establishing and giving material support
to parochial schools is the duty of the parish. In particular,
the parish must try to provide new schoolhouses or rooms

202
or to improve those which it already has, to supply to the
school fuel, lighting and servants, to insure the school
against fire, to provide school books and necessaries as well
as books for home reading, to secure pay and dwellings for
teachers, to establish night asylums and means of trans-
portations for children who live a great distance from the
school, to have a flower and vegetable garden, so that the
children are taught different branches of farming, manual
labor or such industries and needle work as are within a
child’s ability, ete.
56). The object of the ecclesiastical parochial school
being to educate the children of the parish in the spirit of
the Orthodox faith and church, the direction of the schools
and their religious instruction are the duty of the priest.
Other subjects shall be taught by male and female teachers,
appointed by Consistorial Authority on the recommenda-
tion of the Parochial Council, and who carry out the task of
educating and instructing under the responsible guidance
and supervision of the priest who has charge of the school.
57). Church parochial schools shall be maintained with
the funds raised by the Parish entirely, or with a subsidy
from the Diocesan authority. But the funds owned by the
Church also may be used for the same purpose whenever it
may be practical, provided the permission of the Diocesan
Authority be obtained therefore.
58). As need arises, the clergy of the parish shall estab-
lish and conduct courses of theological instruction and
catechisation of the adults of the parish.
59). Every parish Church should possess
Federated Russian Orthodox Clubs
A related form of educational activity began in 1927
with the establishment of the Federated Russian Orthodox
Clubs, which were organized by priests and laymen to help
the church unite its people and to propagate the Orthodox
faith. From a mere handful of members and a dozen chap-
ters, the organization grew to over 165 chapters by 1950
with a membership of 5,000 people. Junior Chapters were
organized for the youth in the parishes. The FROC was in-
strumental in providing funds to enable St. Vladimir’s and
St. Tikhon’s Seminaries to commence operation, as no funds
were available at the time of their inception from other
First FROC Convention, Pittsburgh, 1927
library. Besides books of Divine service, the library should
contain books which the minor clergy need for the purpose
of enlarging and expanding their theological knowledge,
and also the official publications of the church in general
and the local parish in particular.
60). The church library is established and completed
from the resources of the church and the offerings of
parishioners and is under the supervision of the parish priest.
61). The parishioners, if they wish to do so, and the
Authority of the Diocese considers it possible, may use the
parish money for the establishments of their separate
libraries and reading rooms, their own asylums for the aged
and nurseries for babies, which are supervised and managed
under the guidance of: the parish priest, by persons elected
by parochial meeting or the Parochial Council.
During this fifty year period, the United States Religious
Census Report published statistics concerning the number
of Church Schools in the Russian Orthodox Church in
America (Metropolia). Of the parishes reporting the exist-
ence of Church or Sunday schools, there was only one
(presumably Minneapolis) in 1906, 116 in 1916, 90 in
1926 and 101 in 1936. Not listed, but known to be apart of
most parishes educational programs, were the evening
schools and Russian classes. A survey taken by Rev. Nicholas
Kiryluk in the early 1950's gives the following totals of the
different types of programs operating at that time: 76 Sun-
day schools, 55 weekday religious schools and 59 Russian
classes (cf. 1954 Yearbook and Church Directory).
a church
church sources. A continuing scholarship fund has aided
many seminarians and college students to complete their
studies. In addition to its English language Russian Ortho-
dox Journal, one of the few English publications during
this period, the FROC published liturgical music in Eng-
lish and a few pamphlets. It was also instrumental in provid-
ing the momentum for English language Sunday schools in
the 1950’s and financing the publication of some of the
first English materials for class use. Other projects of the
FROC have been the support of St. Tikhon’s Orphanage,
the Pro-Cathedral in New York City and the War Memorial
Shrine in Washington, D.C., the assistance fund for mili-
tary chaplains and various missionary projects in Japan,
Alaska and Africa.
203
 FLER
Testimonial for Archbishop Benjamin, first American-born
ARCHBISHOP BENJAMIN
Basil Basalyga, the future Archbishop Benjamin, was
born in Olyphant, Pennsylvania, on January 11, 1887.
From his youth, his life was centered on the Church, and
when the Missionary School opened in 1897 in Minneapolis,
Basil became one of the first students. After graduation in
1902, the young Basil Basalyga was appointed as instructor
for the Missionary School’s preparatory class. Until 1905,
he served as choir director and parish teacher in Charleroi
and later Pittsburgh. Again he returned to Minneapolis in
1905 as a student at the newly-organized seminary. After
becoming seriously ill in 1910, he went to St. Tikhon’s
Monastery, where he was tonsured a monk in 1911. On
April 2, 1911, he was ordained deacon by Archbishop
Platon in Brooklyn and to the priesthood one week later at
St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
After ordination, Father Benjamin served briefly in many
parishes. Prior to 1919, he served in Akron, Ohio; Chicago,
Illinois; Hartshorne, Oklahoma; Pueblo, Colorado; Spring
Valley, New York; Bellaire, Ohio; and Philadelphia, Penn-
sylvania. Father Benjamin organized the parishes in Akron,
Spring Valley, and Bellaire. In 1919, he was called back to
New York, raised to the rank of igumen and appointed as
Dean of the Scranton, Pennsylvania, area. The next year,
Father Benjamin was elevated to archimandrite and sent to
Canada as administrator of parishes. In 1923, he became
personal secretary to Metropolitan Platon. He also served
204
bishop, on the 50th anniversary of his ordination, May 7, 1961
briefly in Alpha, New Jersey; New York City; Wilmington,
Delaware; Berlin, New Hampshire; and Montreal, Quebec,
Canada.
On September 9, 1933, Father Benjamin was elected to
the episcopate by the Holy Synod of Bishops and was con-
secrated on September 10 at Holy Virgin Protection Cathe-
dral in New York City. He was the first American-born
bishop in the history of the Orthodox Church. Bishop Ben-
jamin was then assigned as Bishop of Pittsburgh and West
Virginia. The same year he produced a parallel Slavonic-
English Divine Liturgy book, which was published by the
Alumni Foundation of the Minneapolis and Tenafly semi-
naries that-he organized. In 1938, Bishop Benjamin was a
delegate to the All-Russian Sobor in Sremski-Karlovtsy,
Yugoslavia, and toured parts of Europe. Following World
War II, he was raised to the dignity of archbishop and sent
to Japan as head of that Church. In Japan, he had to re-
organize a Church which had lost a great deal during the
war. After completing his work in Japan in 1953, Arch-
bishop Benjamin returned to the United States and resumed
his service in the Pittsburgh diocese. He was honored in
1961 by the diocese and the National Church on the fiftieth
anniversary of his ordination. During the Liturgy on that
day, he ordained the present Bishop Theodosius of Pitts-
burgh and West Virginia to the priesthood. Archbishop
Benjamin died on November 15, 1963, at the Eleventh All-
American Sobor in New York City and was later buried at
St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
 SEMINARIES
After the Russian Revolution, the seminary at Tenafly,
New Jersey, encountered severe financial difficulties due to
the discontinuation of funds from Russia and to the eco-
nomic recession in America. Despite valiant efforts to save
the seminary and a move to the Cathedral in New York
City, the school was forced to close in 1923.
Another theological venture of the same period met a
similar fate. In 1921 the Greek Orthodox in America, under
the leadership of Meletios Metaxakis, then Metropolitan of
Athens, and the local Greek Bishop, Alexander of Rodos-
tolon, established St. Athanasius’ Seminary, in Astoria,
Long Island, New York, with Archimandrite Philaretos
loannides (later Bishop of Chicago) as dean, and with twelve
students. Its purpose was to equip future priests with an
Orthodox theological background and to initiate a program
of Americanization among Greek Orthodox immigrants. As
with the Tenafly seminary, St. Athanasius’ Seminary was
forced to close in 1923, due to lack of support.
By the 1930’s, the need for an Orthodox seminary in
America had become apparent to the leaders of all juris-
dictions. Under the leadership of Archbishop Athenagoras
(later Ecumenical Patriarch) and with the concurrence of
os re
Group picture of faculty and students of the last class to attend St. Platon’s Seminary after it was moved
in 1922 where it existed for one year.
Metropolitan Platon, plans were begun for a united Ortho-
dox seminary that would serve Orthodox people of all back-
grounds, to be located on a large estate obtained by Arch-
bishop Athenagoras in Pomfret, Connecticut. However,
interest of the Russian Metropolia in the joint program
began to wane after the death of Metropolitan Platon (April
21, 1934) and the election of Metropolitan Theophilus
(November 21, 1934). When a seminary was finally estab-
lished on the estate in Pomfret in 1937, it was sponsored by
the Greek Archdiocese alone. It was first intended that
young men of the Greek Orthodox faith who wished to
study theology and become priests would undertake pre-
liminary studies at Pomfret, then go on to established
theological schools abroad to finish their studies
After ten years of growth Holy Cross was relocated in
Brookline, Massachusetts, and began a process of gradual
evolution into both undergraduate and graduate schools, In
1968 the undergraduate school was named Hellenic College
and was granted initial permission to grant a Bachelor of Arts
degree. Later, the women’s St. Basil’s Academy located in
Garrison, New York, was transferred to Brookline as part of
the Hellenic College program. Meanwhile a specialized grad-
to the St. Viadimir’s National Home
205
 Greek Orthodox Theological School, Pomfret, Conn. Chapel, Holy Cross Theological School, Hellenic College

uate school of theology emerged which attained full ac-
creditation in 1974, and was likewise granted official status
as a ““University-level School” by the Ecumenical Patriarch.
Though wary of a united seminary project, Metropolitan
Theophilus did recognize the need for a seminary. In 1937
he requested Dr. Basil M. Bensin, Supervisor of Parochial
and Sunday Schools and Secretary of the Education Coun-
cil, to prepare a special report for submission to the up-
coming All-American Sobor concerning the reopening of
the Seminary. In his report, Dr. Bensin outlined the need
for a seminary of college level, in accordance with the usual
standard of the other Christian denominations in America,
which are served by clergy with college degrees, and pro-
posed the reopening of the seminary in New York City, in
conjunction with Columbia University. His report was favor-
ably accepted by the Sobor, but with two amendments. One
was proposed by Archbishop Arseny (Chavtsov), who pro-
posed the establishment of a special school at St. Tikhon’s
Monastery, South Canaan, Pennsylvania, for training readers
and choir directors. Another proposal, made by Bishop
Leonty of Chicago, was to establish the seminary in con-
nection with the theological seminary of the University of
Chicago. Metropolitan Theophilus moved to appoint three
committees, one for each project, which would submit their
reports to him: (1) Bishop Makary (Ilinsky), Dr. Bensin,
and Dr. Peter P. Zouboff for the New York project; (2)
Bishop Leonty for the Chicago project; and (3) Archbishop
Arseny for the South Canaan project. Financial aspects of
tor), Archpriest Basil Demidoff, Basil Musin-Pushkin, and
choir director Dmitri Ressetar, began their work in the
summer home of the old orphanage on the Monastery
grounds. What the school lacked in material needs was more
than compensated for by the spirit of dedication and sacri-
fice of teachers and students alike.
The first graduating class, consisting of Peter Pripisnoff,
Michael Chanda and Vasile Kreshik, received diplomas on
May 30, 1941. All were later ordained to the priesthood:
since its inception, St. Tikhon’s has seen a very high per-
centage of its graduates ordained. A thorough study of the
results of the first three years of labor led to a favorable
report to the great sobor of bishops. In May of 1942, the
sobor approved the work of the Pastoral School, its plans
for improvements, and a program for expansion. This was
the turning point for St Tikhon’s, which now had heir-
archical approval as a permanent Seminary of the Church
in America. With this recognition, St. Tikhon’s initiated a
new program which called for improving the curriculum,
expanding the faculty, and establishing a permanent home
for the Seminary.
In 1947 Bishop Nikon became rector. Under his leader-
ship the Seminary further increased its faculty and again
expanded the curriculum. In 1948, the three-year course
was increased to a four-year course. The problem of facili-
ties for a larger faculty, more classes, and more students
was partially solved in 1951 when a new building for offices

Pa et A
and dormitories was added to the Seminary.
reopening the seminary were not considered by the Sobor.
After careful investigation, Bishop Leonty reported that the
Chicago project was not feasible. The reports of the other
two committees were more optimistic, and on the basis of
their findings, two schools were established: St. Vladimir’s
Seminary and St. Tikhon’s Pastoral School.
The members of the commission for the establishment
of a school at St. Tikhon’s Monastery were: Archbishop
Arseny, Archpriest Gregory Shutak, Dmitri Ressetar, Vladi-
mir Buketoff and Peter Ratica. Under the guidance of Arch-
bishop Arseny, the commission organized St. Tikhon’s
Pastoral School with a budget of less than $500.00. The
school was officially opened for studies by Metropolitan
Theophilus on October 24, 1938. Four students and the
teaching staff, which consisted of Archbishop Arseny (Rec- Ist seminary building, St. Tikhon’s, in the former orphanage

206
 The need for statutes to define the new structure of the secular courses at King’s College and use King’s College
Seminary was studied by a special commission. In 1956 the library facilities for study and research. As in the past,
great sobor of bishops approved the new statutes, which many graduates continue their studies in liberal arts at
defined the administrative structure of the Seminary and its various colleges and many are able to receive their Bachelor
goals and also clarified the relationship of faculty to student of Arts degree soon after graduation from St. Tikhon’s.
body and that of the Seminary to the Church. Other graduates have continued and entered graduate theo-
In 1958 the Seminary, again faced with a need for more logical schools in order to receive a graduate degree in
space, launched into a building fund. The Archpriest Basil theology.
Stroyen was the dean, under Metropolitan Leonty, rector. An important aspect of St. Tikhon’s Seminary life has
The first building of the new plan, providing space for class- been its symbiotic relationship from its first day with St.
rooms and a library, was dedicated in September of 1961. Tikhon’s Monastery. The spiritual and liturgical life of the
The ninth and present rector of St. Tikhon’s, Archbishop Seminary is closely interwoven with that of the Monastery.
Kiprian (Borisevich), entered his duties in the same year. The monastic life has gained from the Seminary; it finds
The building program was continued, and plans for a com- candidates for monastic life from among the students. In
plex of buildings gathering all the facilities under one roof turn, the spiritual life of St. Tikhon’s Seminary is deeply
were completed in 1968. The Seminary was chartered in influenced by the monastic community with which her life
1967 by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as ‘“‘an institu- has been so closely interrelated.
tion in the field of higher education to provide such training
as may be necessary to prepare candidates for the priest-
hood to carry on research in Orthodox theology, church
history, and related subjects, to promote by publication and
lectures the knowledge of Orthodoxy among persons of
other faiths; and other phases including home and foreign
missions, religious education, church music, religious secre-
tarial work, social service, and affiliated fields; and to grant
certification of diplomas to its graduates.”
To meet the continuing challenges of contemporary
secular as well as religious life, the curriculum was re-
organized, improved and increased. The course of studies
was expanded again, from four to five years. This new
program went into effect in 1968. The library was enlarged,
recatalogued, and moved to the new wing. The faculty was
enlarged and strengthened. A working agreement was nego-
tiated with King’s College in Wilkes Barre, according to
which students of the Seminary would take certain of their
St. Tikhon’s Seminary builds to accommodate more students.
 %
Group of seminarians of St. Tikhon’s Seminary in the late 1940’s with Metropolitan Theophilus.
deans in the Orthodox Church in America.
After a year of preparatory studies and planning, St.
Vladimir’s Seminary opened on October 3, 1938, with
services conducted by Metropolitan Theophilus at Holy
Trinity Church in Brooklyn. The first students were ac-
commodated in apartments at Union Theological Seminary.
In the mornings they attended classes at nearby Columbia
University, leading to the Bachelor of Arts degree, and in
the afternoons they attended lectures in theological sub-
jects in the parish hall of Christ the Saviour Church, given
by the first faculty: Bishop Makary, Dean; Dr. Basil M.
Bensin and Rev. Alexander Kukulevsky, both formerly in-
structors at the Minneapolis seminary; Dr. Eugene A.
Dobriansky, a graduate of the St. Petersburg Theological
Academy; Dr. Eugene A. Moskoff, graduate of the Kharkov
University School of Law and a PhD of Columbia Univer-
sity; and Simeon E. Andreeff, choir director of the cathe-
dral. The following year, a temporary home for the Semi-
nary was found on the campus of General Theological
Seminary.
The first years of the seminary (1938-1948) proved,
however, to be very difficult. Indeed, in 1942, admissions
had to be temporarily discontinued due to lack of funds.
While the Church gave her approval to the school, the
majority of her members were unable to realize immediately
their responsibility for its support. To many, the idea of a
college degree as a prerequisite for theological students then
seemed an unnecessary and expensive luxury. That the
seminary survived was due in large part to the encourage-
ment and financial support of a small circle of individuals
and organizations: the Federated Russian Orthodox Clubs
and, especially, their first representative on the Seminary’s
Sponsoring Committee, Mr. Paul M. Fekula; the Russian
208
Many of the above are now leading priests and
Orthodox Theological Fund; members of the academic
community, particularly of Columbia University and of
Union and General Theological Seminaries; representatives
of the Protestant Episcopal Church, including Dr. Paul B.
Anderson of the YMCA’s International Committee, one of
the founders of both St. Sergius’ in Paris and of St. Vladi-
mir’s; and 2 number of generous Orthodox clergy and lay-
men. But above all credit must go to the early faculty of
the school, who, with no permanent quarters and no funds,
struggled to keep the Seminary alive and true to its purpose.
“They were often faced,” wrote one of them twenty years
later, “with the temptation to lower the standards, to com-
promise with what seemed a difficult situation, yet of all
the lessons of the first years, the most inspiring is certainly
that of the faithfulness to the vision, to the idea of the
Seminary as defined at its beginning.”
World War II, while aggravating the Seminary’s financial
crisis, also brought unexpected possibilities for the Semi-
nary’s further growth and development, as scholars and
theologians arrived from war-torn Europe. A chief architect
of the Seminary’s reconstruction was Professor George P.
Fedotov, former professor at St. Petersburg and later at St.
Sergius in Paris, who escaped from Occupied France in
1944 and joined the faculty of St. Vladimir s in 1945. At
the request of Metropolitan Theophilus, he and Dr. Peter P.
Zouboff, another of the Seminary’s founding fathers, pre-
pared a memorandum on the reorganization of the Seminary
into a graduate school of theology. This proposal was pre-
sented to the Seventh All American Sobor in Cleveland,
November 1946, and approved by the Church. The school
moved to new quarters rented from Union Theological
Seminary. The first dean of the renewed institution was the
 BASIL M. BENSIN
Basil M. Bensin, a pioneer educator and historian of the
Orthodox Church in America, was born in Russia in 1881.
He was educated at the Tavrida Theological Seminary and
the Moscow Theological Academy, graduating in 1903.
While doing research in the archives of the Holy Synod in
St. Petersburg, he met Archbishop Tikhon of North Amer-
ica and was invited to serve the Church in America. Arriving
in 1905, Dr. Bensin taught at both the Minneapolis and
Tenafly seminaries. With the closing of the seminary, he
became an agricultural engineer specializing in ecology.-His
| work took him to Alaska, where he’ was able to study the
church life and history of the territory where Orthodoxy
first came to America. In 1937, when the question of re-
establishing theological education and seminaries in America
rose, Dr. Bensin took the lead in encouraging the establish-
ment of a theological academy. The following year St.
Vladimir’s Seminary was created as the fulfillment of his
call for an academy. Dr. Bensin remained on the faculty of
the seminary and helped in its administration until his re-
tirement in 1952. Even in retirement Dr. Bensin continued
his research and writing, principally in American Orthodox
church history. After a life of service to the Church, Dr.
Bensin passed away on February 8, 1973, at the age of 92.
Right Reverend John (Shahovskoy), an alumnus of St.
Sergius and a graduate of the University of Louvain, who
was assisted by Hegumen (later Bishop) Jonah (Stahlberg).
He was succeeded by Father George Florovsky (1949-1955),
former Professor of Patristics at St. Sergius, an active partic-
ipant in the ecumenical movement, and one of the foremost
Orthodox theologians of our time. His scholarly attainments
and prominence in the World Council of Churches, together
with the high scholarly record of other new members of St.
Vladimir’s faculty listed below, greatly raised the prestige
of the new institution of higher learning. Other new mem-
bers of the faculty were (alphabetically) the professors:
Nicholas Arseniev, formerly of the Orthodox Theological
Faculty at the University of Warsaw (and University of
Koenigsburg, then in Germany) joined St. Vladimir’s in
1946; Alexander A. Bogolepov, former professor at St.
Petersburg University (1948); Nicholas O. Lossky, former
professor at St. Petersburg University, dean of Russian phil-
osophers (1948); the late Eugene Spektorsky, former pro-
fessor at and president of the University of Kiev, noted
philosopher, sociologist and jurist (1947); the Rev. Alexan-
der Schmemann (1951) and Serge Verkhovsky (1952), both
graduates of St Sergius Academy in Paris who later were on
its faculty.
The development of the faculty made it possible to raise
the status of the school. In June 1948, the Synod of
Bishops decided to transform the Seminary into a Theologi-
cal Academy (the Russian equivalent of a Graduate School
of Theology). This transformation was officially sanctioned
by the Board of Regents of the University of the State of
New York by granting the Seminary, first a Provisional
Charter (June 18, 1948) and then an Absolute Charter
(April 24, 1953). At the formal opening of the Seminary,
in its new form, held on November 4, 1948, Father George
Florovsky delivered an address on “The Legacy and the
Task of Orthodox Theology” in which he defined the task
and the goals of the school and indicated its definite Pan-
Orthodox character: “The task of a contemporary Ortho-
dox theologian,” he said, “‘is intricate and enormous. . . He
has to realize that he has to speak to an ecumenical audi-
ence. He cannot retire into a narrow shell of some local
tradition, simply because Orthodoxy .. . is not a local
tradition, but basically an ecumenical one. .”
Not withstanding this development of faculty and pro-
grams of study, the task yet to be performed was heavy,
and long the road to the Seminary’s coming of age. The
1950’s were thus spent in efforts, painful at times, to in-
crease the support of the Seminary by the Church, to sta-
bilize its administrative structure, to build up its faculty,
library, and student body. In 1956 the acquisition of the
late Archimandrite Anthony Repella’s unique collection of
more than 10,000 books in the field of Russian theology,
marked the beginning of the Seminary s precious library,
which now has over 35,000 volumes. In addition, the St.
Viadimir’s Theological Quarterly was begun, as a journal
devoted to all doctrinal, spiritual or historical fields of
research related to the Orthodox Church.
In 1958, in compliance with the rules of the State Edu-
cation Department and the principles of the American
Association of Theological Schools, the graduate theological
curriculum was completely separated from the college work,
and a ‘‘Pre-theological’” Division was established for college
students preparing themselves for theological studies. Final-
ly, in 1961, a five-year search for a campus was crowned
with the acquisition by the Seminary ofa beautiful property
in Westchester County.
On October 6, 1962, Metropolitan Leonty dedicated the
new home of the Seminary. After a successful financial
drive, new buildings were erected — including the library,
educational facilities and dormitory. Housing for faculty
and staff was acquired. In June 1966, the Seminary was ac-
cepted to Associate Membership in the American Associa-
tion of Theological Schools and became fully accredited in
1973. On March 31, 1967, by granting to the Seminary the
Present Faculty of St. Viladimir’s Theological Seminary.
209
 Student body of St. Vladimir’s Seminary 1958 with the Prov ost, Professor Verhovskoy and_Dean,
power to award the Bachelor of Divinity Degree (now
Master of Divinity) and on January 21, 1970, the Degree of
Master of Theology, the Board of Regents of the University
of the State of New York gave a final recognition to the
Seminary’s maturity.
Since achievement of accreditation, attention has turned
also to other aspects of the Seminary’s mission of theologi-
cal education. In the fall of 1974, after many years of a suc-
cessful Teacher Training or Adult Education Institute, an
evening extension program was launched, with a variety of
courses in theological subjects, music and languages. In the
following year, the Undergraduate Division was expanded to
provide training not only for those preparing for the Theo-
logical Division but also for those seeking certification in
liturgical music or in religious education along with their
college degree. In addition, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press
has grown rapidly — over twenty-five new titles have been
added in the last three years — making it now the leading
publisher of books on Orthodoxy.
As students from virtually all Orthodox jurisdictions in
America and many Churches in the Old World gather on its
campus, the Seminary is becoming more and more a work-
shop of Orthodox unity, a center of Orthodox theological
reflection, and a focus of ecumenical dialogue in the com-
plex culture of the modern world. Rooted in the conviction
that Orthodoxy is the faith for all men, for the East as well
as for the West, the Seminary community faithfully com-
210
Reverend Alexander Schmemann.
Chaplain
mits itself to this eternal mission.
Following World War II, seminaries were established in
Jordanville, New York, by the Russian Synod in Exile, and
in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, by the American Carpatho-
Russian Greek Catholic Diocese. In addition, the Ukrainian
Orthodox Church of Canada has a seminary in Winnipeg,
Manitoba.
The latest addition to Orthodox higher education in
America is St. Herman’s Pastoral School, the first school in
Alaska to open its doors for the training of readers, choir
directors, church school teachers and clergy for the Ortho-
dox Church since the Russian school at Unalaska closed in
1917. Faced with a serious shortage of educated personnel,
the Alaskan Diocese of the Orthodox Church in America
came to recognize the establishment of a pastoral school as
the only real solution to its problems. The proposal to es-
tablish the school, presented by the Very Rev. Joseph P.
Kreta, then Administrator of the Diocese and the present
Dean of St. Herman’s, was approved by the diocesan coun-
cil in September 1972. The first semester of operation be-
gan on February 1, 1973 with fourteen students from all
over Alaska, in a leased government facility at Wildwood
Station, near Kenai, Alaska. The school now has its own
property in Kodiak. With several programs to produce
readers, choir directors, church school teachers and clergy,
the pastoral school has already had a beneficial effect on
the diocese.
 The Depression

A PRIEST REMEMBERS THE YEARS OF STRUGGLE

Recollections of Archpriest Constantine Vasilievich Popoff, of his service as the rector of St. Nicholas Parish, Joliet, [linois 1931-1945

In 1931, I served as rector of a parish in Hartshorne, Oklahoma, until the middle of July. I received a resolution from
Metropolitan Platon of my appointment as rector of St. Nicholas Parish in Joliet, Illinois
I knew nothing of this church and did not know how to travel to the city of Joliet. After inquiring, I found out that to
come to Joliet I would have to travel through St. Louis. At the station in St. Louis I was informed that Joliet is on the road
to Chicago and that the train stopped only when there were passengers alighting in Joliet. After boarding the train, the con-
ductor checking my ticket said that he would stop the train when the time came for me to get off. He would give me plenty
of notice.
I sat next to a window on the train and all the time I kept looking at the countryside. It was not familiar to me. And all
the time I waited and the train didn’t stop at Joliet.
Suddenly I saw that the train was traveling through some kind of a city I noticed that the name of the sign read “Joliet.”
The train continued to travel . . . it wasn’t stopping! I asked the conductor, “When is the train going to stop? I have a ticket
to Joliet!’ The conductor excused himself and said he forgot about me, that it was now too late to stop.
“T will take you to Chicago and then I will place you on the next train going to Joliet. | will give you a ticket and it will
not cost you a thing. You will arrive in Joliet one hour later.”
What else could I do!
Arriving in Joliet, | took a taxi from the depot and told the driver to go to the Russian church. The taxi driver said, “In
Joliet there are two Russian churches One is small and the other is large. To which one do you want to go?” I answered that
I didn’t know, that I was here for the first time. The driver then said he would drive past the small church soI could see it.
Later he would take me to the large one.
Soon we arrived at the small Russian church, stopped, and looked at the church. I saw on the steeple a three-barred cross,
but, to make certain, I went to the church and read the sign, which was in English. “The Russian Orthodox Church of St.
Nicholas.” Then there was no doubt. | dismissed the taxi and with my baggage went to the door of the parish house, which
was near the church. I rang the doorbell. There was no answer. | rapped at the other entrance and there was no answer. I went
around to the entrance at the rear, rang the bell and again there was no answer. I went back to the front door.
Across the street there was a house and on the porch was a gentleman who was sitting in a swing. He had noticed how I
had been trying to get into the house. I went to him and I asked where the elder of the church was (and I told him who I was).
I asked in English and he answered in Russian. He was Polish, but he spoke well in Russian. He informed me that the former

21}
pastor of the church had left this morning and that the keys to the house and church had probably been left with the elder.
In answer to my questions as to who was the elder, how far did he live from the church, and how could I get in touch with him
the Polish man answered that he happened to be a friend of the elder, that he knew where he lived and that he didn’ t live far
from the church, but that he did not have a telephone.
He suggested that he telephone the store near the elder’s home and ask that the people in the store inform the elder that
the new pastor had arrived. The Polish man had a telephone and he talked with the manager of the store and informed me
that the elder would soon arrive on the bus.
Within half an hour the elder arrived. It was about six or seven o’clock in the evening, on Tuesday, July 21. The elder took
me on to the house, showed me the parish house, and also called a local parishioner, Gabriel Grabavoy, who did not live far
from the church. Gabriel invited me for supper but said that, although his house was not far from the church, it would be dif-
ficult for me to find it alone. So Gabriel sent his brother-in-law to get me.
Gabriel and his wife Anna greeted me joyfully. We dined. They informed me about the church and about the beginning of
unemployment in the city. I knew the first priest of the parish, Father Potochny, from the time when I was in Minneapolis
and had come to Streator on church business. Another priest, Father Kolesnikoff, I also knew. He had studied with me at the
seminary from 1905 to 1906.
It was now 10:00 o’clock in the evening. It was time for me to leave. I asked for someone to accompany me back to the
church for I was afraid I would lose my way. (Elder Vasil Lucas had gone home whenI arrived at Grabavoy’s. Upon leaving,
he had promised he would send his wife Anna and two other Russian women to clean the parish home.)
The next morning at 7:00 o’clock, three women came to the parish house as the elder had promised and they began to
clean. They told me it would take them until 12 noon and suggested I might use that time to become acquainted with the
city. | asked which way I should go in order to see the center of the city and how to find the depot, post office, and the large
stores to buy produce. . . how to go to the city and how to return. I wrote down the address of the parish house and started
out to become acquainted with the city.
I walked in the city for several hours, visited the depot, post office the bank, and the large stores. I purchased what was
necessary. Part of my purchases | brought with me and what was heavier I asked to have sent to the parish house that same
day. Before noon I was back and the cleaning of the house was already finished.
The secretary of the church committee, John Baloy, came. He acquainted me with the financial position of the church.
The church didn’t have any large debts but there were several bills which had remained unpaid; for example, for candles, coal
and the plumbing bills. The gas, electric and the telephone bills were paid. The bill from the city for water had not yet arrived.
The secretary told me that unemployment had begun in the city last month. Two banks had stopped payment and closed
and many parishioners had lost their savings.

The next day, on Thursday, July 23, I went to Chicago to pay my respects to the local Bishop Theophilus and to visit my
relative, Archpriest Sergei Snegireff. I was there for several hours and Father Snegireff advised me to maintain a favorable
attitude toward the church committee and toward the parish and to open a church school soon, which was very necessary,
and that unemployment had a great influence on the material circumstances of the parish.
The following Sunday I served divine liturgy in the Joliet church. Those in attendance numbered about 30 or 40, not in-
cluding children. About a quarter of an hour before the services were to begin, Vasily Lucas came to me and said, ‘““What
should we do? We do not have any candles to sell to the parishioners.” My answer was thatI didn’t know where it was pos-
sible to get candles on such short notice.
The elder then said, “I’m acquainted with the elder of the Serbian church, which is not far from us (about 5 minutes away).
I will try to make a loan of a carton or two from him. We will return them later.” I agreed with this idea. Soon he had brought
one of two small boxes of candles before the service began.

I already knew that the parish did not have a reader or a choir director, but that there were several men who were able to
read and to sing in church and some were able to lead the choir. I did not, however, expect to hear such wonderful women’s
voices. They were pleasant and strong. It was apparent that someone had taught them.
At the end of the service I said that the Metropolitan Platon had appointed me rector of this parish, and I asked that the
parish accept me as such. After the service the parishioners gathered at the church hall.
I again repeated that which I had said in church, that I was the rector of the parish. Then they told me they were not able
to pay a priest $105 a month as they had the former priest and that they were able to give only $75. I accepted that. One of
the parishioners then asked me if there was going to be a parish school and, if so, when would it begin? I said I had already
suggested having school in the summertime from 9:00 in the morning to 12:00 noon and from 1:00 to 3:00 in the afternoon.
In the wintertime, it could be from 4:00 to 6:00 in the evening and on Saturday mornings from 9:00 until 12:00 noon.
 The next day twelve children came to school and their ages were from seven to 15 years. Before the Nativity of our Lord
Jesus Christ the number of pupils increased to 20. However, it was apparent that the parish children who lived in Rockdale
and Lockport were not able to come to Russian school because of the great distance and lack of means to travel on the street-
car. The result was that Russian school was conducted in Joliet four days a week, and on Thursday it was held in Lockport
and Fairmont from four until six and in Rockdale on Saturday mornings from ten until twelve. Classes were conducted in
Rockdale in the houses of Michael Kon and Walter Dulevich. In Lockport, the house of the Hudak family was used and later
the house of the Richak family. The number of pupils in these three schools was 35.

Gradually, there was only a small number of pupils who studied the Russian language (about 4 or 5 of them), so from
1940 on, the school was conducted in the English language. The children learned to sing in church at the liturgy and at vespers
and at matins. On Saturdays the liturgy was studied and the children read and sang the parts which the reader was supposed
to read. é

But now to return to my other duties at the church.

The elder at that time was Vasily Lucas, the treasurer, Max Kreche, the secretary, John Baloy. At the next committee
meeting I asked the members where they had formerly bought candles and informed them it would be necessary to buy some
now, at least 100 for $1.00. The committee agreed. And they suggested we send the order to Syracuse. I wrote to Syracuse
about the candles. They answered that they would send the candles as soon as we paid the past bill in the amount of $102.00.
The candles were sent C.O.D., and it soon became necessary to send a check for $102.00 and afterwards to pay every time we
received candles.

It was necessary to buy coal in the winter. This process repeated itself as with the candles. At the office where they sold
coal they said we must pay the past bill; they then would send the coal. The total sum of this was about $20.00. So, we paid
the bill and bought the church’s coal. It gave more ashes than heat and a lot more smoke and soot. It became necessary to
clean the pipes often.
The first winter the pipes burst in the front room We had to appeal to a plumber by phone. He answered that he would
repair them but not right away. Yet it was necessary to have it done quickly. | personally went to the plumbing office. There
the people were very kind and promised to make the repairs, but they said we would have to be patient because they had
other repairs also to make. When the manager went into the other room the secretary told me that the church hadn’t paid the
former bill of $70.00. “If this bill is paid,” she said, “then the workmen will come and do what is necessary.” We paid this
bill and the next day the repairs were made.
In general, all of the unpaid bills came to about $200 and there was such an amount in the church treasury. Indeed, if it
hadn’t been for this present unemployment, the material position of the church could have been considered very favorable.
But the unemployment changed the material circumstances of the parish. The church income was much less but the disburse-
ments remained more or less the same. It was necessary to pay the heat, electricity, gas, phone, necessary remodeling and
‘repairs, repair of the roof, painting of the church and parish house.

The parish numbered about 40 families. including bachelors, and only two had businesses. Many were without work and,
if they did work, it was for only about one or two days a week. It became necessary for the priest to visit the parishioners to
collect the monthly dues, but very few paid their dues. There were about 15 or 20 who paid their dues every month, which
was $1.00.
When the European War began, then the material circumstances of the parish changed greatly. I remember when the church
income in 1932 was about $800, and in 1944 it became $1,600. The priest’s salary in 1931 was $75.00 a month. In January
of 1932, it was decreased to $60.00, and in January 1933 it was decreased to $40.00. In October 1937 it was increased to
$50.00, and in 1939 it was increased to $60.00. In 1942 it was increased to $75.00.
When Metropolitan Platon appointed me to Joliet, he wrote that the appointment was temporary. In October 1932, Metro-
politan Platon transferred me to the parish in Albion, Michigan, but the parishioners in Joliet wished me to remain. The
Metropolitan wished to appoint Father Nikanor Sokolov to Joliet. I agreed, but the parishioners of Joliet did not want to
accept him, nor would they release me.
There was a parish meeting and a telegram of 180 words was sent to the Metropolitan requesting that I be allowed to re-
main in Joliet. In October 1933, I was appointed by the Metropolitan to Berild, Illinois, but this appointment also was
changed upon the request of the parish. In 1937, the Bishop of Chicago appointed me to Sioux City, lowa, but the parish of
Joliet still did not want to release me. In 1940 and again in 1942, I was offered positions in other parishes, but I refused.

In the beginning of 1945, when I knew that it was necessary to have a young American priest in the Joliet parish, I re-
quested that Metropolitan Theophilus appoint me to a parish in Bryte, California.
 PARISH DEVELOPMENT

World War I and the Russian Revolution sent forth a The membership of the newly-founded Russian Orthodox
second great wave of Orthodox immigrants to America. The parishes in California and elsewhere, as well as of the
first, which arrived in America prior to World War I, was earlier established parishes in large cities throughout the
constituted chiefly of Carpatho-Russians, Galicians and United States, increased significantly. A smaller number of
Little Russians, who came in peacetime from the Austro- Russian refugees came to America from the European
Hungarian Empire seeking a better material life. The second emigre centers. These settled along the East Coast, becom-
immigration, which was the first post-war immigration of ing communicants in the already established parishes there.
Orthodox Christians to America, was constituted mostly of
Following World War II and the withdrawal of German
Great Russians, who from 1918 through 1922 were forced
occupation in Europe, yet another wave of immigration
to leave their native land, their homes and all their posses-
came to America, from 1945-1955. It was constituted of
sions as they fled the Bolshevik terror. They took refuge in
Great Russians, White Russians and Ukrainians from the
all the countries of the world, living “in the diaspora.”
Balkan States and from displaced persons camps in Western
Those who fled to the Far East before the rapidly westward-
Europe. These refugees were of varying types and ages —
bound Bolshevik Revolution settled and established huge
professional people, blue-collar workers, students, educated
Russian refugee centers in Shanghai and Harbin. Even to-
and uneducated. In addition to the organization of new
day, standing in the center of these oriental cities, one can
parishes, the Church in America gained from this immigra-
see in all directions the domes of great Russian Orthodox
tion a significant number of highly-educated clergy and
cathedrals, some of which date back to pre-revolutionary
church leaders.
times. The refugees who fled to Europe via the Near East
settled in the great European metropolitan centers of Bel- Although the Metropolia gained in membership and in
grade, Paris and Prague. There they found remnants of pre- parishes because of the post-World War II immigrations,
revolutionary imperial consulate and embassadorial colonies these gains do not indicate the actual number of Orthodox
and Orthodox churches which were built by the Imperial Christians of Russian background who came to America
Government and through the donations of wealthy bene- during those years. The Russian Orthodox parishes in the
factors. The Undaunted Exiles, by Brumgardener, vividly Far East and in the displaced persons camps in Europe were
describes life in a colony of these refugees in Constanti- under the jurisdiction of the Synod of the Russian Ortho-
dox Church in Exile. Upon arrival in America these refugees
nople: “The greater part of these Russians are of good edu-
remained with the Church in Exile as an exclusively Rus-
cation. Professors, doctors, engineers, lawyers, students,
sian Orthodox Church, and did not enter the jurisdiction of
musicians, painters, former navy and army Officers, etc., are
the existing North American Metropolia, which had already
among their number.”
been established long before the Russian Revolution.
Since the vast majority of the Russian émigrés had no
knowledge of the English language and were not used to The West Coast
hard physical labor, they found themselves in extremely
difficult situations when they arrived in America as well as Los Angeles, California
in other countries. The tragic turns of fate which they had
experienced, and also the life-saving miracles in the most The Los Angeles parish is the first of a whole series of
dangerous circumstances which had resulted from those parishes that were organized in California as a result of the
turns of fate, instilled a fervant religious consciousness immigrations. By 1920 the Great Russian refugees from
even in those among them to whom such feelings had been
foreign. In these moments of danger, a prayerful impulse
arose within them as though of its own accord, pulling them
toward God. A great many Russians, by their experiences of
these monstrous tragedies, returned to the life of the Ortho-
dox Church. They responded to this divine call by building
new churches in the places where they were settling.
On the American scene, the Great Russian refugees in
this post-war immigration came at first principally from the
Far East, not from Europe. They settled chiefly on the West
Coast, often at first in San Francisco, where Holy Trinity
Cathedral became the focal point for emigre life and activi-
ties, but soon they formed communities and built churches
throughout the region. From 1938 through 1945, the immi-
gration to America from the Far East increased as a result
of the westward movement of Bolshevism into Siberia and
China and the Soviet occupation of Harbin and Shanghai. Russian refugees in Harbin, China.

214
 Holy Virgin Protection Church,
Los Angeles, California.
China began arriving on the West Coast. Apart from San
Francisco, they found only an insignificant number of other
Russians living there, and no Orthodox Churches apart from
Holy Trinity Cathedral in San Francisco, the non-operating
St. Helen Chapel at Fort Ross, St. Nicholas Church in
Portland; Oregon, and St. Spiridon Church in Seattle. By
1922 the Los Angeles Russian community had grown to
considerable size, and the organization of a local parish was
begun. Significantly, the people chose an icon of the
Theotokos, ““The Rescuer of the Perishing,” as their protec-
tress and the namesake of their church. In 1928 the con-
struction of the present church building was completed, and
it was consecrated by Metropolitan Platon and Bishop
Alexis of San Francisco. In recent years the parish has sup-
ported a wide program of missions and education through-
out the Los Angeles area.
Portland, Oregon
In May 1924 one of the older parishes of the American
Church, founded in 1889 by the Alaskan of mixed native-
Russian birth, Lavrenty Stevens (Chernov),
was revived
the arrival of the Russian refugees. This was St. Nicholas
Church in Portland, Oregon. The newly-arrived refugees
were very interested in reviving the parish but many of the
old original pre-war immigrants, who had fled Russia to
escape Czarist oppression, wanted a Russian National Club
instead of a church. A few of the older families, however,
were interested in renewing the parish and they joined in
restoring the chapel. On Pascha in 1924 the anti-church
group attempted to disrupt the Divine Liturgy, but Mrs.
Paul Sprawkin, one of the “old-timers” of the parish, drove
them out with her umbrella.
The parish purchased a two-story frame house for a
church in 1925. Additional problems plus harrassment arose
when the parish’s pastor, Father Oleinikov, gave his alle-
giance to the “Living Church.” After he was asked by the
parishioners to leave, the parish was served for the next ten
years by several priests travelling from Seattle and Califor-
nia The present St. Nicholas Church building was conse-
crated in June 1928 by Archbishop Alexis of San Francisco.
Berkeley, California
In the immigration from the Far East were many stu-
dents who wished to complete their education, interrupted
by the war, in American colleges and universities. There
were many professional people and also persons educated
in the arts, humanities and sciences who sought livelihoods
in and near places of higher education. St. John the Baptist
Church of Berkeley, California, was organized by just such
Russians as these. From 1920 until 1938, when the found-
ing core of twenty persons obtained a private building for
worship and were incorporated with the blessing of Metro-
politan Theophilus as a parish, services were conducted in
the homes of the local Russians by Priests Vladimir Sako-
vich and Paul Bulgakov of the San Francisco Cathedral. The
parishioners made a mobile iconostas that could easily be
by assembled and disassembled for transporting all around
town. Priest Sergius Leporsky, also from the cathedral,
served the parish as its pastor from 1930 to 1939 for a
salary of ten dollars a month.
San Diego, California
The last parish of the Metropolia to be organized on the
West Coast in this period was St. Nicholas of San Diego. On
his trips to Los Angeles, Metropolitan Theophilus often
stopped for visits in San Diego. During one such visit in
1940, he was approached by a group of Russians who asked
his permission to organize a parish there. He directed Arch-
priest Gregory Prozoroff of the Los Angeles church to in-
vestigate the possibility, and upon receipt of a positive
response he instructed Priest Makary Baranoff of St. Paul
Island, Alaska, to move to San Diego to organize a new
2¥5
parish. In addition to the local Russian Orthodox commu-
nity there, the wives and children of many Orthodox
servicemen from all parts of the country were temporary
residents. Forty persons attended the first Divine Liturgy
there, held in an Episcopal church, on November
Construction of the present church building was completed
in 1957, and in the same year it was consecrated by Arch-
bishop John of San Francisco.
When it was possible, most Russians who were settled in
Northern California maintained some ties with the Cathe-
dral in San Francisco, and those who were in the southern
part of the state with the church in Los Angeles. They made
occasional pilgrimages there for Pascha and the great feasts
and for their sacramental needs. As these Russian settle-
ments and areas of concentrated Russian population grew,
the people began to organize their own local parishes.
Bryte and Santa Rosa, California
The first of these was the Church of the Holy Myrrh-
bearers in Bryte. Of the many Russians who had settled in
Bryte, the majority were Baptists. Although the Orthodo>
Christians there often thought of organizing a parish, noth
ing was done until the late Sophia Zernova, wife of Nicholas
Zernov, the Orthodox religious writer and ecumenist in
London, visited there upon her return to Europe from a
Y.W.C.A. conference in San Francisco, in 1928. She deliv-
St. John the Baptist Church, Berkeley, California.
216
3, 1940.
Nuns who organized the monastic community in Calistoga.
ered a lecture there about the Orthodox faith before an in-
formal assembly of Russian Orthodox Christians and
Baptists. Later that year she received a letter from some
students in Bryte informing her about the organization ofa
parish by 30 people, thanks to the inspiration of her lecture.
Archpriest Vladimir Sakovich of the San Francisco Cathe-
dral traveled to serve the Bryte community during this
formative time until the church building was consecrated by
Archbishop Alexis of San Francisco in 1928.
Another parish of Russian émigrés was formed in 1936,
when twenty persons came together to organize the Holy
Virgin Protection Church in Santa Rosa. The first pastor of
the parish was Priest Michael Pelzig.
Monastic Centers: Calistoga and Point Reyes
Feeling the spirit of personal piety and rededication to
the Church that most Russian émigrés felt at this time, a
small group of women at the San Francisco Cathedral be-
gan a project to create a place where women could retreat
for periods of time to experience a life of seclusion, prayer
and contemplation. They were initially inspired to do so by
Archpriest Constantine Lebedev.
In 1942 they received the blessing of Metropolitan
Theophilus and acquired a suitable building for their retreat
house in San Francisco. Soon they acquired another build-
ing in the picturesque town of Calistoga, about 80 miles
north of San Francisco. They continued to maintain their
house in the city as a branch home.
In 1949 four nuns arrived in Calistoga from China and
Soviet Russia and followed the ascetic life there. With their
own hands they built a small chapel, a replica of St. Helen
Chapel at Fort Ross and decorated it with embroidered
icons. They named their convent for the Dormition of the
Theotokos. When these nuns came together for the first
time at the convent, one bishop of the American Church
told them: “Pray to God! Never appeal for alms. Do not be
beggars. You dedicate yourselves to the service of God and
He will take care of you. Always remember the sermon on
the fowls of the air.”
In 1951 a retreat center dedicated to St. Eugene the
Martyr was founded near San Raphael, California, as a
memorial to all Orthodox men who lost their lives in battle.
Located near scenic Point Reyes National Seashore, the
“hermitage” in recent years has proven extremely popular
with Orthodox youth of the diocese.
Post World War II! Parishes ‘
During the post-World War II immigration, which lasted
from 1945 through the late 1950’s, new members were
added to existing Russian-language parishes and several new
parishes were organized. The Nativity of the Theotokos
Church in Menlo Park, California, was established in 1950
by Archpriest Alexander Kozlov and 14 parishioners, mostly
émigrés from Harbin, China, and from the Soviet Union.
Its picturesque frame church, the third oldest building in
the city, was erected in 1888 as Holy Trinity Episcopal
chapel and was moved to its present site in 1957. St.
Nicholas Church in Saratoga, California, was established in
—
1951, chiefly by Russian emigrés from the Far East. With
the development of electronics and aerospace industries in
the area, American-born Orthodox from the eastern states
and the midwest have also joined the parish. The result has
been a mutual enrichment of both groups with English as
the common liturgical language. St. Nicholas Church in San
Anselmo, California, was organized in 1957 by the Very
Reverend Boris Symeonoff and 28 parishioners, again
mostly Russians from the Far East. The church school with
classes in religion, Russian language and literature, and Rus-
sian history, helps to maintain the parish’s cultural heritage.
The handsome church building was completed in 1968.
Christ the Savior Church in San Francisco, established in
1952, is an integral part of Holy Trinity Cathedral Parish.
It is located at the diocesan bishop’s residence and serves
the large neighboring Russian community.
‘Sts. Peter and Paul Church in Phoenix, Arizona, was es-
tablished in 1951 by Archimandrite Peter Zaychenko, who
had retired to Phoenix from Chicago, Illinois. Parishioners
likewise have largely come from other parts of the country.
Recognizing the potential for expanding Orthodoxy in the
“Valley of the Sun,” as the Phoenix area is called, the par-
ish has build a spacious new church, consecrated in 1968,
and has turned increasingly to the use of English in the
divine services.
New church in
Phoenix, Ariz.
Zk?

War Memorial Shrine, St. Nicholas Church, Washington, D.C.
The East Coast
Washington, D. C.
Before 1920 Russian Orthodox inhabitants in the
nation’s capitol consisted almost exclusively of those who
were employed at the former Imperial Russian Embassy
there. A Russian priest came occasionally from a parish in
nearby Baltimore to celebrate services for the great feasts
and to administer the sacramental needs to them. In 1920
the membership increased significantly with the arrival of
Tsarist officers and members of the Russian nobility. The
Russians living in various scattered locations offered their
homes for the celebration of church services. Priests
Vyacheslav Gindlin and Hiermonk Pachomius Deliman were
the first pastors to be assigned to this community and, as a
result of their organizational efforts throughout the 1920’s,
St. Nicholas Church was founded there.
Since many American Orthodox Christians gave their
lives in defense of liberty and religious freedom in World
Wars I and II there was a growing sentiment in many Ortho-
dox parishes that the memory of its faithful who died in
battle should be prayerfully remembered with a suitable
memorial. In recognition of this the F.R.O.C., at its 1947
convention established a War Memorial Shrine Fund, and at
its next convention in 1948 resolved that the memorial
would be a church edifice devoted to the worship of God
in the Orthodox manner and that it be built in Washington,
D.C., where all other major religious groups had erected
similar memorials. The hierarchy led by Metropolitan
218
Leonty and the All-American Councils encouraged all
parishes to contribute to the cause. In response the St.
Nicholas Parish of Washington, D.C., took upon itself the
responsibility of building this shrine. Construction was fully
completed in November of 1962, when the church was
dedicated by Metropolitan Leonty, Archbishops Ireney of
Boston, John of San Francisco, and Bishop Kiprian of
Washington, D.C. The magnificent structure, well located
on Washington’s “embassy row,” is patterned after the
famous Russian Cathedral of St. Dmitri in Vladimir. Many
active parish organizations, such as the choir and the sister-
hood, contribute to its continuing beautification.
Baltimore, Maryland
The parishes discussed up to this point are direct results
of the post-war immigration. One new parish of this period
which was not organized as a direct result of the immigra-
tion is St. Andrew the Apostle Church in Balitmore,
Maryland. Its organization in 1940 was due to its founders’
desire to be united to the historical and canonical apostolic
Orthodox Church in America, which started in 1794. The
actual origin of the parish began in 1917 with the founding
of Holy Trinity Parish in that city. Because of the confu-
sion, suspicion and mistruct which resulted from the Living
Church’s challenge to the local canonical Church in America,
Holy Trinity Parish, as many other parishes in the eastern
states at that time, chose not to recognize any diocesan,
hierarchical or higher church authority and to declare them-
selves an independent parish. Within time a considerable
segment of the parish membership recognized how their
parish was suffering as a result of its independence. They
needed clergy but had no where to turn; their children
needed capable and educated leadership in religious instruc-
tion but there were no sources to draw from.
There were numerous but unsuccessful attempts by these
people to reestablish their parish within the proper guide-
lines of churchly life. Only in 1940 did Metropolitan The-
ophilus agree to accept these people under the protection
of his omophore. However, before accepting them, he sent
Priest Adrion Meryka to instruct them in the correct vision
and consciousness of the structure and life of the Orthodox
Church so that the entire parish might be accepted. When
the dissenters insisted upon their former position, the re-
formers left and organized a new parish. They very signifi-
cantly chose St. Andrew the Apostle for their parish’s name-
sake as an expression of their desire to be a part of the
Apostolic Tradition of Orthodox Church. Deacon Theodate
Shevchuk, who was one of the reformers and an original
member of the Holy Trinity Parish where he served, was
ordained to the priesthood and appointed pastor of the new
parish by the Metropolitan.
Pottstown, Pennsylvania
Holy Trinity Church of Pottstown, Pennsylvania, was
organized in 1928 principally by Byelo-Russians and
Ukrainians who had settled in Pottstown long before. They
had formerly attended Orthodox Churches in the surround-
ing communities of Chester, Reading and Philadelphia. But
in time the inconvenience of traveling miles to attend
church services and a recognition of the need for a closer
and more easily available church life led them to organize
their own parish. The new parish community was serviced
at first by Archpriest George Popoff of Reading. Divine
Services were celebrated in parishioners’ homes until Decem-
ber 1928 when the construction of a new church building
was completed. Archpriest Jonah Milasevich, who was as-
signed as the pastor that year, served the parish for 29 of
the parish’s first 34 years of existence.
Christ the Savior Church, New York
On August 29, 1924, Metropolitan Platon blessed the
request of a colony of Russian aristocrats and professional
people from Constantinople who had settled in Harlem, up-
town Manhattan, to organize their own local parish. Priest
Archippus Syrbu, a Russian of Bessarabian background
who had already organized a few parishes in Canada, was
appointed pastor of the new parish by the Metropolitan.
The new parish was named Christ the Savior, after the great
cathedral in Moscow which was to be destroyed in 1934 by
the Bolsheviks. In 1926 the congregation was joined by a
great majority of the congregation of St. Nicholas Cathedral
on 97th Street, after the cathedral was turned over to the
“Living Church” by decision of the court in that same year.
As in many other cases of parish organization by Russian
refugees, many prominent Anglicans gave generous mone-
tary support to Christ the Savior Church. The Church was
located at 51 East 121st Street in New York City until
1971 when it moved to East 74th Street.
Holy Virgin Protection Cathedral, New York
Also in New York City in 1926, following the loss of St.
Nicholas Cathedral, the Church established a new cathedral.
The congregation acquired the rent-free use of an Episco-
palian church located at 105 East Houston Street, down-
town, for an indefinite length of time. Since this new loca-
tion was the heart of New York City’s oldest Russian
settlement, which originated with St. Nicholas Chapel on
Second Avenue in the 1&80’s, the faithful labeled the cathe-
dral’s transfer from the Russian aristocratic section uptown
as a “return to the folk.”
The loss of St. Nicholas Cathedral did shatter many of
the hopes, visions and goals which the faithful of the Amer-
ican Church had held for the future. The physical removal
of the Cathedral Dean, Archpriest Leonid Turkevich, from
his own cathedral by New York City police, acting upon a
court order, was a “Little Calvary” for the whole American
Church. This “‘Little Calvary” led also to a resurrection, for
during those times of broken existence, when darkness
blotted out the glorious beginning of the Church in America,
the faithful clergy and worshippers were sustained by the
hope of a brighter future. The first service in the new
Cathedral was celebrated by Archpriest Leonid on Great
and Holy Thursday, April 26, 1926. All the services from
Great and Holy Friday through Pascha were served by
Metropolitan Platon in concelebration with all the cathedral
clergy. On Palm Sunday the following year, the new cathe-
Holy Virgin Protection Cathedral, New York City.
dral was consecrated to the remembrance of the Protection
of the Most Holy Theotokos.
In 1943 the Cathedral acquired its own permanent
church building, located at 59 East Second Street, with the
help of many prominent Anglican churchmen and influen-
tial Orthodox faithful.
An additional aspect of the Cathedral’s parish life is the
Chapel of St. Innocent of Irkutsk, within the Cathedral
itself. It began when Archpriest George Florovsky, the Dean
of St. Vladimir’s Seminary, began celebrating English-
language services for the students of the Seminary then
located on 121st Street. People who did not understand the
Slavonic services were attracted, and the chapel grew
in popularity, especially for people with small American-
born children. The chapel became the church of the church
school children of the Cathedral and their parents. The
present pastor of St. Innocent’s, Father Stephen Plumlee, is
also director of hospital chaplaincies for the New York
diocese; in turn, many of his parishioners are especially
active in hospital work throughout the New York metro-
politan area.
Sea Cliff, New York
Our Lady of Kazan Church in Sea Cliff, Long Island,
New York, was the last parish of the Metropolia to be
organized by this first post-war immigration. Three Russian
families from New York City settled in Sea Cliff during the
1930’s. Since Sea Cliff was a resort village, located on Long
Island Sound, many other Russians were attracted there
from the city during the summer. When they came they
stayed, of course, at the homes of the local Russians. The
large old homes ofthe Pauschine andWadkovsky families be-
came a haven for all the Russian summer visitors and city-
friends who worked all week and needed a place to stay on
219
 ARCHDEACON VSEVOLOD ANDRONOFF

Surrounded in the midst of the Church by multitudes

of hierarchs, pastors, martyrs, teachers, theologians, wit-
nesses, ascetics, administrators, founders and benefactors,
who have served the Holy Church to the fullest of their
capacities, there are always those whose unique and
necessary task is to personally incarnate and manifest
ineffable Divine Beauty. Of such in our Orthodox Church
in America was Archdeacon Vsevolod Andronoff.
Father Vsevolod possessed rare Christ-like charity,
humility and kindness. He was known by all who came
into contact with him as gentle and indulgent toward
every human being. He was never heard to utter a word
of criticism, blame or judgment against anyone. He
contributed much of his own means, which he earned by
singing in concert choirs, for the material relief of Rus-
sian refugees in Europe and South America, often not
knowing to whom his contributions were being sent.
Many Russians who came to the United States remember
him with a feeling of indebtedness, but many more are
unaware of the benefactor who made _possible their
journey to this country. He sent them affidavits, paid
for their transportation to America and helped support
them during the first, most difficult years which every
immigrant knew. His foremost position in the Church as
archdeacon, leading Divine Services in concelebration
with the Metropolitan of the Russian Orthodox Greek
Catholic Church in America, never made him arrogant,
conceited or bombastic. By the calm and restrained
solemnity with which he served in church, he led the
| worshippers into a deep prayerful unity and corporate
experience of the Kingdom of Heaven.
Father Vsevolod, in the world Vladimir, was born on In 1907, Father Vsevolod was invited by Archbishop
July 13, 1877, in Zhizdra, Kaluga Province, Russia. Being Platon to be cathedral deacon for the American Diocese
raised in a religious and churchly family, he preferred to at St. Nicholas Cathedral in New York City. He served in
live a life of service to Christ and His Church, and at the that capacity until 1926, when the Cathedral was lost to
age of sixteen, he entered the community of St. Nicholas the Church. Until 1945, he served various parishes in
Monastery near Karachev, in Orlevsk Province. At this America as psalomschik, choir director or deacon, ac-
time his sister was already a professed nun at the Convent cording to the need. On April 25 that year he resumed
of the Entrance of the Holy Theotokos, also in Ortovsk: responsibility as Cathedral deacon at Holy Virgin Pro-
The igumen of the monastery noticed young Vladimir’s tection Cathedral in New York City.
musical talent and assigned him to sing in the monastery
choir. In addition to his regular duties at the monastery, In 1947, the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church
he was trained as a bell-ringer. Bell-ringing in the life in America honored his forty years of service to the
of the Russian Church, and especially in Russian monas- Church in a Thanksgiving Service at the Cathedral cele-
teries was a specific art. When Father Vsevolod came to brated by Archbishop Leonty of Chicago with over sixty
America some years later, Mr. Charles Crane, a well-known priests and three hundred guests in attendance. This is
American Episcopalian devotee and benefactor of the the first time that such a testimony has ever been given
Russian Church, donated a set of Russian bells to Harvard to a deacon in the American Church.
University and invited him to teach bell-ringing there. Archdeacon Vsevolod fell asleep in the Lord on Octo-
After living eight years in St. Nicholas Monastery, ber 19, 1953, in New York City, following a long and
Vladimir left to visit the great monasteries of Russia. He painful illness. He was buried at St. Tikhon’s Monastery
entered the Znamenny Monastery in Kursk and was Cemetery, next to Metropolitan Platon. Metropolitan
tonsured under the name Vsevolod, September 3, 1901. Leonty wrote that Father Vsevolod accepted his fatal
He was ordained hierodeacon November 26, 1901. sufferings with Christian patience and prayerful serenity.

220
weekends. The door was always open and guests meandered
in and out on their own. In the attic there were rows of
beds, as in a dormitory, where the visitors parked themselves
for the night. Mrs. Pauschine would make lots of spaghetti
and leave a note on the refrigerator saying: “help yourself.”
One time the PAuschines went out visiting, thinking they
had locked the door, but when they returned they found
two tables of bridge going. By 1940 thirty-five Russian
families had settled in Sea Cliff and surrounding areas.
For church services they traveled to Whitestone and East
Meadow, the nearest of the two being 17 miles away. When
the war-time rationing of gasoline created serious problems
for the continuation of church life the people began to dis-
cuss seriously the organization of their own parish. At the
suggestion of Metropolitan Theophilus an organizational
meeting was held in Sea Cliff which all the local Russian
families attended. In 1942 the Metropolitan granted permis-
sion to build a chapel.
Meanwhile in 1941 Father Vasily Musin-Pushkin from
the Cathedral made regular visits to Sea Cliff to give reli-
gious instruction and Russian lessons to the children.
The garage which they had purchased and converted into
a church was consecrated in August that year by Metropoli-
tan Theophilus. Father Vasily Musin-Pushkin was assigned
to the parish as its first pastor and he served there until
1948.
Holy Trinity Church, East Meadow, New York.
East Meadow, New York
Holy Trinity Parish in East Meadow, New York, was
organized by fifteen persons under the leadership of Priest
John Zawojski. It also was the result of a division over the
Unia within a community that began there in 1916. Holy
Trinity Parish is a unique example of a once ethnic parish
which gradually was transformed from within to become a
new type of parish, stressing mission to the local neighbor-
hood and community and emphasizing liturgical and sacra-
mental life. Archpriest Tikhon Mishevsky (1952-1958) laid
the foundations for this renewal by preparing the communi-
ty for a deeper understanding of church life, and Priest
Daniel Hubiak realized and developed this renewal of church
lite:
New Jersey
St. John the Baptist of Passaic was organized on July 12,
1925. Priest Peter Kohanik, who spent his entire priestly life
in America, led 118 persons in founding the church in
Passaic, where he served as pastor until his death. The
Passaic parish was noted for its large membership. On Aug-
ust 10, 1933, Priest Luke Olchovy organized the Holy
Assumption Church with about twenty interested people
who were living in Athenia, a rural section of Clifton, New
Jersey. Because travel to other parishes in the area was diffi-
cult, another parish was needed. In spite of opposition from
surrounding parishes, it succeeded and developed into one
of the larger parishes of the Metropolia. In 1937 St.
Michael’s Parish of Syracuse, New York, was organized
by Priest John Obletiloff. It was accepted into the Metro-
polia in January 1941, after acknowledging the “Normal
Statutes.” Organized in 1951, Holy Trinity Church in
Niagara Falls moved its church building once due to high-
way construction and has since built a new church as part
of the revitalization of its parish life.
 Dedication ceremonies of the new St. John the Baptist Church, Warren, Ohio.
The Midwest
Several other parishes, chiefly of Carpatho-Russian or
Galician extraction, were organized and founded during the
1920’s and 1930’s. In Cleveland, Ohio, St. Michael’s parish
was organized under the guidance of Priest Joseph Antonoff
in 1922. The new parish was the result of a division over the
Unia issue in the original St. John the Baptist Greek Catholic
Church, which was founded in 1896 as an independent
parish. The Orthodox group was accepted into the Russian
Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America.
Another parish also organized in 1922 asa result of the
same division over the Unia is St. John the Baptist Parish in
Warren, Ohio. The first pastor of the parish was Priest
George Cucura. The original founders numbered six. The
founding of the present parish took place April 5, 1937.
During the 1960’s, under the guidance of Father Thomas
i) i) bO
Hopko, it began its gradual transformation from an ethnic
parish, serving “our people,” into a liturgically and sacra-
mentally centered parish, with stress on mission to the local
community.
Other parishes organized in the 1920’s were St. John the
Baptist of Passaic, July 12, 1925, and Sts. Cyril and
Methodius of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1929. Priest Peter
Kohanik, who spent his entire priestly life in America, led
118 persons in founding the church in Passaic, where he
served as pastor until his death. The Passiac parish was noted
for its large membership. Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church
of Milwaukee was founded by Archimandrite Timon from
Holy Trinity Cathedral in Chicago. The parish lived through
many challenges from members who wanted the parish to
be independent, a reaction to the possible threats from the
Living Church at that time. During the first decades of its
existence, the many pastors who served’ there willingly
arranged to live on state relief so that the parish could have
enough money to operate.
 The Episcopate Of The Orthodox Church In America

BISHOPS FROM ABROAD

Following the Second World War, a number of bishops

or priests who were later consecrated immigrated to the
United States. These men were educated and served the
Church in Europe but later came to America to continue
this service. Among these hierarchs are the present Metro-
politan Ireney, former Archbishop John of San Francisco,
Archbishop John of Chicago, Archbishop Nikon of Brook-
lyn, Archbishop Kiprian of Philadelphia, Bishop Ioasaph of
Edmonton, and Archbishop Sylvester of Montreal and
Canada, the present temporary administrator of the Ortho-
dox Church in America. By the early 1960’s, with the con-
secration of Metropolitan Vladimir, it became apparent the
Church could supply American-born and-educated candi-
dates for the episcopacy; but earlier, with the absence of
theological schools for fifteen years, the Church in Amer-
ica was without future leadership, especially candidates for
the episcopacy. World War II not only led refugees to look
to America for a haven, but provided the American Church
in return with the priests and bishops it sorely needed.

His Beatitude, Metropolitan Ireney

Primate of The Orthodox Church in America
(Cf. Chapter VIII for full biography)

Archbishop Sylvester
Administrator of the Orthodox Church in America

Born October 19, 1914, in Latvia, Archbishop Sylvester

(John Antonovich Haruns) became a member of the Rus-
sian Student Christian Movement while still in high school.
In 1934, he went to Paris to study at the St. Sergius Institute
and upon graduation in 1938, he was tonsured a monk,
ordained and assigned to a parish in the Paris area. When
Russian workers were sent to France by the Germans after
the occupation of France, Father Sylvester obtained per-
mission to minister to them. After the War, he became
rector of a large parish in Paris, where he organized an
Orthodox school. Father Sylvester was consecrated to the
episcopate in 1952 and became a vicar-bishop with responsi-
bilities in Southern France and Italy. In 1963, Bishop Syl-
vester came to North America and was elected Bishop of
Montreal and Canada. He was also temporarily in charge of
the New England Diocese from 1963 to 1972. In 1966, he
was raised to the rank of archbishop. Archbishop Sylvester
acted as Chairman of the Pre-Conciliar Commission for
several All-American Councils and in 1974 was elected
temporary administrator of the Orthodox Church in Amer-
ica for Metropolitan Ireney. He also serves as chairman of
the Department of Church History and Archives.
 Archbishop John (Garklavs)

Born on August 25, 1898, in Umurga, Latavia, Archbishop

John (Garklavs) of Chicago graduated with honors from the
Theological Seminary in Riga, Latvia. Ordained to the diac-
onate and priesthood in 1936, Father John was assigned to
Sts. Constantine and Helen Church in Dundge, Latvia, while
servicing neighboring parishes. Following the death of
Bishop Alexander of Latvia in 1942, he was elected Bishop
of Riga and All Latvia. After preparing himself for this new
responsibility at the Holy Spirit Monastery in Velensk,
Latvia, he was consecrated in 1943. With the Soviet occupa-
tion in 1944, Bishop John was forced to leave his see and
spent several years in displaced persons camps in Germany.
After petitioning Metropolitan Theophilus to be accepted
into’ the Metropolia, Bishop John arrived in the United
States on July 22, 1949. In October 1949, he was appointed
Bishop of Detroit and Cleveland. Appointed temporary
overseer of the Chicago-Minneapolis Diocese in 1955, he
was confirmed as the diocesan ruling bishop in 1957 and
raised to the rank of archbishop. Archbishop John is the
senior bishop in the Holy Synod of Bishops, and serves as
Chairman of the Department of Music.

Archbishop Nikon

Archbishop Nikon (Alexis de Greve) was born in Batoun,

Caucasus, Russia, on February 19, 1895, and was educated
at the Tiflis Military School and the St. Paul Military Acad-
emy in St. Petersburg. He served in the Russian Army in
World War I and the “White” army during the Civil War.
After fleeing Russia, he studied at the St. Sergius Institute
in Paris from 1925 until his monastic tonsuring and ordina-
tion by Metropolitan Evlogy in 1928. After serving as a
missionary in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia, from 1928-1935,
Father Nikon was assigned to St. Alexander Nevsky Cathe-
dral in Paris. He served as an assistant to Metropolitan
Evlogy while he was under house arrest during the German
occupation of France and was sent to serve in Brussels, Bel-
gium, when Archbishop Alexander was arrested by the
Germans. In 1946, he was consecrated Bishop for the Bel-
gian diocese by Metropolitan Evlogy but left for the United
States after the return of Archbishop Alexander. Arriving
in New York on September 19, 1947, he was appointed
rector of St. Tikhon’s Seminary and served as Bishop of
Philadelphia from 1948-1952. Transferred as Bishop of
Toronto, he served in Canada until 1957. In 1959, he was
elected Archbishop of Tokyo and Japan, but returned to
America in 1963 as assistant to Metropolitan Leonty. In
1965, Archbishop Nikon was named Archbishop of Brook-
lyn; he has served since as rector of Christ the Savior parish
in Manhattan.

224
Archbishop John (Shahovskoy)
The former Archbishop John of San Francisco (Prince
Dimitry Alekseevich Shahovskoy) was born in Moscow,
Russia, on August 23, 1902. Following the interruption of
his education in Russia by the Revolution and Civil War, he
completed his secular education at universities in France
and Belgium. In‘1926, he went to Mount Athos, where he
was given the monastic tonsure with the new name of John
by Archimandrite Kiryk of the Russian Monastery of St.
Panteleimon. Returning to Paris, Father John studied at the
Pastoral School of the St. Sergius Institute and was ordained
to the diaconate by Metropolitan Evlogy after being granted
the mantiya. Ordained to the priesthood on March S, 1927,
by Bishop Benjamin, Father John was elevated to igumen in
1935 and archimandrite in 1937. He served parishes in
Belaya Tserkov, Yugoslavia; Berlin, Germany; and France
before coming to the United States in 1946. After a year as
pastor of Holy Virgin Mary Cathedral in Los Angeles, Father
John was consecrated Bishop of Brooklyn on May 11, 1947,
and appointed dean of St. Vladimir’s Seminary. In 1950, he
was elected Bishop of San Francisco and Western America,
retaining that cathedra until his retirement in 1974. Since
the Evanston Assembly in 1954, he has represented the
Orthodox Church in America at sessions of the World
Council of Churches, and has served as a member of the
Central Committee of that Council. Raised to the rank of
Archbishop in 1961, he has remained active in Russian
literary and ecumenical circles.
BISHOP VALERIAN (D. TRIFA)
The Most Reverend Valerian (D. Trifa), Archbishop
of Detroit and Michigan, Bishop of the Romanian Ortho-
dox Episcopate of America, was born in Romania in
1914. He graduated from the Theological School of the
University of Jassy in 1935, and continued with post-
graduate work in Theology, Letters, and Philosophy for
five years at the universities in Bucharest, Romania and
Berlin, Germany. After spending four years as a political
prisoner in Germany during World War II and another
five years as a displaced person in Italy, he immigrated to
the United States in 1950 where he became an American
citizen through naturalization in 1957. In 1951, after
serving as editor of the church paper Solia, he was elected
Vicar Bishop of the Romanian Orthodox Diocese of
America. From 1952, he assumed the leadership of the
Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America in the ab-
sence of the titular Bishop, Policarp Morusca, who was
held at that time as a political prisoner in Communist
Romania. After the death of Bishop Policarp in Romania
in 1957, Bishop Valerian became titular head of the
Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America. With the
reception of the Romanian Episcopate into the Metro-
polia in 1960, Archbishop Valerian became a member of
the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America,
and presently serves as chairman of the Department of
Canonical and Pastoral Affairs. He is a member of the
Governing Board of the National Council of Churches
of Christ in the United States, and a member of the Cen-
tral Committee of the World Council of Churches,
Geneva, Switzerland.
Archbishop Kiprian

Archbishop Kiprian (Boris Pavlovich Borisevich) was

born in Kholm, Russia, August 15, 1903. After completing
preparatory school in Kremenetz in 1919, he entered the
Theological Seminary in Volyn, graduating in 1925. He
then studied at the Orthodox Theological Faculty of the
University of Warsaw where he received a masters degree in
theology in 1931. Married in 1927, Father Boris was or-
dained in 1928 and assigned to a parish in Lopusho. From
1929-1939, he served as Supervisor of Religious Education
in a secondary school in Srodno, and as diocesan missioner
and sacristan of the cathedral. Transferred to Vilno, Lith-
uania, he was Supervisor of Religious Education from 1939
to 1940. Following World War II, Father Boris organized
parishes in Linz, Austria, and Augsburg, Germany. In July
of 1949, he and his wife arrived in the United States. Father
Boris served parishes in Kansas City (1950-1953), Baltimore
(1953-1959), and Stamford, Connecticut (1959-1961). He
served as censor, editor of the Church Calendar, and editor
of the Russian-American Orthodox Messenger. After the
death of his wife in 1961, Father Boris took monastic vows
with the name of Kiprian and was consecrated Bishop of
Washington, vicar to the Metropolitan. He became rector of
St. Tikhon’s Seminary and in 1964 was elected Bishop of
Philadelphia and Pennsylvania. In 1970, Bishop Kiprian was
raised to the rank of archbishop. Archbishop Kiprian is a
member of the Lesser Synod of Bishops and serves as chair-
man of the Department of External Affairs.

Bishop loasaph

Bishop Ioasaph (Stephen Antonuk) of Edmonton, auxil-

iary to the Archbishop of Montreal and Canada, was born
on December 28, 1897, in Grodno County, Russia. After
receiving his education in Russia, he was ordained to the
priesthood in 1922, serving parishes in Chita and Harbin,
Manchuria, China. Arriving in the United States in 1930,
Father Stephen was assigned to St. Nicholas Church in
Stratford, Connecticut, where he served for thirty-eight
years. In 1963. he became a widower. Elected to the epis-
copate in 1968, he was consecrated Bishop of Edmonton
on March 4, 1968, in New York City.
Bishop Kiprian greeting Metrcpolitan lreney
upon his enthronement as Primate of the
Orthodox Church in America.

The present Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America (1973). Seated, left to right: Archbishop Valerian, Archbishop Sylvester, Arch-
bishop John (Garklavs), Metropolitan Ireney, Archbishop John (Shakovskoy), Metropolitan Vladimir, Archbishop Kiprian, Standing, left to
right: Bishop Herman, Bishop Stephen (+1975), Bishop Theodosius, Bishop Joasaf, Bishop Dmitri, Bishop Jose, Bishop Gregory. Not shown:
Archbishop Nikon. (Cf. Chapter VIII for biographies of other bishops.)

D eDjaar |
 IS

Metropolitan Leonty
CHAPTER VII
Signs of New Growth
Short as it may appear, the period 1950-1965 — the era
of Metropolitan Leonty — constitutes a crucial turning
point in the history of our Church. In more than one way, /
it marked the end of one era and the beginning of another
without creating a break in continuity, for it is precisely
of that continuity that the newly-elected Metropolitan
was a living symbol and providential bearer.
The Old and the New
What indeed was coming to an end during Metropolitan
Leonty’s tenure was the entire immigrant period in the
history of the Metropolia, with its particular vision and ex-
perience of the Church, its particular leadership and its
specific life style. A new generation was coming of age, a
new situation was emerging with new needs and new de-
mands. And it is the eternal merit of Metropolitan Leonty
that, although belonging by age and experience to the “old”
situation, he, almost alone in his generation, understood the
demands of the “new” one; with his truly unique and
saintly patience, he softened the shock of their encounter
and made it into a relatively peaceful transition.
The “immigrant period’ was adequately dealt with in
the preceding chapters. But in order to understand the
developments that took place in the Fifties, we must stress
once more that nowhere was the “immigrant period” bet-
ter expressed than ina particular type of pastoral leadership,
in that generation of priests — of “‘old missionaries,” as they
were fond of calling themselves — who organically combined
their priestly vocation with that of a socio-ethnic leadership.
They were pastors of immigrant communities, their efforts
were aimed at the preservation of the Orthodox faith by
means of ethnic identity and at the preservation of ethnic
values by means of religious identity. For them the Church
and the ethnic school, the choral group and the balalaika
orchestra, the mutual-aid brotherhood and the community
hall were the self-evident and organic elements of the same
reality, tools of the heroic fight for survival in alien and, /
at times, inimical surroundings.
Now, it is to these priest-leaders that our Church owes
her survival during the stormy Twenties, after the Russian
Revolution left her without even a ruling bishop and de-
prived her of all material support and spiritual guidance. It
is they who, in the vacuum created by the disintegration of
the central ecclesiastical administration, preserved enough
moral authority and a sufficient “power base” in their
parishes to start the “reconstruction” of the Church. It is
they who in 1924 in Detroit, virtually forced the recently
arrived Metropolitan Platon to assume hierarchical power,
and, in the midst of quarrels, schisms, controversies and
vicious propaganda, “reassembled” the Church around him,
thus restoring the foundations of her organizational unity.
1970-1967
Without their active support, neither Metropolitan Platon
nor Metropolitan Theophilus could have completed the “re-
construction” that took place during the Thirties. And it is
to be hoped that when they are written — and they must be
written! — the biographies of men such as Father Benjamin
Kedrovsky, Father Jason Kappanadze, Father Theophan
Buketoff, Father John Nedzelnitsky, Father Peter Kohanik,
Father John Chepeleff and many others, will fully reveal
what our Church owes to all of them.
Parochialism: Focus of the Crises
And yet, beneficial as it proved to be at a time of crisis,
the de facto control assumed over the life of the Church by
that priestly leadership resulted in new problems which, in
turn, created new crises. For if the vision of those priest-
leaders was, with a very few exceptions, limited to the
Church as above all an immigrant community and thus
turned to the past rather than the future, aimed at the pres-
ervation of the ethno-religious identity, it was, on the other
hand, essentially parochial. The ethnic unity of the “Amer-
ican Orthodox Rus’” (Amerikanskaya Pravoslavnaya Rus’)
was, in that vision and experience, a much greater reality
than the unity of the Church as expressed in her canonical
and administrative structure. On this level, it is the parish,
not the “Church,” that stood in the center. For as is known
by every student of immigrant sociology, the parish in the
immigrant community acquired a significance it did not
have in the “old world.” Here, in America, besides being a
link with the past and also a community center, it became
the symbol and the focus of the immigrant community’s
“standing” within American society, the crystalization of
its pride in itself and of its sense of achievement. Hence,
there developed a tremendous sensitivity in regard to
“parish property,” to the parish’s independence trom all ex-
ternal control, and hence, the immigrant parish’s self-
centeredness and self-sufficiency. In our Church _ this
“parochialism,” typical to some degree of all immigrant
communities, was brought to a kind of paroxysm by the
unfortunate actions of Archbishop Alexander in the early
Twenties. In desperate need of funds and thinking that the
revolutionary crisis in Russia would be of short duration, he
mortgaged several churches which were ultimately lost and
this created a mistrust of any “‘center,’ a mistrust whose
aftermath can still be detected in some places even today.
The first result of that “‘parochialism,” shared in fact, al-
though maybe somewhat differently, by both clergy and
laity, was the chronic weakness of the Church’s central
hierarchical power, or better to say, of the Church as a
whole, as a unified canonical organism. If everyone agreed
that there “must be a Bishop” and no one denied his sacra-
mental power, in fact, his administrative power over the
V99
parish was reduced to a minimum, limited to ordaining and
appointing priests as well as transferring them, virtually al-
ways by their own request or that of the parish. Deprived
of any financial support from Russia, totally dependent on
the less than meager contributions from parishes (the
“reconstruction” of the Church coincided in time with the
Depression), the central administration lived on a day to
day basis, unable to take any long-range initiatives, unable
truly to face and to respond to the most essential common
needs of the Church. In reality, if not in theory, the Metro-
polia became a loose and essentially voluntary federation of
de facto independent parishes, each caring about itself and
its “interests” and having almost entirely lost the sense of a
common destiny and vocation.
All this explains why, when the situation began to change
— and to change rather rapidly and radically — generating
new problems and new needs, the same leadership which
some twenty years earlier truly saved the Church from dis-
integration, failed to understand the nature of that change
and of those needs and opposed the attempts to solve them.
For changing indeed was that very immigrant situation and
the mentality inherent in it, which for decades shaped the
life of the Church and of which those leaders were both the
product and the bearers.
New Generations and Problems
In the first place, the “second generation,” the genera-
tion of immigrants’ children, born and educated in America,
was coming of age, bringing with it, as every “second gener-
ation” always did in America, the demands for “‘Americani-
zation,” for religious rather than “ethnic” schools, for a
reflection upon the common destiny of Orthodoxy in the
new world. This process, which began already in the late
Thirties, was accelerated by World War II, which uprooted
thousands of young Orthodox, then sent them by means of
the G.I. Bill to colleges and challenged them, in a new way,
with the problem of their religious identity, with a new
interest in the Church and not merely in their ethnic heri-
tage. Another consequence of the war was the massive in-
flux of new immigrants from Europe, the “displaced per-
sons,” and of Russian clergy of a different background,
training and mentality. This contributed to a progressive
breakdown of the hitherto homogeneous ethnic character
of the Church, challenged her with a pluralism of customs,
traditions, liturgical practices, etc. Last, but not least, there
was a need for the Church to clarify hercanonical position,
challenged by the reappearance on the American scene of
the Moscow Patriarchate and the emergence here of the
“Russian Church in Exile” (whose membership included
now the overwhelming majority of the “displaced persons”’),
by the rapid growth of other national jurisdictions, by new
“ecumenical” pressures, by the growing number of converts,
brought into the Church either through intermarriage or
through spiritual and doctrinal attraction to Orthodoxy. All
these challenges urgently required answers, solutions, de-
cisions, and this meant the reexamination by the Church of
the very foundations of her organization and life, of her
order of priorities. Hence the conflicts and controversies,
misunderstandings and even quarrels which raged through-
230
out the Fifties. And if, in spite of all this, our Church not
only preserved her unity, but ultimately gave it a much
deeper content, it is due primarily to the presence at her
head, during that difficult period, of a man who more than
anyone else was qualified to lead her through that transition.
The Eighth All-American Council — 1950
When, in December 1950, the Eighth All-American
Sobor convened in New York to elect a successor to Metro-
politan Theophilus, virtually every delegate knew, even be-
fore any balloting, the name of the man who would be
elected: Leonty, Archbishop of Chicago and Minneapolis.
He was indeed the only candidate and was elected, in fact,
by acclamation not merely because of his age and hierarchi-
cal. seniority, but because the entire Church knew him to be
one of her “‘builders,” her leader for almost fifty years.
In his report to the opening session of the Council (prior
to his election as primate) Metropolitan Leonty reviewed
all aspects of the Church’s life, particularly the Church’s
stance towards the Church of Russia and the Russian Church
Abroad. He attributed the breakdown of contacts with the
Patriarchate of Moscow after the 1946 Council to the in-
ability of the Patriarchate to recognize the complete auton-
omy of the Church in America. His remarks about the
Church Abroad, whose hierarchy and faithful were at that
very time establishing themselves in America, were chari-
table but frank: the relationship with the Church Abroad
was called ‘“‘the most painful phenomenon in the life of our
Church during its entire 150-year existence”; at the same
time, the prediction was made that “one American Ortho-
dox Church on New World soil” was inevitable.
Three more Councils were held under the leadership of
Metropolitan Leonty: the Ninth, November 8-10, 1955,
New York; the Tenth, November 10-13, 1959, New York;
the Eleventh, November 12-15, 1963, New York.
Their work was guided by the need to create a solid
canonical and institutional foundation for the future growth
of the local Church. Thus in 1955, the Statute of the
Church was adopted, providing clear regulations and pro-
cedures for the administration of the Church on all its levels,
from the primate and the All-American Council to the
parish and its functions and purposes. The Councils of 1959
and 1963 digested and assimilated the Statute and placed
the central administration of the Church on a permanent
and stable footing.
The Statutes
The main achievement during the fifteen years of Metro-
politan Leonty’s administration was, without any doubt,
the adoption by the Church of new Statutes reconciling the
essential canonical demands with the particular conditions
of the American situation. This situation, as we have seen
already, was often interpreted as requiring a de facto
“congregational” structure of the Church with an almost
nominal administrative link between the parishes and the
central episcopal administration. As early as 1907, the first
Sobor held in Mayfield adopted a Parish Statute, in the
elaboration of which Metropolitan Leonty (then Father

Bishop’s Synod, ca. 1954. Left to right: Bishop John (Shahovskoy),
Bishop Nikon, Archbishop Benjamin, Metropolitan Leonty, Bishop
Dimitry (Magan), Bishop John (Garklavs), Bishop Dionisy, Bishop
Jonah.
Leonid Turkevich) took an active part. This Statute, which
incidentally was used as one of the patterns for the Parish
Statute adopted by the Moscow Sobor of 1917-1918, was
made irrelevant by the events which followed the Russian
Revolution. In 1937, again through the efforts of Bishop
Leonty, the Church adopted a constitution, organizing it as
a Metropolitan District. All these measures, however, were
inadequate given the weakness of the central administration
and the lack of readiness on the part of the parishes to
clarify their relationship to the “center.”
But, by the early Fifties, for reasons mentioned above,
the need for such clarification became evident. A special
Canonical Commission was appointed by the Bishop’s
Synod and instructed to prepare a Statute covering all
aspects of the Church’s life. The Commission consisted of
Archbishop John (Garklavs) of Cleveland and Detroit,
Chairman; Fathers Joseph Pishtey, John Chepeleff and
Alexander Schmemann; Professors Nicholas Arseniev and
Serge Verhovskoy; and three Orthodox lawyers: Ralph M.
Arkush, Ivan M. Czap and Lewis Nescott. It worked for
over three years and although itself somewhat polarized
between the “hierarchical” and the “democratic” attitudes,
finally prepared a draft of a Statute, which after heated dis-
cussions and some amendments, was adopted by the Ninth
All-American Sobor in 1955.
In many parishes the new Statutes were met with violent
opposition and it took several years and more discussions at
the subsequent Sobors (the Tenth in 1959 and the Eleventh
in 1963) before it began to be “digested” by the Church.
Yet a tremendous step forward was made: the Church now
had a basic constitution, harmoniously integrating the
Orthodox doctrine and the real particularities and needs of
America, covering all levels of the Church’s life and making
possible her further growth and development. Slowly but
surely the deeply rooted parish distrust of the hierarchy and
central administration began to recede, opening the way for
true “‘sobornost” and peaceful cooperation.
The Central Administration
The second achievement consisted in the much needed
restructuring of the Central Church Administration itself.
During the prerevolutionary period that administration,
similar to that of all Russian Dioceses, consisted of a “Con-
sistory,” i.e., a small staff appointed by the Bishop to help
him in performing his administrative duties. There were no
elective offices, and no direct participation of parish repre-
sentatives. But after the crisis of the early Twenties and the
Detroit Sobor of 1924, the first to elect the Primate of the
Church and to establish an elective leadership, the old sys-
tem had to be replaced with a new one. Moreover, the Mos-
cow Sobor restored the participation of both clergy and
laity on all levels of the Church’s government. Thus there
emerged, little by little, and at first without too precise a
definition of their respective areas of responsibility, the
organs of the Church’s administration in America: the
Synod of Bishops and the Metropolitan Council, patterned
after the model of the Diocesan Council established by the
Moscow Sobor and consisting of clerical and lay representa-
tives elected by the All-American Sobor. What was left
without any real clarification and definition, however, was
precisely the structure of the permanent central administra-
tion, the organ responsible for administration between the
sessions of the All-American Sobor, the Synod of Bishops
and the Metropolitan Council.
For several years, primarily because of the extreme
poverty of the Church’s “center,” the daily administrative
task was fulfilled by volunteers: a few dedicated parish
priests (Father John Chepeleff, Father Vladimir Lilikovich,
Father Theophan Buketoff, and finally Father Joseph Pish-
tey, who became the first Chancellor of the Orthodox
Church in America), a few committed laymen (A. E. Bez-
smertny, V. A. Kamensky). That system, or rather lack of
system, resulted in poor communications with parishes and,
what is more serious, in widespread distrust of what to
many appeared as mismanagement, private influences, etc.
kt was at the Eleventh All-American Sobor, held in New
York in 1963 that this important segment of the Church’s
life was finally given a permanent shape and placed on firm
foundations. The Sobor unanimously adopted an amend-
ment to the Statutes establishing three national offices:
those of the Chancellor, Secretary and Treasurer of the
Church, whose holders were to be appointed by the Bishop’s
Synod upon nomination by the Metropolitan Council. The
three officers, to whom later were added two representa-
tives of the Metropolitan Council, were to constitute, under
the chairmanship of the Metropolitan, a permanent Adminis-
trative Committee. Of special importance in this reform was
the clarification of the financial operations of the Church.
Thus, when in early May 1965 Metropolitan Leonty died
after a long period of illness, the Church was equipped with a
coherent administrative structure, with institutions making
it possible for her to grow and to develop.
Alexander Schmemann
 Born in 1876 in Kremenetz, Volhynia (Western Russia)
in the family of a priest, Leonid Turkevich, the future
Metropolitan, followed the classic way of Russian “clerics.”
After seminary studies in Volhynia, he enrolled at the
Kiev Theological Academy and upon graduation in 1900
began a teaching career in ecclesiastical schools. He occu-
pied teaching positions as a layman at the seminaries of
Kursk, in central Russia, and Ekaterinoslav, in the Ukraine.
In 1905, after his marriage with Anna Chervinsky, he was
ordained to the holy priesthood at the monastery of
Pochaev and chose to succeed his father in the humble
position of parish priest in Kremenetz. He thought of be-
coming a missionary in Persia, in the newly established Mis-
sion of Urmia, among the remains of the ancient Nestorian
Church, part of which had joined Orthodoxy, but his
missionary zeal was to be channeled into another direction.
In 1906, the young and dynamic Bishop of the American
Diocese, Tikhon, found in him a suitable candidate for the
responsible and pioneering post of Rector of the newly
established Seminary in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He arrived
in the United States in October 1906, and after that, his
life was totally identified with the life and growth of the
American Church. As Rector of the Seminary in Minneapo-
lis and, after 1912,in Tenafly, New Jersey, he was the father
of Orthodox pastoral education in America. As editor, from
The late Metropolitan was known
by young and old alike for his
gentleness, kindness and charity.
Metropolitan Leonty presiding at
the 8th All-American Council
1950.
 METROPOLITAN LEONTY
Funeral of Metropolitan Leonty.
1914 until 1930,of the Russian-American Orthodox Mes-
senger, he was the Church’s main spokesman and “‘ideo-
logue.” As dean of St. Nicholas Cathedral and member of
the Consistory, he was the main advisor of the ruling
bishops. Together with Father Alexander Kukulevsky, he
represented the American Church at the Great Sobor in
Moscow in 1917-1918. He always enjoyed telling the story
of how he thus received an opportunity to introduce at the
Sobor a motion which led to the election of Tikhon — his
former diocesan bishop and close friend — as Patriarch of
Moscow. Upon his return to America — through Siberia and
Japan — Father Turkevich went through the trying experi-
ence of church dissensions which he was to combat for the
next several decades. As one of the main leaders of the
Detroit Sobor in 1924, he became the chief architect of the
Church’s autonomy, based on the decisions of the Moscow
Sobor. Widower since 1925, he was consecrated Bishop of
Chicago in 1933. Thus, from the time of Archbishop
Tikhon and for nearly half a century, he was at the center
of the Church’s life, and his election as Metropolitan in
1950 was a natural crowning of that total commitment.
The formula of St. Cyprian of Carthage, “‘the Church is in
the Bishop and the Bishop is in the Church,” has seldom
had a more adequate proof of its veracity.
What, however, distinguished Metropolitan Leonty from
many of his “immigrant” contemporaries and colleagues,
was his vision of American Orthodoxy, of the particular
destiny and vocation of the Orthodox Church in the New
World. He developed that vision long before the tragic
events of 1917-1918 “forced” it, so to speak, on the
Church, at a time when the very idea of the universal,
transnational nature of Orthodoxy was virtually absent
from Orthodox consciousness not only here but everywhere.
Already in 1916, in his article on “The Tasks of Orthodoxy
in North America,” he affirmed his conviction that it is in
America “that the Orthodox Church will manifest its uni-
versality in all its strength, reveal her creative ability
organically to integrate all elements composing her . .”
and spoke of the future autocephaly. At the same time,
having witnessed the revolutionary chaos in Russia and also
the creative response to it of the Russian Church at her
historic Moscow Sobor, he returned to America a convinced
partisan of the sobornost, the active participation in, and
responsibility for, the life of the Church of all her members,
laity as well as clergy. He saw no contradiction between his
unfaltering loyalty to his Russian roots, to the ideals and
inspiration of Russian Orthodoxy and his commitment to a
great and permanent and truly “universal”? Orthodox
Church in America. The latter was for him the true goal and
the self-evident fulfillment of the Russian mission.
If this vision made him eminently qualified to lead the
Church through a difficult time of transition, it is his truly
unique charisma of pastoral patience and generosity that
assured the ultimate success of this transition, made it into
an organic rather than critical process. His mere presence,
quite often silent and apparently “non-commital,” had a
deeply pacifying effect on the passions and controversies
which were raging around him. It is as if understanding all
points of view, seeing the partial truth of each of them, he
transcended all of them, preserving within himself the unity
and the “wholeness” of the Church which so often were
endangered by human passions. No one who attended it
will ever forget his funeral in May 1965, at the New York
Cathedral and then St. Tikhon’s Monastery. On that day
one almost physically felt a renewed gift of unity, a new
and wonderful reality of the Church, which our old Father
in Christ left with us as he was called to God.
Alexander Schmemann
i)ty WW
 EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY 1950 — 1975

The 1950’s were the years of renewed educational activ-

ity at the parish level. From the efforts of the FROC, the
Alumni Federation of the Theological Seminaries, and the
work of several individuals, the movement to reorganize
English Sunday Schools began in earnest. These were post-
war years and the “baby boom” resulted in large numbers
of children in nearly every parish, children whose parents
now identified themselves as Americans and desired to have
their children educated as Orthodox Americans. The ““Sun-
day School,” modeled after the popular Protestant move-
ment, was established in the majority of parishes (141 Sun-
day Schools were reported in 1961, contrasted with 76 in
1953). Attempts were begun to produce Orthodox materials
in the English language. An English language Yearbook and
Church Directory was reinstituted by Father John Kivko of
the Metropolia in order to raise funds by sale of the Year-
book for the publication of English materials for the Sunday
schools.
The former Educational Council was reorganized in
1951 as the Metropolitan Council Sunday School Commit-
tee, under the chairmanship of Metropolitan Leonty. Other
officers and members included Fathers George Florovsky,
Nicholas Kiryluk, John Kivko, John Semanitzky, and the
lay persons Sophie Koulomzin, Natalie Kiryluk, Walter
Chanas, Andrew Messick, Ladd Johnson, Stephen Kopeston-
sky and Max Ball. Using translations of the Russian lesson
series “Zakon Bozhi” (“Instruction in God’s Law’’), pub-
lished by the Y.M.C.A. Press in Paris, France, the Commit- Father John Kivko, leader in The Sunday School program of the
tee began the publication of six sets of leaflets in English. Metropolia.
Father Kivko, Stephen Kopestonsky and Sophie Koulomzin
York, October 26 and 27, 1956. On that day, the Orthodox
undertook much of the translation work, with Father
Christian Education Commission was founded. Its primary
Kiryluk assisting in the editing. Several coloring books and
aims were to seek to find an Orthodox approach to the
a beginners series were added later, as was a church history
readily-adopted Protestant pattern of Sunday schools,
text written by Mrs. Koulomzin.
(which, in spite of its usefulness, was felt to be inadequate
At the same time, similar materials were being devel- and in some respects, inapplicable to the Orthodox under-
oped by the Syrian Archdiocese (the Orthodox Catholic standing of education), to relate Orthodox life and teaching
Instruction Series prepared by Father Michael Gelsinger and to the American situation and particularly to new ap-
Mary Gelsinger), the Greek Archdiocese, which published proaches to education, and perhaps most significant, to
several textbooks in Greek and English, and the Carpatho- seek to create an inter-Orthodox forum for the exchange of
Russian Diocese, which, from an educational viewpoint, ideas, problems and practical solutions for the educational
attempted to produce materials using more modern ap- needs of the Orthodox parishes and dioceses. The very idea
proaches involving student activity as part of the lesson. of bringing together Orthodox pastors and teachers from
various nationalities and jurisdictions was, in itself, a rela-
The Orthodox Christian Education Commission tively new idea, and the actual foundation and development
In 1954, Mrs. Sophie Koulomzin and other interested of the Commission became the first successful cooperative
persons began discussing the need for an inter-Orthodox pan-Orthodox project on a national scale. At this first
forum to confront the needs of education in the Church. A meeting, the Commission began a long series of lectures and
correspondence between Dr. Gerald Knoff of the National discussions that were to form eventually the basis for an
Council of Churches in the USA and Mrs. Koulomzin re- Orthodox philosophy of Christian education. The Commis-
sulted in a meeting of interested religious educators from sion recommended the publication of a semi-annual Bulletin
several jurisdictions that was held in the old headquarters of that would promote research and the exchange of informa-
the NCC. By 1956, the group consisted of representatives tion in the field of Orthodox education. This Bulletin was
of the Carpatho-Russian, Greek, Romanian, Russian (Metro- later expanded to include a wider audience and finally
polia), Serbian, Syrian and Ukrainian jurisdictions, and the evolved into the present Concern magazine.
first of a series of Annual Conferences was called at the Successive conferences dealt with ‘““The Church and its
Tolstoy Foundation’s Reed Farm, in Valley Cottage, New Youth” (Cleveland, November 1-2, 1957), “‘Teacher Train-
(Continued page 236)

234
 SOPHIE KOULOMZIN
Sophie Koulomzin was born in 1903 in St. Petersburg,
Russia, the youngest daughter of Serge and Alexandra
Shidlovsky. During her early childhood she enjoyed educa-
tional and social advantages that most children did not have
since her father was Vice President of the Czar’s Duma. But
her life dramatically changed with the Russian revolution.
She left her homeland and with her family first found
refuge in Estonia. Here under the guidance of a refugee
priest, she began teaching a class of young émigré children
— opening the door of a vocation that would consume her
life work.
Sophie Shidlovsky found it difficult in new circum-
stances to continue her education and spent much time in
self-disciplined study. Finally through the efforts of Paul B.
Anderson of the International YMCA, she attended the
University of Berlin on a scholarship and then received a
grant from the John D. Rockefeller Fund to study in the
United States in 1926-1927 for a Masters Degree in Reli-
gious Education at Columbia University. She returned to
France and became Director of Education in the Russian
Student Christian Movement. She worked with priests, lay-
men and children alike there and edited two volumes of
church lessons.
In 1949, married to Russian engineer, Nikita Koulomzin
and the mother of four children, Elizabeth, Olga, Xenia and
George, Mrs. Koulomzin came to America and settled in
| Nyack, New York, in a house that overlooks the Hudson
River. Very quickly she joined the Metropolitan Council
Church School Committee and began translating and editing
Russian materials and organizing conferences.
With a vision of what Christian education in the Church
means and with the knowledge of the needs and situation
in the United States, she organized the Orthodox Christian
Education Commission, a pan-Orthodox body, with
purpose of sharing materials and pooling resources. Since
becoming its first secretary (1956-1969) she has edited the
initial publication The Bulletin (educational journal), led
meetings to develop a curriculum, wrote many manuals,
conceived and edited the children’s magazine Young Life,
established Upbeat (teen periodical) and Concern (adult
Sophie Koulomzin, Founder of The Orthodox Christian Educa-
tion Commission.
quarterly). She has traveled throughout the country on
teacher training missions and in 1966 went to Alaska to sur-
vey the educational needs of the Church there. From 1956
through 1973, she taught a course in Orthodox Christian
Education at St. Vladimir’s Seminary. In her latest book,
published by the seminary, Our Church and Our Children,
she affirms her belief, experience and philosophy as a
mother, teacher, grandmother and lay woman, that the
spiritual needs of children are just as valid as those of adults,
and that the Church must provide for those needs at the
particular age of the child.
Mrs. Koulomzin continues actively to work in the field
of Church education. She is a member of the Executive
Board of the OCEC. She teaches in the church school of
her parish, Holy Virgin Protection Church, and she has just
initiated with others a new venture, 7rezvon, a monthly
magazine for Russian speaking children throughout the
world.
What Mrs. Koulomzin has done can best be summed up
the by one of the children she taught. “She’s not like the
teachers we have in public school. She’s a real teacher.”
Certainly in the eyes of the thousands of children that she
came in to touch with and who taught her so much, Sophie
Koulomzin reflects that special aura, the attraction and
mysterious love of “the teacher.”
Thomas Kazich
(Continued from page 234)
ing” (Pittsburgh, December 5-6, 1958), “Problems of Ortho-
dox Christian Education and Inter-Orthodox Cooperation”
(New York City, December 11-12, 1959), ‘Philosophy of
the Orthodox Curriculum” (New York City, 1960 and
1961). Following conferences were actually working con-
ferences on curriculum, with particular attention being
given to adolescents and teacher training in the light of the
curriculum. As early as 1957, the Commission began
gathering data concerning the Church’s ministry to college
youth, and in 1965 it gave its support to the fledgling
Orthodox Campus Commission with the publication of
Concern magazine, utilizing it first as a journal of general
interest to college students, teachers and adult readers with
a Parish Supplement included for teachers and parents, and
later as a magazine for general adult readers in the Church.
From an income of $722 in 1957 from the sale of sub-
scriptions to the Bulletin, the OCEC has grown to an annual
working budget of $115,000 which is derived solely from
the sale of its curriculum materials and magazine subscrip-
tions. The Commission has developed a full program of
curriculum materials and teachers aids. for Orthodox Church
schools and produces two periodicals for students: Young
Life for elementary-age children, and Upbeat for teenagers
and young adults. It has extended its services to the areas
of teacher training and leadership development; in the
spring of 1975, the OCEC sponsored a week-long Teaching
Skills Institute for those preparing for leadership positions
in teacher training in parishes, and plans are being made for
a follow-up conference on Youth Leadership Training for
spring 1976. Regular workshops and conferences are held
regionally and in local parishes as part of the Commission’s
“Contact” program for the training of lay teachers in the
parishes.
The guiding force in the development of the Orthodox
Christian Education Commission has been Mrs. Sophie
Koulomzin, who almost singlehandedly in the early years
carried out the bulk of the work and dared to take the
financial risks required for the publication of new materials
and the expansion of the programs of the OCEC. She was
succeeded upon her retirement in October 1969 by Miss
Constance Tarasar, who is now assisted by a small staff of
workers and many volunteers who contribute to the period-
icals and other publications of the Commission. The OCEC
continues to work on behalf of nearly all Orthodox juris-
dictions in America and through their representatives who
serve as trustees of the Commission and educators who
participate in the planning and execution of the Commis-
sion’s many programs.
The Department of Religious Education
Following the decisions of the 1963 All-American Coun-
cil which reorganized the administration of the Council into
various Departments, the former Metropolitan Council
Publications Committee and Sunday School Committee
were re-created as the Department of Religious Education
of the Church. Father John Kivko continued as the chair-
man of the new department with a small executive board
consisting of Father Thomas Hopko as vice-chairman, Mrs.
236
Sophie Koulomzin, Miss Constance Tarasar as executive
secretary, Father Joseph Pishtey, Jr., and Mrs. Natalie
Breyan. With the institution of the Education Department,
the following policies were instituted by Metropolitan
Ireney in a special directive to the parishes: (1) that the
curriculum and manuals published by the Orthodox Chris-
tian Education Commission of the Standing Conference of
Orthodox Bishops in America be utilized as the basis of
instruction in all weekly Church schools or Sunday schools,
(2) that supplementary materials published by the Depart-
ment of Religious Education or by the OCEC (such as the
children’s magazines) be used as additional aids in the
church schools, and (3) that the existing Metropolia Sunday
School publications be modified and/or expanded for use in
special educational programs such as camps, altar boy train-
ing.sessions, retreats, etc., so as not to duplicate the efforts
of the OCEC in establishing a common program ofinstruc-
tion for all Orthodox Church schools. These directives con-
firmed the recommendations offered unanimously by more
than 275 priests and teachers of the Church who had
gathered at St. Tikhon’s Seminary and Monastery in August
1961 for the first National Church School Teacher’s Con-
ference, which has since become an annual event in the life
of the Church. The recommendations of that conference set
the tone for the future work of the Department of Religious
Education. (cf Box)
The DRE’s initial momentum came from its first major
project: a series of church school visitations in the fall of
1967. Entitled the Church School Guidance Project, the
visitations were conducted by Constance Tarasar in a
month-long series of parish seminars and deanery work-
shops in the eastern part of the country, during which
approximately 740 persons (562 teachers, pastors and
parishioners of the Russian Metropolia, 119 persons from
other Orthodox jurisdictions, one Orthodox college fellow-
ship and one parent’s organization) were contacted. This
number included 77 Orthodox clergy and their parishioners
from 104 parishes. Nine full-day workshops, thirteen eve-
ning lectures and six individual appointments were scheduled
during this first thirty day visitation, which covered the
territory from New England to Ohio. A second series of
visitations to the major areas west of the Mississippi to
(Continued page 239)
New Jersey Teacher's Conference, sponsored by the DRE.
 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FIRST CHURCH
SAINT TIKHON’S MONASTERY,
General Recommendations: (a) That a full report on the work of the Conference be published and distributed to all the parishes
of the Russian Orthodox Metropolia, and (b) that a similar Conference be reconvened once a year.
I. Recommendations presented by the workshops on the
Orthodox Church School Curriculum
1, That the Orthodox School Curriculum Outline, pre-
pared by the Orthodox Christian Education Commission
at its Conference in April 1961, and published in the Sum-
mer 1961 issue of the Bulletin of the Orthodox Christian
Education Commission, be endorsed for general use in the
Church Schools of the Metropolia, the outline to be
adopted to local needs.
2. That the preparation of the following materials be
given consideration and top priority:
a. Teacher's Handbooks at every age level. Such
handbooks to deepen the teacher’s insight into the special
needs and characteristics of each age group and to supply
practical suggestions for conducting work, planning les-
sons, etc., at each level (including songs, games, etc., for
the younger grades.)
b. A special set of slides on the Divine Liturgy be
prepared for children 6 and 7 years of age as foreseen in
the Curriculum for this age level.
c. An Orthodox interpretation and commentary on
the Sunday Gospel reading at an adult age level, for the
use of Church School teachers.
II. Recommendations from the workshops on the Church
School within the Parish, Diocese and the Metropolia
1. That the Bishop’s Sobor establish an order of author-
ity for the work of Religious Education in the Metropolia:
one central department of Religious Education under the
direction of the Metropolitan or a person appointed by
him; directors of religious education at the diocese and
deanery levels. That the work of such directors be con-
sidered as a full time vocation. That the parish priest is in
full charge and responsible for the Church School educa-
tion program in his parish, though he may appoint a
qualified superintendent to supervise the work.
2. That the responsibility for administering the school
financially, physically and morally must be borne by the
parish and that the parish must assume all financial obliga-
tions for the continuance of the Church School at the
highest level possible.
3. That there be established a proper timing for church
schools so that they will not conflict with the service of
Divine Liturgy.
4. That the name of the Orthodox Church School be
used rather than the name of Sunday School.
lil. Recommendations presented by the workshop on
Teacher Training
That the teacher training program of our Church
Schools be strengthened in the following ways:
SCHOOL TEACHER’S CONFERENCE
AUGUST 11-12, 1961
1. At the Parish level:
a. By setting up a system whereby all parish priests
and church school superintendents receive information reg-
ularly concerning material, audio-visual aids, curriculum
developments, etc., with their critical evaluation. (A bi-
monthly leaflet was suggested.)
b. By holding regular teacher’s meetings with the
priest’s participation.
c. That the priest and the superintendent take active
part in the work of the school, taking time occasionally to
attend classes in session.
d. That special discussion groups be formed for the
senior church school students, which could serve as reserve
pools for the trainee teachers.
2. At the National level:
a. That the opportunity be created for qualified
persons to receive graduate training in Orthodox theology
and religious education, preparing them for the position
of organizers of teacher training programs.
b. That a fund be created for the realization of such
a program through an appeal to the Bishop’s Sobor, to the
parishes and the FROC.
c. A special steering Committee be appointed to
carry on continuing concern for this project: in coopera-
tion with the Metropolitan Council Religious Education
Committee.
3. At the District level:
That in addition to the yearly National Church
School Conference area conferences be held at convenient
times specifically for teacher training purposes, such as are
already being held in certain parts of the country.
V. Recommendations presented by the workshop on the
Church School and other forms of youth work
That a regularly planned adult education program be
encouraged as part of the Church School through forum
discussions guided by the priest or other qualified individ-
uals, that teen-age groups be encouraged in a regular basis:
that youth groups be encouraged to sponsor special educa-
tional programs; and that the parish be encouraged to as-
sume the responsibility for youth social axtivities.
VI. Recommendations presented by the workshop on
Inter-Orthodox cooperation
a. Thata Pan-Orthodox pattern be established for
Church School gatherings, special projects, social activities,
etc., thus “breaking the ice” of our isolation.
b. That a list of Orthodox speakers from various
national backgrounds be prepared for conferences and
teacher training programs.
i)
 AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CHURCHES
From the Orthodox Christian Education Commission
The Orthodox Church has now had more than fifty
years of experience in the field of Christian education in
America, with more than fifteen years of work carried on
by the OCEC, the one educational organization which
operates directly under the sponsorship and supervision of
the Standing Conference of Orthodox Bishops in the
Americas.
A great amount of material for Church schools has been
produced over these years. The OCEC itself has prepared
and published a full curriculum. Literally hundreds and
thousands of books and periodicals have been produced and
distributed. The central task facing all of us at the present
moment is to evaluate the work already done and to plan
carefully for the future.
The Curriculum Department of the OCEC, therefore,
with the express approval of the Commission representa-
tives, has decided not to produce any new manuals for the
next two years, but to spend this time in the necessary
analysis and planning.
The OCEC at this time wishes to ask all members of the
Church, and particularly the bishops and priests with their
respective educational departments and staffs, to report in
detail to the Commission office all of their experiences,
criticisms and suggestions concerning the work of Christian
education in the Church. The future development of the
OCEC depends upon this cooperation of all.
At this time, the OCEC wishes to present to the entire
body of the Orthodox Church the following points of
consideration which constitute a consensus attained from
its fifteen years of educational experience:
1. Training and development in the Christian faith and
life takes place primarily and essentially in the home.
Parents, not priests and teachers, are the crucial Christian
educators. Without a Christian experience in the family, the
Church and the Church school can do almost nothing.
There are fortunate exceptions, of course, but this “rule”
can be statistically demonstrated.
2. This leads to the conclusion that the greatest care and
attention must be given to the Christian education and
spiritual direction of adults. The education of children
depends upon the adult community. “Adults believe in
God; children believe in adults.”
3. In the Church Christian education takes place within
the whole of parish life and not merely in the clasroom.
The character of the total life of the parish determines the
child’s attitudes to God and the Christian life. Where the
238
- May 1969
local community is not built upon strictly Christian
standards which are operative in real life, the classroom
lessons are rendered useless, and perhaps even harmful. For
example, the doctrines such as the universality of the
Christian Faith as opposed to narrow nationalism, the
commandment of detachment from material wealth and
earthly ostentation, the teaching of the necessity and
desirability of regular and sincere participation in the Holy
Sacraments, etc., cannot be taught in school and denied in
the life of the church—not if our children are expected to
be educated as well-balanced, inspired and intelligent
Christians.
4. In addition to the overall spiritual condition in the
local parishes, the condition of the liturgical life is of
critical importance in Orthodox education. The philosophy
and practice of the OCEC is founded on this premise. There
can be no Christian education unless the people, and most
obviously the children, are given the possibility and are
actively encouraged to participate fully in the sacramental-
liturgical life of the Church where Christ Himself is present
and active as Teacher, Pastor and Priest.
5. Being convinced that teaching “about”? Christianity
cannot replace the living experience of Christ in the
Church, the OCEC calls all members of the Body of Christ
to make every effort of total spiritual renewal and most
specifically to make the Divine Liturgy to be what it is: the
common action (litourgia) of all, in which
a. the whole community is gathered in one place at one
time,
b. worshiping God in an understandable language,
c. with well-prepared and well-executed reading, singing
and serving,
d. with adequate educational preparation and preaching,
e. with all the faithful participating regularly in the
mysteries (sacraments) of salvation.
We turn to the most eminent hierarchs, the devoted
pastors, the dedicated teachers and all of the faithful
brothers and sisters in Christ for their blessings and prayers
for the Orthodox Christian Education Commission. We ask
their sincere collaboration in our common task of
education in the Church. And we pray with the Apostle
Paul to the Risen Lord “that we may be filled with the
knowledge of His will, in all spiritual wisdom and
understanding, to lead a life worthy of the Lord, bearing
fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of
God” (Colossians 1:1-10).
(Continued from page 236)
California and Washington began one month later. Through
this intensive and extensive coverage of the parishes, the
curriculum of the OCEC was introduced, parish data col-
lected, suggestions and comments received on the needs and
problems of the church schools, and a basis established for
future contacts and training conferences.
Since its creation the DRE has expanded its publications
program with three basic types of religious education
materials: (1) a series of short tracts on the liturgical cycles
of Great Lent and Holy Week, the Life of Christ, and as-
pects of the spiritual life (fasting, prayer, Communion, Con-
fession, etc.). The Department of Missions is planning
additional titles for this series, (2) a series of pamphlets for
adults and children on the sacraments, major liturgical
services for the feasts and Paschal cycle, and topics of
general interest on Orthodox faith and life, (3) a series
entitled “The Orthodox Handbook” in four volumes:
Doctrine, Worship, Bible and Church History, and Spiritu-
ality, plus other small books and resources for parents,
teachers, pastors and other interested adults on subjects
related to education and Christian living. All of these
materials provide a varied supplementary program to the
OCEC basic curriculum and offer a wealth of resources for
adult education in the parish.
Finally, the DRE has been instrumental in furthering the
development of a sound youth program in the Church, and
has recently appointed Father John Matusiak to serve as a
Youth Coordinator to provide resources and to assist parish
youth groups, Jr. FROC groups, and those who have no
formal program for youth to develop educational, mission-
All-Parish Conference, sponsored by the DRE, focused on Accent on Youth at St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
ary and spiritual programs and activities. Throughout the
country, many youth retreats have been held during the
past decade which have led to a new spiritual and liturgical
awareness among the youth of the Church. The DRE
sponsored a year-long Orthodox Youth Survey in coopera-
tion with the Youth Research Center in Minneapolis to dis-
cover the needs, problems and concerns of Orthodox young
people. Several significant findings resulted from the survey
of over 500 high school students, among which was the fact
that the population of Orthodox youth surveyed on social
and religious issues did not differ at all in their thinking and
concerns from the American population of church youth as
a whole. Serious difficulties were noted as a result of life in
a pluralistic society, with religious relativism scoring high
among the young people. Ethnicity and problems of foreign
languages tended to result in confused responses, based up-
on divided loyalties between parents’ attitudes and contem-
porary life situations, e.g., a foreign language in services was
often seen as a good thing or as something that must be
used for the sake of the older generation, but the vast
majority of teens admitted to little or no understanding
whatever when such a language was used in the Church.
Such problems will be the focus of seminars and workshops
at the first Orthodox Youth Rally, which is being planned
as the culmination of the Orthodox Church in America’s
participation in the bicentennial celebration of the United
States for July 14-17, 1976, at St. Tikhon’s Seminary and
Monastery. The Rally, which will focus on “Our Heritage
and Our Mission,’ will be a gathering point for all Orthodox
youth in America to plan for the future life and mission
of the Church in America.
 DEVELOPMENT OF CHURCH MUSIC
From the beginnings of the Alaska mission — where to
this day the native peoples sing the services to their own
distinctive chants and melodies — music has played an im-
portant role in Orthodox life in America and in the Church’s
mission to America. For example, Bishop Vladimir (1880-
v (
1891) while en route to the United States, organized a
choir and after his arrival he set his own English translation
eg
of the services to the common chant of the Russian liturgi- de v
cal tradition — all this so that new worshippers might be
attracted by the beauty of the services.
With Bishop Vladimir came Professor Paul Zaichenko, a AQ & ™~RA ~w ® >
Orthodox America’s first professional choirmaster. After
directing for three years in San Francisco, he was sent by
Bishop Nicholas, Bishop Vladimir’s successor, to Minneap-
olis to organize a parish school. There he organized the first
parish choir and later served also as Professor of Music at
the Missionary School. Even in distant Minneapolis he
1st Choir in Minneapolis, 1891, with Professor Paul Zaichenko.
would from time to time be summoned by Bishop Nicholas
to accompany him on pastoral visits — to Chicago for the This interest in music extended also to the parish level.
Columbian Exposition, and even to Alaska — in order to Despite the Russian Revolution and the Great Depression,
organize the singing. parishes regularly would have a “professor” in charge of the
Episcopal interest in church music continued after the choir and the Russian school, and many could boast a
transfer of the diocesan see to New York. A boy’s choir was balalaika or string orchestra or even a marching band in
organized under the direction of Professor Gorokhov, with addition to the choir, large and well-rehearsed, with a wide
the financial assistance and active patronage of Mr. Charles repertoire of music for both church services and concerts.
R. Crane, the industrialist. Boys would be chosen on the Yet this approach to music in the parish, while often creat-
basis of talent from parishes throughout the East Coast to ing a wonderful esprit du corps, was not without its draw-
come to New York, where they lived in their own dormitory backs. What was good concert material was not always
and were trained both in music and in regular academic appropriate for church services; even a good imitiation of
subjects. The choir sang regularly in St. Nicholas Cathedral, Jaroffs Don Cossacks was not always conducive to worship.
but as its fame spread, it made public appearances elsewhere Signs of change can be noted in the decade following World
— including one before President Wilson at the White House War II — with Gretchaninoff’s Divine Liturgy No. 4, for
in 1915 — to introduce America to Russian liturgical music example: written in America and published in 1950 by the
at its best. San Francisco “R” Club, its quiet melodies and light texture
Boy’s Choir of New York at the White House, 1915.

240
are quite a contrast even to that great composer’s own early
works. This new attitude to church music can perhaps best
be summed up in the question that Boris Ledkovsky, former
Professor of Music at St. Vladimir’s Seminary, would ask on
seeing a piece of liturgical music: “Is it churchly?”
Also important in altering the musical “style” of Ortho-
dox America in the post-war era was the shift to the use of
English as a “liturgical language.” In the preceding decades,
church choirs had sometimes sung in English, but little
music was published specifically for Orthodox Church use.
Choirs would rely on handwritten copies of their director’s
own adaptations or else on music released in “‘octavos” by
commercial publishing firms — music adapted for English
from the Russian choral repertoire, chiefly for use as
“anthems” in Protestant worship. This situation began to
change in the late 1940’s. An early milestone was Father
Andrew Glagolev’s Divine Liturgy book, published by the
FROC in 1948. A very singable collection of familiar Rus-
sian music, it became the standard setting for English litur-
gies for many parishes throughout the nation for the next
twenty years. Much pioneering work in English-language
music was done by the Antiochian Archdiocese. In 1950 it
published its “Three Liturgies,’ prepared by Professor
Michael P. Hilko, which contained one setting of the
Liturgy in English, and since that time it has continued to
publish English-language music in both Byzantine and
Russian melodies, with volumes arranged by Father James
C. Meena, Father Michael G. H. Gelsinger and Father
Gregory Abboud. Another pioneer in the use of English was
Metropolitan Fan Noli of the Albanian Archdiocese, whose
1951 Eastern Orthodox Hymnal, containing music of the
Russian tradition for Liturgy, Vespers, Matins and other
occasions, was followed in 1959 by a Byzantine Hymnal,
which contained Byzantine melodies as well as Russian.
Also to be mentioned is Bishop Dositheus of the Russian
Patriarchal Church, who published three original English-
language settings of the Liturgy between 1957 and 1959.
More recently several national jurisdictions have pub-
lished music of their respective traditions: the Roman Epis-
copate (ca. 1963), the Ukrainian (1966), and the Carpatho-
Russian (1974).
Seminary
St. Theodosius Parish Choir, 1932.
Within the Orthodox Church in America, the very musi-
cal Soroka family — Father Igor, Father Leonard, Father
Vladimir and his son Leonard — has been publishing music
in English since the late 1950’s for the Divine Liturgy, the
marriage service, the Panikhida, Vespers, Matins and the
liturgical year. Published in a variety of formats, much of
this music is well-suited for use in congregational singing —
a noteworthy trend in church music in recent years that can
be noted also in Stephen P. Kopestonsky’s Panikhida setting
and in Chaplain Boris Geeza’s convenient edition of the Pre-
sanctified Liturgy. Music for the major liturgical cycles, in
five volumes, has been published since the 1960’s by Father
Nicholas Solak, Jr. In addition Father Dimitri Ermakov (in
his “Orthodox Notes’), Father Dimitri Ressetar, Father
Sergei Glagolev, Mr. John Sutko, Father Theodore Heckman
(especially in his bi-monthly subscription service) and others
have also made available large amounts of music in English
through less formal channels. Most recently, St. Vladimir’s
Seminary Press has begun a series of music publications, be-
ginning with Professor David Drillock’s Liturgy of the Pre-
sanctified Gifts and Father Heckman’s Feast of the Nativity
of our Lord. In these publications another trend in much
recent Orthodox church music can be noted: toward the
older chant traditions and to music from a variety of Ortho-
dox ethnic backgrounds. As Father Gelsinger noted in the
preface to his Orthodox Hymns in English, published in
1960 by the Antiochian Archdiocese: “‘Every tradition of
our Orthodox music should find a home in every parish in
America, for American Orthodoxy inherits the music of
every national Orthodox Church abroad.”
In recognition of the need for coordination of musical
efforts within the Orthodox Church in America, a Depart-
ment of Church Music was established in 1971. Its projects
include collections of existing music and publication of a
choir director’s handbook.
String Orchestra, 1907.
241
 THE STANDING CONFERENCE OF CANONICAL
Beginnings of Orthodox Cooperation
After the end of World War II, but more especially at the
end of the 1950’s, an increasing sense of Orthodox unity,
of the need for its expression, appeared on several levels:
that of education (cooperation on the development of a
common church school curriculum), campus work, clergy
fellowships, etc. Several meetings were held by the heads
and representatives of the major jurisdictions, the main pro-
ponents of cooperation and unity being from the very be-
ginning the Greek Archbishops Michael (+1958) and, after
him, lakovos; the late Antiochian Metropolitan Antony
Bashir (+1966) and the head of the Russian Metropolia,
Metropolitan Leonty (+1965).
All these preliminary efforts and investigations resulted
in the establishing in 1960 of the Standing Conference of
Orthodox Canonical Bishops in America. At a meeting held
at the Greek Archdiocese in New York City on March 15,
1960, twelve bishops representing ten Orthodox jurisdic-
tions adopted the following resolution:
PREAMBLE
In the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.
Behold how good and how pleasanta thing it is for brethren
to dwell together in unity. (Ps. 132:1)
For the last one hundred and fifty years the Orthodox
Church in America has been blessed with marks of divine
favor. Her beginnings in this country were humble. Planted
by a handful of missionaries in Alaska and nourished by
successive waves of immigration from Orthodox lands, she
is now a great and flourishing member of world Orthodoxy.
All of the faithful brought here the treasures of their na-
tional Orthodox traditions, so that the American Church
is the inheritor and custodian of the paradosis of the
Apostles, Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils. Fully inte-
grated in American society the Church is here to remain, to
grow, and to bear witness to the true faith. At the moment
when the United States assumes an always greater responsi-
bility in the world community, the presence of Orthodoxy
in America acquires a new significance and calls for better
forms to express her common testimony. By the mercy of
God our unity of faith has been preserved, but the time has
come to actualize this unity in all those fields in which a
common effort is required.
RESOLUTIONS
Therefore we, the hierarchs of the American Church,
have decided to establish a Standing Episcopal Conference
without reference to the civil laws, for the consideration and
resolution of common problems, the coordination of efforts
in matters of common concern, and the strengthening of
that unity which is the essence of Orthodoxy ...
... that a standing Commission of theologians and ad-
ministrators, representing the major hierarchs and appointed
by them, be delegated to supervise the work of the ap-
242
ORTHODOX BISHOPS IN AMERICA
pointed Commissions, provide appropriate items for the
agenda of the meetings, and keep the hierarchs informed of
all matters relative to the interests of the Conference and its
activities ...
... To interrelate the work of the various committees
appointed and serve as a common clearing house of informa-
tion, a General Secretariat shall be established to work in
close coordination with the Standing Commission of theo-
logians and administrators established above, with an office
and budget to be established by the hierarchs.
The next three sessions held respectively on June 8, 1960,
at the Greek Archdiocese, on October 20, 1960, at the Syr-
ian Archdiocese and on January 24, 1961, at the Russian
Metropolia, were devoted almost entirely to the discussion
of the general structure of the Conference, and resulted in
the acceptance of its Constitution at the 4th session. Arch-
bishop Iakovos was elected President, Archbishop Ireney the
Treasurer, and The Right Rev. Archimandrite Firmilian
Ocokolijch the Secretary General of the Standing Confer-
ence. The name of the Standing Commission of theologians
and administrators was changed to that of the Study and
Planning Commission and the following members were ap-
pointed to it: The Very Rev. Alexander Schmemann, The
Rev. George Bacopoulos, The Rev. Paul Schneirla, and The
Rev. John Meyendorff.
The next four sessions focused on the content of the
work of SCOBA. These were held on August 8, 1961, at the
Serbian Cathedral, New York City, on January 24, 1962, at
the Albanian Diocese in Boston, Massachusetts, on May 17,
1962, at the Greek Archdiocese, New York City, and on
November 15, 1962, at St. Vladimir’s Theological Seminary
in Crestwood, New York. If the first four sessions were
spent in the difficult work of shaping the Conference itself,
of defining its goals and methods, at the next sessions the
constructive work began, the results of which can be sum-
marjzed as follows:
In the field of Orthodox religious education:
— The Conference adopted the Orthodox Christian Edu-
cation Commission, founded in 1956, as its educational
agency. This commission is to centralize, coordinate and
plan, on a pan-Orthodox basis, the work of religious educa-
tion. Financial support was given to the commission whose
Executive Secretary is Mrs. Sophie Koulomzin.
— The Orthodox Boy Scouts Commission was also given
official status and financial help.
— A Commission of College Work established for coordi-
nating and sueprvising the work of Orthodox student groups
in universities and colleges.
In the field of Ecumenical relations:
— It was decided that all Orthodox Churches should have
a united representation in the National Council of Churches
and other ecumenical agencies. The Study and Planning
Committee first served as the Ecumenical Commission of
the Standing Conference to centralize and coordinate all re-
lations between the Orthodox Church in America and the
non-Orthodox confessions and groups. Later, this Commis-
sion was expanded to include additional theologians from
the Orthodox Theological Society to serve on the various
consultations with the non-Orthodox.
In the field of Military Chaplaincy:
—A special united Committee on Chaplaincy was ap-
pointed to coordinate the work of Orthodox Chaplains in
the USA armed forces
In the field of Orthodox cooperation.,
—A special Committee on Clergy Fellowships was ap-
pointed to coordinate the work of the various Orthodox
clergy associations, thus strengthening Orthodox units and
the links between the Standing Conference and the local
Orthodox parishes.
In spite of its rather informal and clearly only consulta-
tive character, the Conference — for the first time since
canonical unity in America was broken in 1920 — projected
a witness of unity, a desire for closer contact and common
action. In several areas, the Orthodox of America began to
receive united guidance, including a set of “Ecumenical
Guidelines” for relations with the non-Orthodox. While or-
ganized in ethnic jurisdictions, some related to their Mother
Churches abroad, some de facto independent, the Orthodox
Church was taking purely pragmatic and consultative — but
still real — steps towards unity. It became a symbol and a
hope for all those who were consciously working towards a
united Orthodoxy in America in accordance with the Ortho-
dox understanding of the Church and in agreement with the
holy canons.
Attempts Towards Union
Unfortunately the Conference found no support what-
soever from the Mother Churches beyond the seas. It did
make two serious attempts to convince them that action
was necessary. On March 30, 1965, it accepted the report
of its Committee on Unity which proposed to transform
the SCOBA into “the canonical center of American Ortho-
doxy” by having it petition all the autocephalous churches
to be officially recognized as the “Holy Synod of the
Orthodox Church in America,” with the Exarch of the Ecu-
menical Patriarch as ex officio president of the Synod and
with each national jurisdiction represented on the Synod by
one Bishop. The representatives of the Moscow Exarchate
and the Bulgarian Church voted against the project, demand-
ing a reconciliation between the Russian Metropolia and
its Mother Church as a prerequisite. One may assume that
other Churches — the Serbian, the Romanian, the Bulgarian
and probably the Antiochian would also eventually have
objected to the transfer of their jurisdiction to a Synod
headed by the Greek Archbishop. The project was even-
tually shelved.
In May 1968, another more modest attempt (also op-
posed by Moscow and Bulgaria) was made by the Confer-
ence. By majority vote, it was decided to send three repre-
sentatives to the then forthcoming Pan-Orthodox Confer-
ence in Geneva, with the mission to initiate a discussion
with all the Mother Churches towards the formation of a
united Orthodox Church in America. In October 1968,
however, Archbishop Iakovos informed the members of
the Conference that the Ecumenical Patriarchate had found
it impossible to place the issue of American unity on the
agenda of the Geneva Conference.
The Chairman, Archbishop lakovos, who committed
much energy and dedication to these projects, then held a
special meeting of SCOBA on May 18, 1970, which ad-
dressed to the autocephalous Orthodox Churches of the
world two letters proposing the immediate gathering of a
Pan-Orthodox meeting “for the purpose of granting per-
mission for the creation of a Provisional Provincial Synod
of the Canonical Orthodox Hierarchs in America. “The
Synod would then “study the possibility of creating a Pan-
Orthodox (in character) Autocephalous Orthodox Church
of America, named and established by the Mother Church
(presumably — Constantinople, J. M.), and would be the
only Autocephalous Church in America” (text in Archi-
mandrite Serafim, Quest for Orthodox Unity in America,
New York, 1973, pp. 152-155). If one excludes the strange
accusation found in Archbishop Iakovos’ letter, according
to which Moscow and the OCA “‘will seek the gradual coer-
cion of others or the actual subjection to them of all Ortho-
dox Churches in America” (ibid., p. 154), the Chairman of
SCOBA was making a last minute attempt to salvage the
projects debated earlier by the conference. Certainly, even
at this last minute a Pan-Orthodox meeting on the situation
in America (provided it included the newly established auto-
cephalous Church) would have been a welcome opportunity
for all and would perhaps have given Constantinople the
possibility to exercise some leadership by providing the
American jurisdictions with some constructive guidance.
Unfortunately, the opportunity was missed once more by
Constantinople. In July 1970, Archbishop Iakovos presided
at the Convention of the Greek Archdiocese and invited
Metropolitan Ireney to be present as a guest (which he did
at the opening session). The Convention made a last attempt
at suggesting a more constructive attitude to Constantinople:
it requested its own “autonomy” and the authorization to
promote English as a liturgical language. Both requests were
flatly rejected by a letter of Patriarch Athenagoras I. The
Greek Archdiocese was to remain ethnic and tightly depen-
dent upon the Patriarch of Constantinople.
In the following years, no significant change occurred
in the structure of SCOBA. The autocephalous Ortho-
dox Church in America was officially recognized by the
Patriarchs of Moscow, Georgia, Bulgaria, and de facto by
Serbia; by the autocephalous churches of Poland and
Czechoslovakia; the autonomous churches of Finland and
Japan. Only the Greek-speaking churches issued statements
of non-recognition, following the leadership of Constanti-
nople, but without ever breaking sacramental communion
and fellowship. The Church of Romania adopted a wait-and-
see attitude.
 The consistent progress of the autocephalous Orthodox
Church in America is a sufficient and obvious proof that
the Act of 1970 was a decisive step towards making Ortho-
doxy a truly permanent missionary presence in America.
The criticisms which it encountered were provoked not by
any canonical or ecclesiological considerations, but by the
fear that the “phyletistic” (or ethnocentric) structure of
the existing “jurisdictions” would henceforth be decisively
challenged by a canonical and healthy American Church,
which, at the same time, would be fully open to the preser-
vation of all valid national customs and traditions of the
various Orthodox immigrant groups. While fulfilling its
clear and unchallengeable mission, the autocephalous Ortho-
dox Church in America has repeatedly stated its readiness
to participate in any discussions, any negotiations, and any
form of furthering Orthodox unity. It believes that SCOBA
can remain the forum where these initiatives can take place,
if only its other members so desire.
Father John Meyendorff
CAMPUS COMMISSION
A special area of the Church’s ministry is that which is
geared toward the needs and sensitivities of college and
university students and professors. Since the 1940's, pockets
of on-campus activity — notably the Columbia University
“Orthodox Christian Fellowship” and the “New England
Federation of College Orthodox Students’? (NEFCOS) —
had emerged under local inspiration and leadership. In
1965, realizing the need to coordinate and expand such
activities, the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox
Bishops in America established its Campus Commission.
The Greek Archdiocese assumed the initial burden of
financial and organizational support, augmented by periodic
donations from the other member “jurisdictions.” James
Couchell, a graduate of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School
of Theology, was named Executive Secretary. Operating on
a small budget, Mr. Couchell began work in four broad
areas: (1) establishment and maintenance of an office which
would provide organizational, programming and communi-
cations assistance to on-campus Orthodox Christian Fellow-
ships (“OCFs’’); (2) on-site promotion of an increasing
number of campus-based OCFs through extensive travels
across North America; (3) urging increased regional activities
(such as retreats), culminating in a summer North American
Conference; and (4) publication of a quarterly, Concern
magazine, which would provide varied selections of litera-
ture, theology, graphic arts, political and social commentary
geared to a university-level audience.
The thrust was well-aimed, and the activist-minded stu-
dent generation of the late 1960’s responded with convic-
tion. A pan-ethnic circle of advisors and assistants gathered
around the New York office, with continuous input from
nearby St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary.
Across the United States and Canada — especially in such
centers as New York, Montreal, Chicago, San Francisco and
Los Angeles — dynamic Pan-Orthodox groups emerged
which became focal-points for a renewed exploration by
244
students of the relationship between Man and God, and of
its implications in human society. Contacts among the
various groups expanded, culminating in a series of North
American Conferences — Oberlin, Ohio, 1968; Lake Forest,
Illinois, 1969; Detroit, Michigan, 1970; Brookline, Massa-
chusetts, 1971, etc. Concern grew in stature and subscrip-
tions as the only magazine of its kind in North America.
Other areas of involvement began to take shape, such as a
1968 “Middle East Seminar” and the formation of an
“Orthodox Peace Fellowship” in New York during the
height of the Vietnam conflict.
With the resignation of Mr. Couchell following Confer-
ence *71, the responsibilities of the Executive Secretary
went to another graduate of Holy Cross, Paul Costopoulos.
Sharing the editorship of Concern with Mr. Serge
Schmemann, Mr. Costopoulos embarked upon a vigorous
program to extend and improve the foundation laid during
the preceding years. The network of campus-based OCFs
was codified, a Campus Guide to College Work was pub-
lished (edited by Mr. Costopoulos together with Boris Nico-
loff), and a successful Conference ’72 was held in San Fran-
cisco, California.
By the autumn of 1972, however, a combination of fund-
ing difficulties together with increased inter-jurisdictional
conflicts made it impossible for the Campus Commission to
function on a full-time basis. Following Mr. Costopoulos’
resignation, an Executive Committee assumed the task of
continuing the Commission’s efforts on a volunteer basis.
In spite of a steady decline in local OCF activity together
with a declining subscription rate for Concern, the volun-
teers managed to organize Conference ’73 in Riverdale, New
York.
In August 1973, the Executive Committee offered the
position of Executive Secretary to Peter Mikuliak, the son
of an Orthodox priest and former Peace Corps Volunteer.
Funding was still inadequate, and there were no stationary
office facilities available. Still, Mr. Mikuliak attempted to
maintain the network of OCFs while developing contacts,
cooperation and support from among the various ethnic-
based Orthodox lay organizations. These groups were urged
to adopt campus outreach programs as a natural part of
their own activities. Regional coordination was stressed.
New student leadership was sought; thus the editorship of
Concern was placed in the hands of Denise Melligon, a
student at Barnard College. An expanded funding base was
also pursued from among both lay organizations and indi-
vidual “Friends of the Campus Commission.” Conference
‘74 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Conference ’75 at Lake
Geneva, Wisconsin, continued the tradition of annual North
American student encounters.
Presently the Campus Commission is operated from its
new office at St. Basil’s Academy in Garrison, New York.
Future success and effectiveness will depend upon both the
leadership of the Standing Conference of Bishops as well as
the dedicated commitment of local priests, laypersons and
students who understand the crucial importance of main-
taining the Church’s presence within the academic com-
munity.
Peter Mikuliak
Brookline , 1971.

ORTHODOX CAMPUS
COMMISSION

James Couchell, 1st Executive Secretary

of the Campus Commission.

Choir rehearsal for the liturgical services, Riverdale.

Riverdale, 1973.
icici induc

a
t
 MEMBERSHIP IN THE WORLD
Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the ecu-
menical movement has been one of the most significant
developments in the history of Christianity. It arose from a
new awareness that there can be only one Church of Christ,
not several; that Jesus Himself, before His passion, prayed
that “‘all may be one;”’ that the multiplicity of Christian
“churches” and denominations, all claiming to possess the
truth, but in fact competing with each other and accusing
each other of heresies and mistakes, constitutes a scandal,
especially in mission lands; that this division between those
who claim to be Christ’s disciples confuses the unbelievers
and is the greatest obstacle to the progress of Christianity in
an increasingly secularized and atheistic world.
The ecumenical movement was initially a purely private
initiative of predominately Protestant churchmen. Some of
them believed that in order to unite, Christians should
abandon doctrinal discussion and start cooperating in social,
charitable and educational fields; this was the “Life and
Work” movement. Others became aware that practical co-
operation was impossible without at least some basic agree-
ment in the faith and in the understanding of church order;
they initiated the “Faith and Order” movement. The two
had separate organizations and held separate conferences
and discussions.
By the time of World War I, both movements acquired
enough support to initiate together the idea of a “World
Council of Churches,” which would centralize and coordi-
nate all aspects of the ecumenical movement, and also in-
volve the responsibility of the “churches” themselves for its
future progress. Delayed by the war, the formation of the
World Council of Churches took place at its first assembly,
held in Amsterdam, Holland, in 1948.
The statutes of the new Council declared that member-
ship in the Council did not in any way imply that the
member-churches would modify any of their teachings. The
decisions taken or statements made by the various Council
assemblies and committees would have no authority over
the member-churches, but would be offered “for their study
and appropriate actions.”’ The member-churches were them-
selves the only judges of what is “‘appropriate.” In 1950,
the Central Committee of the Council, meeting in Toronto,
issued a declaration which specified further that the use of
the word “church” in the Council’s title (World Council of
Churches) did not imply that its members all acknowledged
each other as “churches” in the full sense of the word.
Thus, the Orthodox could be members without tampering
in any way with their belief that the Orthodox Church
alone is indeed the “one, holy, catholic and apostolic
church.”
Many eminent Orthodox churchmen actively partici-
pated in the ecumenical movement at the time when it was
only a private initiative. These include the Greek Metro-
politan Germanos of Thyateira (London), the Russian
Metropolitan Eulogius (Paris), the Bulgarian Exarch Stefan
(Sofia), the Syrian Archbishop Antony Bashir (America), as
246
COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
well as several theologians, including Father Sergius Bulga-
kov, Father Geroge Florovsky, the Greek professor Hamilcar
Alivizatos and others. However, at the time when the World
Council of Churches was formed (Amsterdam, 1948), the
cold war polarization limited Orthodox participation. Local
Orthodox Churches which took part in the Amsterdam
assembly were only the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Con-
stantinople, the Church of Greece, and the independent
Romanian Episcopate of America. Metropolitan Germanos
of Thyateria (Ecumenical Patriarchate) was, however, elect-
ed as one of the Council’s presidents. An inter-Orthodox
conference met in Moscow the same year, grouping all the
Orthodox churches of the iron curtain countries, as well as
representatives of the Patriarchate of Antioch, and de-
nounced the World Council as a “tool of American imperi-
alism.”
The former Russian Metropolia of America joined the
Council at the time of the Second Assembly, held in Evans-
ton, Illinois, in 1954. The recent arrival of Father George
Florovsky to the United States was undoubtedly instru-
mental in this act. As one of the leaders of the Council, and
a member of its Central and Executive Committees, Father
Florovsky could be regarded as the leading Orthodox ecu-
menist. In addition to Father Florovsky, Archbishop John
(Shahovskoy) of San Francisco, Father Vladimir Borichev-
sky, and Ivan M. Czap represented the Metropolia as dele-
gates at Evanston. Father Alexander Schmemann and
Professor S. S. Verhovskoy were present as advisors. In
Evanston, Archbishop Michael, head of the Greek Arch-
diocese of America, was elected as one of the WCC Presi-
dents and Archbishop John of San Francisco was appointed
to the Central Committee. The Third Assembly, held in
New Delhi, India, was marked by a sensational event: the
Patriarchate of Moscow joined the Council and was soon
followed by all the Orthodox Churches of the Communist
world. The American Metropolia was represented in New
Delhi by Archbishop John of San Francisco, Father John
Meyendorff, Ivan M. Czap and Rudolf Kunnet. Archbishop
John was re-elected for a second term on the Central Com-
mittee and Father Meyendorff was appointed to the Faith
and Order Commission, the main theological wing of the
Council. Father Meyendorff would eventually be elected
Vice-chairman and Chairman of the Commission. During the
New Delhi assembly, an initial but quite extensive discus-
sion was held between the representatives of the Russian
Church and the American Metropolia. Though inconclusive
on a practical level, the discussion prepared the ground for
the negotiations leading to autocephaly. At the Fourth
Assembly, held in Uppsala, Sweden, in 1967, the delegation
of the American Metropolia included Archbishop John of
San Francisco, Father Thomas Hopko, Professor S. Verhov-
skoy, and Ivan M. Czap. Archbishop Valerianof the Roma-
nian Diocese (holding separate membership in the Council
but now jurisdictionally affiliated with the Metropolia)
was elected to the Central Committee. Father John Meyen-
dorff was also present, but as an invited delegate of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate. During the assembly, Patriarch Unfortunately, the lack of preparation and of a united
German of Serbia was elected one of the Council’s Presi- and consistent Orthodox witness had made the Orthodox
dents. The assembly was an occasion for further contact — presence in the Council not as fruitful as it could have been.
more direct and more practical this time — between Metro- Orthodox delegates from totalitarian countries were unable
politan Nikodim of the Russian Church and the American to speak freely on some of the issues discussed at ecumeni-
representatives. cal meetings. As a result, the ecumenical movement tended
Between the assemblies, Archbishops John and Valerian,
to follow patterns of thought prevailing in Western Protes-
tantism since the 1960’s: secularism, relativism, the reduc-
the representatives of the American Church on the Central
tion of ecumenical action to participation in social causes
Committee, attended the regular annual meetings. Other
(some of them doubtful), and the acceptance of ideological
delegates participated in various commissions ofthe Council.
trends foreign to Christianity.
What can be said about the overall significance of Ortho-
This new situation should certainly not serve as an ex-
dox participation in the World Council of Churches? Since
cuse for withdrawal into isolationism. The Orthodox
1961, this participation was in fact massive: all the local
Church, being the ‘“‘Catholic’”? Church for all times and all
Orthodox took part and their combined delegations repre-
countries, must continue to witness to the truth of Christ
sented the biggest confessional block in the Council. The
whatever fads momentarily dominate the scene. The dele-
assemblies were occasions for meetings between the Ortho-
gates of the Orthodox Church in America will continue to
dox themselves, who seldom met each other otherwise. On
do so guided by the important Encyclical “On Christian
the other hand, the very claim of the Orthodox Church to
Unity,” published by the Holy Synod in 1973 — which
be the one, true Church already implies a responsibility
gives a relevant Orthodox critique of negative trends in
towards all those who seek that unity. Where else except in
contemporary ecumenism and provides a clear statement
the Orthodox faith can Christians of all denominations find
of the unchangeable Orthodox witness to the faith “once
unity in Christ? And if this is so, it is the duty of the Ortho-
delivered to the saints.”
dox to witness to this one truth in the ecumenical move-
ment — for without this, truth cannot find its fulfillment in Father John Meyendorff
unity.

OCA representative s to the WCC Assembly: Father Thomas Hopko, Archbishop John (Shahovskoy), Professor Verhovskoy, Archbishop
Valerian and Father Vasile Hategan, 1968.

247
 PARTICIPATION IN THE
The same Christian concerns which led to the formation
of the World Council of Churches motivated the individual
countries participating in the Council to establish councils
on the national level. In the United States, cooperative
movements among the Protestant churches, going back as
far as 1832, when the denominations formed the National
Sunday School Association, culminated in the formation of
the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. in
1950. The Orthodox Church in America along with several
other Orthodox Churches joined as charter members at that
time.
The National Council of Churches sees itself as providing
a platform for meaningful dialogue on issues of concern to
the member churches. Its deliberations and statements
therefore are merely advisory in nature and are not binding
on the churches. They are addressed to church members
for their thoughtful consideration and study.
Much of the most valuable work of the National Council
of Churches that goes on daily receives little publicity. The
public is more acquainted with statements the National
Council makes on controversial issues, many of them deal-
ing with our social problems. The Orthodox, among others,
have been the Council’s critics in this area. The Orthodox
position has been consistent, if not always vocal: that
wherever the theological differences between the Protestants
and Orthodox are too great and no consensus can be
reached, no pronouncements should be made. This refers to
such past issues as Responsible Parenthood (1961) and The
Church and the Public Schools (1963), a statement
prayer in the public schools. In this area Orthodox criticism
of the National Council was perhaps not vigorous enough,
although more recently a statement on abortion was not
accepted primarily because of the Roman Catholic and
Orthodox opposition to it.
While the Orthodox churches comprise one third of the
National Council of Churches’ membership, they have not
248
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
provided sufficient representation and financial backing to
make a serious impact. However, this should not be mis-
construed as meaning that the Orthodox presence goes un-
noticed. The Orthodox are and have been able to advocate
and provide leadership, most recently in the area of human
rights. It is also interesting to note that the National Council,
in its own study, has come to the conclusion that examining
social issues is but one of the twelve purposes of the Council,
and that perhaps the time has come to devote more atten-
tion to the other purposes — a direction that will be wel-
comed by the Orthodox.
Over the past twenty-five years, our Church has been
represented in the National Council of Churches by a few
dedicated clergy and laymen. Several of them, while repre-
senting our Church, attained responsible positions in the
Council. In the 1950’s, Father Georges Florovsky served as
one of its vice-presidents and Mr. Ralph Arkush was its
recording secretary. Mr. Ivan M. Czap served as chairman of
the Constitution and By-Laws Committee for a number of
years and was actively involved in the work of several other
Council committees. Mr. Paul M. Fekula and Mr. Walter
Bouquet were also active in the early years of its existence.
Among others who gave considerable time in representing
our Church were Fathers Schmemann and Meyendorff, Pro-
fessor Serge Verhovskoy and Miss Constance Tarasar. Since
the late 1960's, Mr. Constantine Kallaur and Father Vladimir
Berzonsky have been our active representatives. Mr. Kallaur
is now serving as chairman of the Constitution and By-Laws
of Committee and as a member of the Executive Committee;
and Father Berzonsky is a member of its Faith and Order
Commission. In this triennium, the Orthodox Church in
America delegation is headed by Bishop Valerian Trifa;
Other members include Fathers Sergei Glagolev, Dmitry
Grigorieff and Arthur Liolin.
Constantine Kallaur
 PARISH
The 1960’s and 1970’s have seen a growth of new
parishes unmatched since the decades of the Great Immigra-
tion. Reasons for the formation of these new parishes have
varied. In many cases geographic considerations — shifts of
population, particularly to the suburbs — have been impor-
tant. In a few cases, desire for proper canonical ties with
the Orthodox Church in America rather than continued
association with so-called “‘independent”’ parishes has been
the determining factor. In almost all cases, the goal has
been to establish an English-language parish, pan-ethnic in
its scope and appeal. In some cases, formation of a new
parish has been part of a coordinated regional plan, some-
times on a pan-Orthodox level. In other cases, it has been
the result of a spontaneous combustion of faith. Yet even
though the reasons — and combination of reasons — behind
the formation of these new parishes have varied, the results
show certain basic similarities: a rich, eucharist-centered
liturgical life, emphasis on education both for children and
adults, a mission orientation that encourages conversion to
Orthodoxy and testifies to the presence of the Church in
the community, and a generosity that extends beyond the
parish level to all aspects of the Church’s mission.
Three parishes formed in the 1950’s, sharing the same
spirit though separated from each other by thousands of
miles, helped set the pattern for the parishes of the 1960's.
Dallas
Sociologists have traced the movement of Eastern
Europeans in the United States through the larger cities of
the Northeast along the railroad tracks westward across the
continent, to places where jobs were plentiful. And where
immigrants settled, churches were built. Given this pattern,
we should expect the first of anew generation of parishes to
appear on the outskirts of a traditionally “Orthodox”
community. How, then, did it come about that the first of
our “new” parishes was begun in Dallas, Texas, in the heart
of the Baptist Bible Belt, far from the heartlands of Ortho-
doxy in America? The answer can only be found in the
compelling power of Orthodoxy itself, which draws men to
the truth regardless of sociological patterns. Three converts
to the faith, among them the present Bishop Dmitri
(Royster), in 1°54 converted a home to church use, as St.
Seraphim Eastern Orthodox Church. Its purpose was to
serve as an English-language mission, for people of all
national backgrounds. Funds were meager and numbers
small, but much was accomplished. Translations of the
services were made, lessons of instructions for those pre-
paring for Chrismation were prepared, a variety of mission
activities were supported, formation of a monastic com-
munity was encouraged. Membership has now grown to
over 150, but because of its continuing mission program to
Texas and the Southwest, the impact of the parish has been
far greater than its numbers would suggest.
DEVELOPMENT 1950 — 1975
Encino-Tarzana
The history of St. Innocent’s in Enzino-Tarzana begins
in 1954. Father Sergei Glagolev of Lorain, had written an
article in the FROC Journal pointing out the need for the
Orthodox Church to expand its mission into the suburbs
and to adopt English for use in the services. The article
came to the attention of a small multi-ethnic group that
was struggling to find some sort of Orthodox identity in
Southern California’s San Fernando Valley. Together they
persuaded the hierarchy of the necessity of such an under-
taking and the challenge was undertaken: of establishing a
new parish, with a mission to all Americans. Few prece-
dents existed for such an undertaking, and many practices
adopted at St. Innocent’s were criticized at the time as
“innovations.” Therefore, perhaps the best measure of St.
Innocent’s pioneering importance is the fact that what was
once “innovation” — use of English as the liturgical lan-
guage, regular communion, Lenten Presanctified Liturgies
in the evening, reading of the priest’s “quiet prayers”’ audi-
bly, use of a “pledge” system for offerings, adoption of the
“new’’ calendar, attendance of adults as well as children in
the church school — is now the norm for much of the
Orthodox Church in America. The road has not been an
easy one: in 1969 the church building for which all had
worked so hard was gutted by fire, and for three years,
during reconstruction, the parish led a nomadic existence.
Yet the parish has remained true to its original missionary
spirit. In the late 1950’s it helped to organize its sister pan-
Orthodox parish, St. Luke’s (Antiochian Archdiocese) in
Orange County; and, along with St. Luke’s, it has contrib-
uted to the establishment of new missions in Pasadena and
Oxnard, using its membership and associated priests as the
founding nuclei.
Woodside, New York
On Sunday, September 14, 1958, the 24 founding mem-
bers of St. John Chrysostom approached an unlandscaped
piece of property, adorned with a ramshackle house with
broken windows, on their way to the first Divine Liturgy of
their new parish. Nine months before, the same group had
been on their way to the basement of a private home to
meet with Father Joseph Kreta, a young priest serving the
needs of the English-speaking communicants of the Church’s
“Pro-Cathedral”’ in lower Manhattan. Together they ac-
cepted the task of establishing a parish in the distant
borough of Queens, a community heavily populated, but
without a church to serve the English-speaking faithful. The
establishment of the new parish exemplifies what ought to
be a natural process of development within every Ortho-
dox community. As in Psalm 23, “my cup runneth over,”
so the common life of joy in the Lord should spill over into
the surrounding communities in every major center of
Orthodoxy in America.
249
The Northeast
Before 1960, Orthodox parishes in the New Jersey area
were concentrated in the older ethnic communities of the
industrial cities, though the potential for development of an
American expression of Orthodoxy in the suburbs had al-
ready been shown by St. Anthony’s in Bergenfield, New
Jersey, a parish of the Antiochian Archdiocese, initially
organized in 1954 through the efforts of regional Metropolia
clergy with the blessing of Bishop Dimitry of Philadelphia.
Soon this situation was to change. Of the 23 parishes in the
New Jersey Deanery of the Orthodox Church in America,
twelve were established in the period 1960 to 1973. This
remarkable growth of new parishes began with the Church
of Christ the Saviour in Paramus, organized in 1960 under
the guidance of Father John Nehrebecki, then secretary of St. Anthony’s Orthodox Church, Bergenfield, New Jersey.

the New Jersey Deanery. Soon appointed pastor of the new

parish, Father John not only has developed the Church of
Christ the Saviour on a sound spiritual basis, but also, as
Dean of New Jersey since 1963, he has been instrumental
in the organization and coordination of parish development
throughout the area: Holy Trinity Orthodox Christian
Church in Dover, New Jersey, formed in 1964 by a group
of Orthodox Christians located miles from the nearest
Orthodox Church; Holy Resurrection Orthodox Church,
established in suburban Wayne in 1964 and now a dynamic
contributor to the spiritual life of the whole New Jersey
area; St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church in Wap-
pingers Falls, New York, formed in 1963 by a small group
of faithful assisted by Father George Timko, who recog-
nized the need for an English-language parish in the rapidly
expanding Mid-Hudson Valley region; Holy Transfiguration
Church in Pearl River-West Nyack, New York, formed in
1968 as a pan-Orthodox parish for growing Rockland
County; Church of the Holy Apostles in Garfield, New
Jersey, organized in 1969 by parishioners of Three Saints in
Garfield who wished to remain with the local American
Diocese; Orthodox Christian Church of the Annunciation
in Bricktown, New Jersey, formed in 1970 by a multi-
ethnic group eager for an English-language parish in New
Jersey’s Atlantic shore region; Church of the Holy Cross,

Christ the Saviour Church, Paramus, New Jersey.


Holy Resurrection Orthodox
organized in 1973 in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, in the Phila-
delphia suburban area.
Other new parishes in the New York-New Jersey Diocese
include: Rochester, New York’s, Saint John the Baptist
Church, established in 1964 with the counsel of the Dean,
Father Alexander Warnecke, as the first English-language
parish in the upstate area; St. Andrew’s Church in the Long
Island suburban community of Dix Hills, established with
the cooperation and assistance of Holy Trinity Church in
East Meadow, which, though founded in 1924, has regularly
shown the zeal that characterizes the “new” parishes; and
St. Mark’s in Bethesda, Maryland, established in 1972 after
a small group discussed with Father Joseph Kreta of Wood-
side, New York, the possibility of establishing an English-
language parish to serve Washington, D.C.’s expanding
suburban area.
Pennsylvania
The idea of a new Orthodox parish in Harrisburg, Penn-
sylvania, was first conceived in the 1950’s, during gatherings
of the local Orthodox Christian Fellowship, composed of
some twenty younger Orthodox Christians who had moved
into the state capital area. In 1962 the first concrete steps
were taken, and a new parish, Christ the Saviour Eastern
Orthodox Church, was organized: a church intended for
Orthodox Christians of all nationalities, that would use
chiefly the common language of all, English.
In Wilkes-Barre, with its large and still expanding Ortho-
dox population, a second parish was created in 1967.
en
ate
27
Church, Wayne, New Jersey.
Dedicated to the Holy Trinity, the large new parish wor-
shipped in temporary quarters until completion of its im-
pressive new “Church on the Hill” in 1969. Also in 1969,
a new mission parish, St. Andrew’s Church, was established
in Dallas, eight miles northwest of Wilkes-Barre.
St. Stephen’s parish in Philadelphia was formed in 1970
— at first as “The Committee of and for a Metropolia
Church” — out of a desire to maintain proper canonical
ties with the local Church in America. Its early struggles
have borne fruit with the parish’s beautiful new church
building, completed in 1974.
The Diocese of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania established
a systematic program for development of mission parishes
in areas of eastern Pennsylvania lacking Orthodox churches.
One such area was Delaware County. Advertisements in
local newspapers brought a very encouraging response, and
on September 30, 1973, the first Divine Liturgy was cele-
brated: Another new parish, St. Herman’s Church of Mor-
ton, Pennsylvania, had been established. In the same year
yet another mission parish named for St. Herman was
founded in Shillington, Pennsylvania, to serve the Reading
area. The third mission of the diocesan program, St. Mark’s
Orthodox Mission, was established on July 28, 1973, to
serve the Bucks-Montgomery County area. Beginning as the
Doylestown American Orthodox Mission, it now ministers
to more than 60 families of many ethnic backgrounds. St.
Mark’s also promotes the mission of Orthodoxy by sponsor-
ing a weekly radio broadcast, “The Hour of Orthodoxy,”
the first regular weekly Orthodox religious program in
OLN)
 ENGR
Holy Trinity Church, Wilkes-Barre, Pa., Consecration Ceremonies,
English anywhere in the country. Instrumental in the forma-
tion of all three of these mission parishes has been St.
Tikhon’s Monastery and Seminary: Father Vladimir Bori-
chevsky, Dean of the Seminary, serves as temporary pastor
of St. Mark’s, and the other two missions have been served
during their formative periods by clergy from the Monastery.
The Diocese of Pittsburgh and West Virginia also saw the
establishment of new parishes in the 1960’s: All Saints in
Indiana, Pennsylvania, in 1965; and Holy Resurrection in
Belle Vernon, Pennsylvania, begun in 1964 with the co-
operation and encouragement of Holy Trinity Church in
neighboring Charleroi and of its pastor, Father Valdimir
Soroka, officially organized in 1966, and blessed with its
own church building in 1969.
The Midwest
The Cleveland, Ohio, area has a continuing, often sys-
tematic development of new parishes since the early 1960's.
The first to be established was Holy Trinity Church in
Parma, in Cleveland’s southern tier of suburbs, founded in
1963 with the support of its “mother parish,’ St. Theodosius
Cathedral in central Cleveland. The next successful venture
was St. Andrew’s in the eastern suburb of Maple Heights,
established after much careful deliberation as a sister church
by St. Michael’s on Cleveland’s east side, and incorporating
the small older parish of the Dormition in Bedford. With a
remarkable spirit of cooperation, St. Michael’s handled all
the financial aspects of the building of St. Andrew’s. Most
recently in the Cleveland area, St. Nicholas Church has been
Day
1969.
established in Painesville to serve the distant eastern sub-
urban area (1974).
Other new parishes in the Midwest include: Holy Resur-
rection Church in Chicago’s suburban Prospect Heights
(1970), Holy Resurrection Church in Southfield, Michigan,
a Detroit suburb (1971), and Christ the Saviour Church in
Indianapolis, Indiana, formed in 1972 as a pan-Orthodox
English mission.
The West
An important locus of parish expansion in the last
decades has been the Los Angeles area, in southern Califor-
nia. St. Seraphim Church was initially established as part of
a systematic mission program in 1969, by Los Angeles’
Holy Virgin Mary Cathedral, and became a parish in 1971.
More recent are St. Herman’s Church in Oxnard and St.
John Chrysostom Church in Pasadena, formed during the
height of the 1974 energy crisis by parishioners who had
been attending St. Innocent Church in Tarzana, some 30
miles away and now rapidly increasing in membership.
Elsewhere in the West, a parish in Littleton, Colorado,
was formed in 1972. It is the first church to bear the name
of St. Herman of Alaska. In 1974, Sts. Constantine and
Helen Church was organized in Colorado Springs, Colorado,
the first Orthodox parish in that part of the state. In the
San Francisco Bay area, St. Michael the Archangel American
Orthodox Mission Church was formed in Walnut Creek,
California, in 1974. Finally, in 1975, an English-language
mission, named for St. John of Damascus, was begun for
the greater San Diego area.
A living room transformed for worship (see “be-
fore’’ photo, page 256). St. John Chrysostom
Church, Pasadena, California, organized 1974.

Christ the Saviour Eastern Orthodox Church, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, November 1974.

[
ICR

PP ee
EAfe.
The annual Epiphany ceremony of the
blessing of water, Miami, Florida.

38 Cubans are chrismated with sponsors from

Christ the Saviour parish, Miami, Florida.

Boys retrieve cross in Miami lake.

Members of Puerto Rican Mission

have water blessed for homes.
 Florida Orthodox Deanery
Russian Orthodox settlement in Florida had a much
later start than other sections of the country, yet it addsa
colorful chapter to the ‘history of the Orthodox Church in
America. Adventurous young men, seeking employment
and fulfillment of ideals in experimental farming and com-
munal life, visualized “‘Russian villages” springing up in the
Florida wilderness.
One hearty family in 1910 traveled from Argentina over
the Andes to Chile, next to Peru, stopping a few years to
work on the Panama Canal, then under construction, and
ended by settling in Alabama on poor farm land. Neverthe-
less, they managed to bring over alk their relatives still in
Russia. Another group of Russian tsarist officials, stranded
during the Russian revolution, banded with the Ala-
bama Shiskins to experiment in farming in the Everglades of
South Florida. The well-known names of today in Florida
education, society, politics and community action—Shiskin,
Virrick, Sakhnovsky and Pushkin — struggled in the snake
and alligator-ridden, often flooded lands of the Everglades.
The land yielded well, but the elements destroyed through
flood, draught, insects and hurricanes. The white collars of
the past proved not to be the best farmers and eventually
the Russian village of the Everglades disbanded for city life.
The Orthodox Church did not exist for these early set-
tlers, though the services of a‘retired priest, Father Basil
Fekula of far-off Daytona Beach, were available from time
to time. Attempts to organize a parish in the Miami area
met with little success in the early 1940’s: in and out of
borrowed Episcopal churches, division into ethnic factions,
the foreclosing on the ill-fated St. John’s Church and civil
suit that followed and the opening of the Exile Parish of
St. Vladimir in 1946 did little to attract the majority of
Orthodox in the area.
The first parish of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic
Church was successfully organized by Rev. Cornelius
Svigoon and followers in 1951. This parish of Sts. Peter and
Paul became the hub of new activity and growth in the area.
The warm weather all year round, the natural beauty and
the beaches and the all important factor that there existed
an Orthodox Church nearby, attracted more and more
tourists and retirees, many eventually relocating in the
South Florida areas.
As time went by and travel to one southern church be-
came a hardship, we find faithful banding together and
opening new parishes in the neighboring cities: St. Nicholas
in Fort Lauderdale in 1961, again organized by Father Cor-
nelius Svigoon, and Three Saints Church in Hollywood,
organized by Father Vladimir Lilikovich in 1962. Christ the
Saviour Parish of North Miami was organized in 1961 bya
group of faithful and their pastor, Rev. George Gladky, as a
parish to serva all nationalities, and it began the tedius task
of seeking out Orthodox not being serviced, Orthodox (like
our earlier settlers) that ““‘bowed out” of the picture and
into history, especially the un-churched. The missionary
arm of the parish stretched forth in all directions to foster
new parishes: on the west coast, with Holy Trinity Parish in
St. Petersburg in 1964 and St. Olga Chapel in Alva in 1964
School bus used to gather parishioners
for St. Vladimir's Church, Miami, Florida.
(recently reorganized in more central St. Myers in 1975);
St. George Parish in Central Florida-Orlando in 1969 and
St. James Mission in Stuart in 1973. Additional parishes
appeared in the fast growing Florida Deanery in Titusville,
St. Simeon’s Parish, organized in 1969 by Rev. Michael
Karas and in Delray Beach, St. Herman’s, organized in 1974
by the Rev. Myron Hill.
Missionary work steadily continues with periodical serv-
icing of the faithful in Key West, Winter Haven, Lakeland,
Daytona Beach and wherever “two or three are gathered”
in His name. Churches have been temporarily assembled in
Episcopal churches, halls, garages, homes, tents, and even
in funeral homes. Bright Week of the Orthodox Church is
celebrated in different communities each day, this being
their only Pascha. And what a joyous day it is for those far
from regular church buildings and activity!
Work among other national groups has also been con-
ducted by Christ the Saviour Parish. Much time has been
dedicated to making available in Spanish the necessary
materials, music and information needed in working with
the very large Cuban and Hispanic population of South
Florida. Services, classes and visitations have brought many
to be confirmed in the Orthodox faith—38 on one occasion.
Because of the great potential for the growth of Ortho-
doxy not only in Florida but throughout the South, an ex-
tensive study is being conducted by the Dean of the Florida
Deanery and by the Department of Missions, directed to-
ward the establishment of a southern diocese of the Ortho-
dox Church in America, to provide a focus for the Church’s
mission in that neglected part of the nation. Preliminary in-
vestigations have shown definite possibilities for such work
in Houston, San Antonio, and Paris, Texas; Little Rock, Ar-
kansas; Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee, Richmond, Vir-
ginia; Durham, North Carolina; Atlanta, Georgia, Birming-
ham, Alabama; New Orleans and Baton Rouge, Louisiana;
Jacksonville, Florida; and Oklahoma City and Tulsa, Okla-
homa. A projected survey of established parishes to deter-
mine which of their parishioners have relocated elsewhere
may reveal the existence of groups in other localities as well.
bhoN nN
 A makeshift altar in the living room, Pasadena, California. A converted chapel, Doylestown, Pennsylvania.

Those ‘Wilderness Years’’ of a New Parish

They counted themselves fortunate and indeed they were, those who gathered in the living room of the leading couple’s
home. Together with others known to be Orthodox Christians living in the same general location, they held a vision in common, and
they inspired one another with the image of the Orthodox Church that they conceived as a spiritual center for themselves, their
children and potential parishioners who were to find Christ in their neighborhood temple.
The time for many of the churches we still call “new” was the placid, optimistic years after World War II. The Eisenhower
period was a time of economic prosperity, of new homes being built for the returning veterans. The Orthodox American G.I. found a
job, married and moved away from the inner city neighborhood of his parents. Often his wife was not Orthodox by birth or back-
ground. He who had taken his vest-pocket prayer book with him throughout those traumatic four years which changed his life outlook
hoped to find a way to express his gratitude to God for all He had seen him through; how better than to labor for a church like the
one of his childhood?
He maintained his membership in the parish where he had been baptized and married, but in the new suburban community
the drive each Sunday was a chore, much less several times each week for feast day vigils and meetings of the church council. He and
others like him who lived in the new location came together to lament their distance from downtown and decided to do something
about building a new church.
An important ingredient that the returning veteran needed if he were to struggle for the erection of an Orthodox Church was
a secure self-awareness not possessed by his older brothers and sisters, whose concern was to assimilate to the stereotyped American
image, to divest themselves of all that was not a part of main-stream America — and, first of all, of the Church, the very symbol of an
Old World heritage. The founder of a new parish not only knew he was an American, he had proven it by offering to lay down his life
for his country. No need for him to deny his faith or heritage; an Orthodox Christian could be American and indeed was, in his person.
A new pride in one’s self-awareness came about in the assimilated, secure second generation of immigrants’ children.
Just the desire to have a new parish is insufficient for its realization. Genuine church expansion is not merely adding onto the
facilities of a parish but envisioning the Church as all the people in a region who require holiness in their lives. Growth of new parishes
ought to be as natural a process as cell division is for multiplying simple living organisms, which split the nucleus so that two beings
exist where formerly there was but one. Normal, perhaps; but for church multiplication, not quite so simple. We have as yet no com-
monly accepted pattern for the coming into being of new parishes.
A local parish has no fixed number of people above which it becomes necessary to organize a new parish. Rare is the parish
with a missionary arm for developing new church groups. On the contrary, it is the older parishes which often regard the fledgling
parish as a challenge to its own health. Often they become protective and defensive, fearful of the “invasion” into their territory,
cautious lest the new parish wean away “good” parishioners. (Only the “good” are likely to dare the difficult, pay the taxing price,
and take up the challenge, for only they have a thirst for spiritual things sufficient to take up the struggle.)
For each of our successful new parishes created in the past few decades, there have been several attempts that have failed. For
a well-rounded evaluation of parish growth it is not enough to analyze the successful new ones; we should search out the causes of
failure in those still-born or in the fledglings that never matured.
No other factor is as important as the degree of commitment ‘of the founders. Many are they who bleat, “It would be nice
if we had a church nearby.” Like the barnyard animals in the child’s tale of the Little Red Hen, they encourage, but she alone labored.
All would like to have a share in the vision. Men especially delight in drawing up by-laws and statutes, which costs little; too few, how-
ever, are they who are willing to pay any price or bear any burden. Without at least one who demands to know ‘“‘What must we do to
have a church?” nothing at all will happen to incarnate the vision.

256
 Auditorium Stage, Florida A renovated barn, Littleton, Colorado.

— temporary quarters and a feeling intimacy

After the vision and the decision, nearly every gathering of the new parish founders comes to realize that to grow, they will
have to seek the assistance and support, if possible, of the local bishop, the deanery clergy and existing parishes. Certainly, they re-
quire a pastor compatible with their vision. They will also reach out to all in their immediate area who are Orthodox Christians, irre-
gardless of ethnic background. They do so by advertising in the mass media and deciding early either to use English exclusively in all
worship or to try to learn as many liturgical languages as are in use by the parishioners.
The advertisement in the local newspaper welcomes all to worship with them in some temporary quarters: it may be a bank,
a hall, school gymnasium or civic building not used on Sundays, or a Protestant chapel “baptized” for use each Sunday, with icons on
tripods, sandbox candle holders and collapsible altar and oblation tables. People who had done nothing but stand in pews now are
setting up folding chairs, taking collections, greeting visitors, perking coffee and distributing bulletins. The choir struggles along
through the whole ring-binder of newly xeroxed music, enthusiastic and undaunted by mistakes.
These are the golden years that become cherished memories. In order to increase church attendance one must communicate
the importance of Orthodox Christianity, and to do this one must first learn the faith himself. Prayer books, catechisms, church his-
tory and doctrinal materials are read and passed on. If one learns best by doing, here in the temporary quarters one “does” the liturgy
with the celebrant by becoming literally a part of it all.
Members of such young parishes are in a real sense like the Hebrew children in the wilderness years wandering behind Moses,
having left the security of Egypt and not at all sure where they are heading, trusting in the Lord to guide them. Just as the portable
tent of meeting lacked the splendor of the future Temple in Jerusalem, so the meager plywood altar and tables of preparation, the
icons on hinged tripods and sandbox candle holders are humble compared to the lavish gilded church articles that eventually accumu-
late, appropriately donated by prominent families. Yet those “wilderness years” are cherished forever. Long after the ground-breaking,
the building construction, the first Divine Liturgy in the new church, the consecration, the mortgage burning, the remembrance of
those green years lingers.
What to parishioners talk of when they gather for meetings years later in those expansive parish halls with their chromium
kitchens and terra cotta tile floors? Listen to those whose names are inscribed on bronze plaques as “founding members”’ and invari-
ably they sigh as they recall their nearness to the altar in those days, their feeling of participation as they watched the celebrant’s vest-
ing, preparation of the Holy Gifts and even the prayers of the anaphora. They remember how humbling an experience it is to learn the
faith that one thought he had always known, that he had recited by rote in “Russian school” and filed somewhere in the recesses
of his mind. They were not at all sure then about attending vespers regularly on Saturday evenings, or about frequent communion.
They enjoyed doing things all together as a family — praying, setting up the church, or receiving instructions. They recall the time
when each of them was truly needed . . . that Sunday when they had come to the new mission just to see what it offered, when the
father was asked to take the collection, or to put up candles, or else to stay and help put away the folding chairs. Mother took her turn
serving coffee after the liturgy, the boys served as altar boys or sang with their sisters in the choir.
Every serious new family of a mission soon learns the financial obligations of building a church. What so-called ‘‘established”’
churches carry as token contributors cannot be borne by a mission. Lack ofcash is an initial problem; lack of adequate collateral soon
takes it place, when a loan is needed for building.
Conflicting local traditions crop up, and it takes a subtle, wise pastor to handle liturgical problems, especially on the great
feast days. These, too, are part of the growing pains. Yet, the joys far outweigh any frustrations or emotional “pains.” Rarely is the
person who is involved in the life of a new parish left unchanged. He is transformed, transfigured. And who would exchange that ex-
Pperience for any y other on earth. Father Vladimir Berzonsky

~J
iw)1)
TOMOS OF AUTOCEPHALY

April 10 9 1970
 The Orthodox Church
CHAPTER VIII
1969-1977
The death of Metropolitan Leonty in May 1965S left the
Church without a self-evident candidate for the highest
hierarchical office. He was the last in the generation of “old
missionaries” who led the Church through the difficult
years of the crises and reconstruction. None of the Bishops
(and there were in 1965, 10 bishops, members of the Synod)
had his national stature, none had behind him fifty years of
uninterrupted service in our Church. Thus the situation was
potentially a dangerous one, with doors open for rivalries,
competition and factionalism. It is here, in this new situa-
tion, that the Church realized the crucial importance of her
new Statutes, with their clearly and precisely determined
procedure for the election of the Primate. In fact, one can
say that the Twelfth All-American Sobor will remain in the
history of the Church that successfully passed examination
by which our Church reached her maturity, proved to her-
self her capacity for a stable continuity in her life and
government.
The Twelfth All-American Council — 1965
When the Twelfth Council convened at Holy Virgin
Protection Cathedral in New York, September 22-23, 1965,
to elect a successor to the recently-departed Metropolitan
Leonty, the maturity of the Church in America was tested.
The Sobor met in a tense mood. It became clear immedi-
ately that the delegates were polarized between a strong
desire to elect an American-born bishop, to make the final
step towards “Americanization” and the equally strong
desire of the older clergy and laity to maintain the status
quo by electing one of the older bishops. This polarization
became evident in the first ballot. A substantial majority of
votes went to the only American-born Bishop Vladimir,
the head of the Japanese Church which at that time was still
in the jurisdiction of the Metropolia. Behind him, but still
with a good number of votes was the Archbishop of New
England Ireney, whom, after the death of Metropolitan
Leonty, the Synod of Bishops elected Locum Tenens of the
Metropolitan’s office. The two hierarchs clearly “symbol-
ized” the two tendencies within the Church, the election
being thus less “‘personal” than precisely “‘symbolic.”
According to the Statutes, if no candidate received in
the first ballot a two-thirds vote, a second vote was to be
taken — with two names inscribed on each ballot, the final
election being left to the Bishops. Once more the majority
. debate. Finally, the bishops asked for a “straw vote,”’ indi-
of votes went to Bishop Vladimir and the minority to Arch-
bishop Ireney. Now the crucial moment had come. The
Bishops went to the altar, while the entire Sobor, truly with
one heart and one mouth, sang prayers preparing itself to
receive the decision of the Bishops as the will of God.
After a few tense moments the Royal Doors were opened
and the senior Bishop, John of Chicago and Minneapolis,
announced the choice of the Bishops: Archbishop Ireney
was to be the new Metropolitan. And it is at that moment
in America
that the spiritual maturity and strength of our Church was
revealed: whatever the feelings and, in some cases, even the
bitterness of some of its members, the Sobor exploded in a
majestic Eis polla eti despota, and thus sanctioned and truly
received the decision of the Bishops. At 4:00 p.m. on the
same day, the solemn enthronement of the new Primate
took place at the Cathedral.
There can be no question that many were deeply dis-
appointed. There was the danger that dissatisfaction and
misunderstanding would overtake the participants of the
Council in the emotion of the moment. The sense of respon-
sibility for the Church overcame all dangers and disappoint-
ments, while love the Church covered the personai
desires and preferences of bishops, priests and lay delegates.
It may be that an important lesson of permanent value had
to be learned by the Church’s leaders and members. This
lesson is that the road to autocephaly was not to be taken
for the sake of any “‘nationalism’’ — even American; that
God’s will and not human calculations or preferences are
decisive.
It was the concern for continuity in administration that
made Archbishop Ireney the candidate for the highest
office of the Church. He brought with him to that office a
long experience in pastoral ministry, a sense of stability and
tradition. To all those who were afraid of too rapid a trans-
ition, too radical a change, he was a reassuring symbol of
continuity. And as paradoxical as it may seem, it is precise-
ly under his tenure and leadership that the most radical
change: the reaching by our Church of her canonical inde-
pendence, was successfully achieved.
The Thirteenth All-American Council — 1967
The Thirteenth All-American Council was held in New
York, November 14-16, 1967. The whole Church was
pointed towards the future by a proposal placed before the
Council. The Council was asked to approve a change in the
name of the Church from the cumbersome and increasingly
irrelevant “Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of
America” to “Orthodox Church in America.” The proposal
had been duly studied in committee prior to the Council,
its implications scrutinized and evaluated. Unexpectedly,
the episcopate forbade discussion or voting on the proposal,
in effect vetoing the change prior to its discussion on the
floor and prior to a vote. The veto itself led to a stormy
cating that this expression of opinion would give the
question the opportunity to mature. The “‘straw vote”’ re-
sulted in an overwhelming expression of support for the
adoption of “Orthodox Church in America” as the name of
the Church.
The Church had thus given notice that it saw itself as the
Orthodox Church in America, but that the formal change of
name had been deemed premature.
Metropolitan Ireney (1965 - Present)
Like his predecessor, the newly-elected Metropolitan
came to the Episcopate from the ranks of the “‘white,” ie.
married clergy. Born in Mezhirech, Liublin Province of
Southwestern Russia on October 2, 1892, John Bekish
graduated from the Kholm Theological Seminary in 1914
and until ordination served as a parish reader. He was or-
dained to the priesthood in 1916 and appointed assistant
rector of the Cathedral in Lublin, Poland. He was a member
of the Consistory of the Diocese of Pinsk, and also served as
Chairman of the Missionary Committee. While servicing
parishes in the counties of Sarna and Kamen-Kashursk, he
was made Dean of these two Deaneries. During the Second
World War he, together with millions of people, became a
refugee, a displaced person, first in Western Europe (where,
for a few years, he served as priest in Charleroi, Belgium),
and then, in 1952, in the United States of America.
It is while serving the small parish in McAdoo, Pennsyl-
vania, that he lost his wife. And since there was, at that
time, an urgent need to fill the vacancy created by the
260
departure from Japan of Archbishop Benjamin, the Synod
of Bishops elected, in June 1953, Father John Bekish as
Bishop of Tokyo. He was tonsured with the name Ireney
and consecrated in the New York Cathedral. Under his
leadership, the Orthodox Church in Japan made great prog-
ress and its Theological Seminary was reopened in 1954.
Bishop Ireney remained in Japan for seven years and re-
turned to the United States in 1960 to become Bishop of
Boston and New England, but above all, to serve as the
assistant to the old and ailing Metropolitan Leonty. On the
day of Metropolitan Leonty’s funeral, the Synod elected
him as Locum Tenens, and for six months, prior to his
election as Metropolitan, he was in fact governing the
Church. And it is primarily the concern for continuity
in administration that made him the candidate for that high
office to which he was elected on September 23, 1965.
In June 1970, after the granting of the canonical status of
autocephaly, the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox
Church in America bestowed the title of “Beatitude” upon
the Metropolitan as head of the local American Church.
 AUTOCEPHALY
Someday church historians will call the granting of auto-
cephaly to the former Russian Metropolia in America a
major event in the modern history of Orthodoxy, a starting
point in the liberation of the Orthodox ecclesiastical con-
sciousness from those political, national and ethnic “reduc-
tions” of the Church which for centuries obscured and
mutilated Orthodox ecclesiology. A full and dispassionate
history of the events which preceded and led to the Tomos
of 1970 cannot as yet be written, especially by those who,
like myself, were involved in some of them.All I can do,
then, is to recordhere — for the future historian — some
personal recollections, my personal experience and under-
standing of “how all this happened.”
L
First, a few words on the background against which the
climactic events of 1969-1970 are to be understood. By the
early 1960's, the “temporary self-government” proclaimed
in 1924 by the Russian Diocese in America at its Sobor in
Detroit was approaching its fortieth anniversary. The se-
quence of events which brought about and, as the subse-
quent history of our Church shows, fully justified that
Detroit decision — the Russian Revolution of 1917, the en-
suing breakdown in communications between the Church
here and the Moscow Patriarchate, and the rapid disintegra-
tion of church life, deprived of clearly established central
authority — was rapidly fading away from the memory of
the faithful. Under the administrations of the Metropolitans
Platon (1924-1934) and Theophilus (1934-1950), the Dio-
cese had healed her wounds and achieved a significant
degree of stability. What is even more important, she not
only became accustomed to her “self-government” but
more and more experienced it as the only possible way for
her orderly existence and growth in the New World. In fact,
she experienced the meaning of the historic decisions of the
All-Russian Church Sobor, which in 1917-1918, at the
darkest moment of the Old World’s collapse, in the words
of Professor A. V. Kartashoff “‘restored the sobornost (i.e.
the responsible participation of the entire people of God,
clergy as well as laity, in the life of the Church) from the
top to the bottom...” It was those decisions — the election
of the bishop by each Church, the restoration of the laity
from a passive to an active status, the recovery of the con-
ciliar form of government — that saved the Metropolia after
1924, and it was that directly experienced and tested spirit
of sobornost which became the most cherished foundation
of her life in the new and unprecedented conditions.
The 1950’s were marked primarily by efforts to clarify
and codify the basic structures of the Church’s inner life:
such was the meaning of the stormy controversies about the
new Statutes and of their final adoption by the All-
American Sobors of 1955 and 1959. Not without pain and
suffering, the Church was overcoming the temptations,
pervasive in her, of parochialism (‘‘independent parishes’),
clergy-vs.-laity polarization and opposition, undue “‘clerical-
ization” as well as “democratization,” etc. What she was
seeking on a deeper level, however, was a difficult harmony
between her eternal Tradition and the forms of life charac-
teristic of America, a way of remaining truly Orthodox
while becoming truly American.
With these problems solved, at least in the common mind
of the Church as expressed at her Sobors, there inescapably
arose the next problem: that of the permanent, and no
longer “temporary,” canonical status of the Church herself.
The Metropolia always experienced its separation from the
Mother Church as forced upon it by events beyond its con-
trol, always looked forward with hope to the day of reunion
and restoration of normal relations. It was with great joy,
indeed with enthusiasm, that an overwhelming majority of
the faithful greeted the restoration of the Russian Patriar-
chate in 1944 and the possibility of entering into contact
with the Mother Church. Soon it became clear, however,
that the much desired “normalization”? was not understood
in the same way in America and in Moscow. More than a
quarter of a century of mutual alienation made it in fact
impossible to find a common language, a common under-
standing of the past, present and future. For Moscow, the
Metropolia was a “‘schismatic”’ body to be pardoned, upon
repentance, by the Mother Church. And if the latter was
willing to grant her American Diocese a certain autonomy,
she was in no way ready to give up ultimate control and
authority. As for the Metropolia, however deep and sincere
was its desire for unity and communion, it simply could
not surrender the freedom which proved to be so beneficial,
so “existentially” necessary for its life in America. Hence
the failure of the first attempt at “normalization,” at the
memorable Cleveland Sobor of 1946, and another delay of
almost twenty-five years before the “American problem”
could find its solution.
What she was seeking on a deeper level, however,
was a difficult harmony between her eternal Tradition
and the forms of life characteristic of America, a way
of remaining truly Orthodox while becoming truly
American.
26)

IT.
The need for a solution, however, was becoming more
urgent with each passing year. For if at the time of the
Russian collapse in 1917, the Russian Diocese of North
America and the Aleutian Islands constituted the only
established canonical structure in America, exercising its
jurisdiction over virtually all Orthodox people here, the
next decade saw the rapid proliferation of “national” juris-
dictions, whose establishment the Russian Church, then at
the darkest hour of persecution and suffering, could neither
prevent nor question. Within a few years the American con-
tinent became a canonical “no man’s land,’ a territory open
io ecclesiastical “colonization,” where virtually every exist-
ing Orthodox Church established its own diocese and this
without the slightest attempt at coordination and coopera-
tion with others. And if, during the earlier “Russian” period,
the basic inspiration of the Church here was missionary, i.e.
aimed at the organic growth of immigrant communities into
an American Orthodox Church (cf. the famous report of
Archbishop Tikhon, the future Patriarch, to the Holy
Synod), now the efforts of each “ethnic” jurisdiction be-
came concentrated on preserving the “national identity” of
its flock. The very idea that the Orthodox in America could
have a common vocation, a missionary responsibility and a
unified canonical structure all but vanished from Orthodox
consciousness and was replaced by a narrow and closed ob-
session with religious ethnicism. All this transformed Amer-
ica into an ecclesiastical jungle in which national animosi-
ties, political rivalries and ethnic susceptibilities, imported
from the Old World, were given a new life, were filled with
new passions.
The Standing Conference of Bishops
Thus when, at the end of the 1950’s, new attempts were
made to find some form of cooperation among the dozen
Orthodox jurisdictions — attempts which resulted in the
establishment of the Standing Conference of Orthodox
Bishops — it became clear that there existed no common
approach, no common canonical terms of reference for the
solution of the American problem. And although the Rus-
sian Metropolia was among the most fervent initiators and
supporters of that movement towards unity and coopera-
tion, its position and status in fact became more ambiguous
than in the past. Different in this from all other “national
jurisdictions” which were controlled from abroad, the
Metropolia not only had no support from its Mother Church
but was denounced by the latter as “‘schismatic” and de-
prived of canonical basis. Already some ten years earlier,
during World War II, when an attempt was made to “‘feder-
ate” the major Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States
of America, the Metropolia was simply excluded from this
federation in favor of the small Patriarchal Exarchate. It
was indeed ironic that the oldest Orthodox Church in
America, which knew herself to be in unbroken continuity
with the missionary beginnings of Orthodoxy in the New
World, the one more than any other rooted in American
soil and open to America, was now considered somewhat
like a “poor parent” by the Churches proud of their
262
The very idea that the Orthodox in America could
have a common vocation, a missionary responsibility
and a unified canonical structure all but vanished
from Orthodox consciousness and was replaced by a
narrow and closed obsession with religious ethnicism.
“canonicity,” which in fact consisted in their total depend-
ence on centers located thousands of miles away from
America. This is not to belittle in any way the very real
achievements of SCOBA, especially during the first decade
of its existence. This is only to indicate its basic and “‘built
in’ inability to solve or even to face the fundamental
question: that of the permanent canonical unity of Ortho-
doxy in America. Soon it became evident that the Mother
Churches, from which the American “national jurisdictions”
derived their canonicity and on which they were totally
dependent, not only were indifferent to any canonical clari-
fication in the New World but opposed it as a threat to their
interests here. And in this they were (and, alas, still are)
right, for those various foreign interests often were dia-
metrically opposed to the real interests of American Ortho-
doxy as a whole. Prisoners of their “subordinationist
ecclesiology,” split between their role as agents, defenders
and representatives of the “Mother Churches” and their
pastoral function in America, the bishops of SCOBA as
heads of “national jurisdictions,” were reduced to covering
with rhetorical appeals to unity the harmful and ultimately
impossivle status quo. It is here, in the impasse reached by
SCOBA in the early 1960's that the history of autocephaly
had its origin.
IIL.
One rainy evening, in March of 1963, Dr. Paul Anderson,
an old friend of Orthodoxy, called me at St. Vladimir’s
Seminary and informed me that Archbishop Nikodim, head
of a delegation of the Moscow Patriarchate visiting the
United States, had expressed a desire to pay a visit to the
Seminary, and that he and his companions were to arrive in
about two hours. I told Dr. Anderson that I must ask per-
mission to receive the delegation and would call Metropoli-
tan Leonty. I still remember the weak and soft voice of the
old Metropolitan who, after listening to me, said: “... him
who comes to me I will not cast out (John 6:37). Receive
them with love .. .” And thus one hour later a bus stopped
at the doorstep of the Seminary, and some fifteen Russian
hierarchs, priests and laymen entered the building. The
seminarians were already at Vespers in the Chapel and,
having welcomed our guests in the name of the Metropoli-
tan, I invited them to the Chapel.
They prayed with us, praised the student choir, and then,
at a rapidly organized reception, Archbishop Nikodim took
‘me aside and said that, in his opinion, the time was ripe for
“resolving our misunderstandings.”’ Were we ready to dis-
cuss them? My answer was that all I could do was to inform
the Metropolitan and try to arrange a personal encounter
between him and Archbishop Nikodim. This was done and
a few days later, Archbishop Nikodim came to the Metro-
politan’s residence at Syosset, Long Island. I will never for-
get the nearly ninety-year-old Metropolitan as he slowly
came down the stairs to meet his guests, dressed as usual in
his white riason, so majestic, so sure of himself, and yet so
simple and joyful, so obviously the head of the Church to
which he had given his entire life. At the end of the dinner,
he made a speech in which, after having expressed his joy to
see representatives of the Mother Church after so many
years of mutual alienation, he spoke of his participation at
the Moscow Sobor of 1917-1918, of his experiences in
Russia afire with revolutionary chaos, of the path followed
by the Metropolia. It was the speech of someone who
knows where he stands and who, because he knows it and
carries upon himself the ultimate yesponsibility, knows
what to expect from the future. No serious matters were
discussed during this first encounter, but I am sure that it
had a great importance. I am sure that it was then that
Archbishop Nikodim realized the reality of the American
Church, a reality which made the previous categories —
those of “schism,” “repentance,” “‘return to the Mother
Church,” etc., somewhat irrelevant. He must have felt the
sincerity and the depth of Metropolitan Leonty’s unfailing
love for the Russian Church, yet at the same time the
incarnation in him of the local American Church, the
strength of its roots, the reality of its own life and tradition.
It was an encounter in depth: that which was not said was,
in a Way, more important than that which was said.
But if the “vision” always precedes “reality,” the latter
manifested itself as full of difficulties and obstacles. In the
summer of the same year, a new meeting took place in
Rochester, New York, where Archbishop Nikodim was
attending an ecumenical conference, between him and three
representatives of our Church: Archbishop John of San
Francisco, Father John Meyendorff and myself. There, for
the first time, the practical aspects of a possible solution
were discussed, and it became clear that some obstacles
were too substantial to be removed easily, especially the
question of the “schism” and how to approach it, of the
past and how to overcome it. And although no agreement
was reached at Rochester, and the negotiations ended in an
impasse which was to last five years, the psychological
climate was certainly altered. A “breakthrough” appeared
as possible.
IV.
From 1963 until 1968 no new contacts with the Moscow
Patriarchate took place. The long illness and the death in
1965 of Metropolitan Leonty, the changes that were taking
place in the administrative structure of our Church, develop-
ments in the Soviet Union and many other factors made
any new attempts practically impossible. This does not
mean, however, that the need for a canonical solution be-
came less urgent or was forgotten. On the contrary, it began
now to preoccupy much wider circles within our Church.
In 1965, shortly after the election of Metropolitan Ireney as
Primate, a commission of some thirty members, which in-
cluded bishops, priests, theologians and laymen, was en-
trusted with studying the problem in all its aspects and
preparing a solution. The commission unanimously came to
the conclusion that the “‘temporary self-government” be
brought to an end and that the needs of our Church as well
as canonical order, required that at the next All-American
Council our Church should eliminate the term “Russian”
from her self-definition and proclaim herself the permanent
local Orthodox Church in America. And although the
Synod of Bishops decided to postpone the final decision,
the memorable “‘straw vote” at the All-American Council of
1967 revealed such overwhelming support for the proposals
of the Commission that any other path was thereby elimi-
nated.
During the same years, our Church made a last effort to
convince all Orthodox Churches of the urgent need to find
a solution for America. In December 1965, Metropolitan
Ireney sent a long letter to the heads of each Autocephalous
Church asking them to take a joint initiative in solving the
canonical chaos of the Orthodox Diaspora. With one
exception — a response from the Archbishop of Finland —
the letter was met with silence. In May 1966, by order of
our Holy Synod, I visited the late Patriarch Athenagoras in
Istanbul. He received me with his truly unique warmth and
love, invited me to his table, blessed me with a pectoral
cross, but as to the “‘American problem” his stand was
adamant: “You are Russians, go to your Mother Church,
for no one can solve your problem except the Russian
Church .. .”” This was shortly after the Ecumenical Patriar-
chate, under pressure from Moscow, discontinued unilater-
ally its jurisdiction over the Russian Exarchate in Western
Europe, jurisdiction which was established in 1931 by agree-
ment with Metropolitan Eulogius after the Moscow Patriar-
chate threatened him and his clergy with suspension and
excommunication if they would refuse to take an oath of
loyalty to the Soviet regime. As I left the Patriarch, I was
convinced that no initiative of any kind would be taken by
any Orthodox Church in regard to American problems and,
least of all, by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. It is this pessi-
mistic report that | presented to the Synod of Bishops. My
pessimism wasjustified the next year.
The memorable “straw vote” at the All-American
Council of 1967 revealed such overwhelming support
for the proposals of the Commission that any other
path was thereby eliminated.
In June 1967, Archbishop lakovos, head of the Greek
Archdiocese, informed me by telephone that he had received
from Constantinople orders to suspend communion with
the Metropolia. He was sincerely saddened by this new
development and asked me to assure Metropolitan Ireney
that, for the time being at least, he did not plan to comply
with the order. We were very thankful to him for his
courage and friendship, yet the whole episode was a clear
indication that the situation was rapidly worsening. Canoni-
cally the Metropolia was at the mercy of “jurisdictions”
whose very establishment in America should have been at
least questioned by the Russian Church — the first to have
established here its territorial, but not “national,” juris-
diction.
263
 In the summer of 1968 in Uppsala, Sweden, where the “Alaska, in Moscow in May 1970. In October, the first
World Council of Churches was holding its assembly, three Council of the new Orthodox Church in America was held
representatives of our Church — Archbishop John of San at St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
Francisco, Father John Meyendorff and Serge S. Verhov-
skoy — met with Metropolitan Nikodim in an ultimate
attempt to find a solution. It was then that, for the first TELEGRAM
time, the term “autocephaly” was brought into conversa-
tion as a possibility to be considered. This for the Patriar- METROPOLITAN IRENEY
chate was a great and decisive step forward since the stale- NEW YORK, NEW YORK
mate of 1963. It was agreed that if our Synod of Bishops
was willing to enter into concrete negotiations, a sign of YOUR BEATITUDE:
good will ought to be given. That “sign” took the form of a
telegram in which our Church congratulated Moscow on the BY OUR UNANIMOUS DECISION TO-
fortieth anniversary of the restoration of the Patriarchate GETHER WITH THE HOLY SYNOD AND
(1918). The Patriarch expressed his gratitude to Metropoli- IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL THE MOST
tan Ireney, after which our Synod decided to enter into REVEREND BISHOPS OF THE PATRIAR-
preliminary and exploratory negotiations with the Russian CHATE OF MOSCOW, AUTOCEPHALY IS
Church. This task was entrusted to a special team consisting GRANTED TO THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX
of Archbishop Kiprian of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania,
GREEK CATHOLIC CHURCH IN AMERICA.
Chairman; Protopresbyter Joseph Pishtey, Chancellor; and
Fathers Alexander Schmemann, John Skvir and John ON THE BASIS OF THE LETTER AD-
Meyendorff. DRESSED TO US BY YOUR BEATITUDE
V. AND IN YOUR PERSON BY THE GREAT
COUNCIL OF BISHOPS OF THE AMER-
In January 1969, Metropolitan Nikodim was again in
ICAN METROPOLITANATE, WE ESTAB-
New York and the first official meeting between him and
LISH AND PROCLAIM THE HOLY AUTO-
our representatives was decided upon. When we entered his
room, he asked: “What are we to discuss: autonomy or
CEPHALOUS ORTHODOX CHURCH IN
autocephaly?” To this we answered: “Autocephaly, your AMERICA.
Eminence, for we are authorized to discuss only that...”
WE HAVE ACCEPTED AND CONFIRMED
He smiled and the negotiations began. After this first meet-
ing, we met again in Geneva in August, in Tokyo in
THE AGREEMENT SIGNED ON MARCH
November and, finally, in New York in the last days of 31, 1970 BY YOU AND HIS EMINENCE,
March 1970. Someday a detailed history of these negotia- THE METROPOLITAN OF LENINGRAD
tions will be written. Here I will only say that they were AND NOVGOROD NIKODIM.
difficult. sometimes painful, more than once reaching what
seemed a breaking point. And I must say, in all conscience,
OUR PATRIARCHAL AND SYNODAL
that each time they were salvaged by the unmistakably TOMOS WILL BE HANDED TO YOUR
sincere desire of Metropolitan Nikodim to reach an agree- DELEGATION WHICH WE INVITE WHOLE-
ment, not to lose this ultimate opportunity. After each HEARTEDLY TO VISIT US.
session, full reports were given to the Synod of Bishops and
the Metropolitan Council. In the Fall of 1969, the Diocesan WITH SINCERE JOY AND LOVE WE EX-
Conventions of each diocese were briefed: Archbishop TEND TO YOU A BROTHERLY HAND OF
Kiprian, Father Pishtey, and Father Schmemann went to COMMUNION. TO YOU AND TO THE
Harrisburg (Diocese of Philadelphia); Father Meyendorff to ENTIRE AUTOCEPHALOUS ORTHODOX
California; Father Schmemann to Chicago and to the New CHURCH IN AMERICA, WE WISH DIVINE
York-New Jersey Diocese; Archbishop Kiprian to Pittsburgh. BLESSING, HELP IN YOUR WORK FOR
Once more the sobornost expressed itself in all its fullness, THE GLORY OF GOD AND MULTIPLICA-
so that when, on March 31, in Syosset, the final agreement TION OF LOVE BETWEEN US AND
was signed by Metropolitans Nikodim and Ireney, our
BETWEEN ALL THOSE WHO ARE FAITH-
Primate was acting out of the consensus of the entire
FUL TO CHRIST OUR SAVIOUR.
Church.
Eleven days later, on the eve of the Akathist Saturday, a + ALEXIS
telegram from Moscow informed our Metropolitan that the PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW
Synod of the Russian Church, upon ratifying the agreement AND ALL RUSSIA
signed in Syosset, issued the Jomos of Autocephaly signed
by the Patriarch and all Bishops of the Russian Church. Telegram sent on Monday, April 13, 1970
The Tomos was officially received by a delegation of the Received April 14, 1970
American Church, led by His Grace Theodosius, Bishop of

264
Autocephaly: A Documentation

The Tomos: Signatures of the Holy Synod of the Russian Church

The Christmas Message to All Patriarchs, December 1966

Official Notification of Negotiations, December 9, 1969

Reception of the Tomos: The Delegation

Reception of the Tomos: The Presentation and Response

Encyclical Letter of the Great Council of Bishops, April 1970

Message to all Orthodox Christians in America, October 1970

IN
eo
RF
AA
WN The Tomos: Excerpts from the English Translation

265
 °*8-

266
8 Attu YoXOg YeHHOdNOM Gqzootled
AW Meulmomco
90 ROL@
R LOMOMUSUXAY
YMMOMADA
WU WIOMVAVLAGALS
Koo YoHaoNdel]O@LOHFO]]
HM eH MeBLoOeden asnderouerg ~erQeog
ouo” 810g ‘srosmEdelreog Ovemasodsok
eoga odwi YOnMHOeY TOMOMIMXAY UMMOMGOR-OdE
VW BUIOLAMIV
yeoag
ox Agerg
YaveHe YORAIaIO
A YORRO POMAANYcor
U GHHEOGID ‘fWONDOHOTOFO
BE hoOHmMOUOK
H
oCOHGYeLeHHONOeWHeKaOHetO goHaerooged]]
maudol]
@ -mdemy TOMOMLIA BMMOEAHUMN
VW BAIOEVINON
siZ
oF BH xereheH MHYGbexOddy
w Nogenendu eomaXasoyereod
onHeaOroOuer
eHKOG KOMYOHA ediloe)
& eIMeo XAHGeTOOReC]]
NOMOMIIA WMMOTUAL
M WMOTMICS
XAHLOONO] ePeMOLEY
XAHIE yoandely
- youarepexozay
-oaed]
yonaero mandel]
a@ *eivdany
DONOMUA WMHORO.WHdth
M BWIOHURAH
AOOHEIY
BHD5 a ‘eemsdogLoany
nw Bendretfeedo
Gimody
- y UOMOMIG UMMOHSIORO
MW WWHORSEBE
Amowamr AMeods ou wemaXkasovel - ‘XA yRavay uM HAO ‘nea
NE PE WA WAVER YWOHOEOHOON
WHatWAXa a
mAHded w MydALoeu ‘mBdRioeuNXde sermouoMH er ‘ MronMOd|]
LUINOgLAR..; YMOHMITVL
MW POIOHOLOE
-xdel] YoNOHGIudeMy YoHaer voged]] yoHIrebexoLay 4OlwaD meen
ee emmmosoredu wu dmonon aXmaeaett{x000H aXHOepeH Gog) Ha
*moxenoA SnaoTOOUeKD BY Mandel] YOswAD OuerO o@ Adds
a OHBOMUTO]] oeds eawoOW O46] ‘evOu *BHY QO] wredue
XavMdLyO BWIOGOMOON
UW BHO Wkd ge a ya

MAGIth OJOHHAMBGO:VIOHAO ee
LMIODOdLUN QAHTIMLAdH
A BIDIORSNOLON
+H Ys MD
LUAIOUOdLUN BMMOVdJHMAS
A WAHOVOdOJGOR
Be

aLUN DATONG yng —“uynvare.s4+ ry,

XaveHe RHAVGHA u
LAIODOdLAN WMDIOEOIdO
H WWIOHBdS # wyorrbs
J
LAWONOGLAN
WAI WIDIOHMLY-
VM WHHOHVLOXVEVA
oy, es
LHIFO BMOEVIDOdK
A WYHOEOLN0d
e Vf
MQ WOLAAM
M WOH + I

sainjzeubis
yo yoseljegsixalypue ay} sSsaquiaw
4O ayi AJOH
pouds
$o au} yoanyd
jo elssny
uo ay} sowoy
40 ‘Ajeydas0iny
Iady‘OL “OZ6L
 The December 1966 Christmas Message of Metropolitan
Ireney addressed to Patriarchs of the Autocephalous
Churches, imploring them to consider the unity of the
Orthodox Churches in America.
THE CHRISTMAS MESSAGE
TO ALL PATRIARCHS
December 1966
Christ is born - glorify Him
Christ has come from heaven — receive Him!
Your Holiness!
With this joyous, festal greeting, uttered in the past by
St. Gregory the Theologian, and sung each year in our
churches, we greet you, Your Holiness, wishing you and
your divinely protected flock health, prosperity, success in
all good endeavors, preservation from every enemy and foe,
and above all God’s help during these festival days and for
the approaching New Year.
The Good News of the Incarnation of the Son of God
has been heard in the world for two thousand years, bring-
ing each year light and joy to the hearts of Christians. But
at the same time millions of unbelieving people remain in-
different or openly hostile to the great Truth ofour Salva-
tion. We must admit, contritely, that this indifference or
hostility is often founded on the behavior of Christians
themselves, who are unworthy of their calling, and who
forget that they, as disciples of Christ, are called upon to be
witnesses of uncompromising truth, peace, love and unity.
For this reason the Holy Church summons us not only
to “rejoice” during these days, but also to “glorify” the
Lord worthily, showing to the world a way of life which is
consistent with the great mystery of the Incarnation of the
Son of God, born in Bethlehem of Judea of the Most Pure
Virgin Mary.
Separatism and Divisions
We, the leaders of the Churches of God, calle® upon to
care for the flock of Christ, have a particular responsibility
for the Christian life of the entire “fullness of the Church.”
However, our Holy Orthodox Church today suffers many
internal divisions — and even schisms — many misunder-
standings brought about by political events, much provincial
separatism in local churches, dioceses and parishes. Many of
them live independently and forget that there is but one
Holy Church in the whole world, and that if all Christians
today are striving towards unity, then we Orthodox Chris-
tians above all should be able to realize among ourselves the
unity already granted us by our Lord God in the One, Holy,
Catholic and Apostolic Church — the “Body of Christ.”
Conscious of my particular responsibility for the fate of
our American flock, I consider it my duty in this letter not
only to greet Your Holiness, but also to share with you
some thoughts concerning the past and future destinies of
the Orthodox Church in America.
American Orthodoxy in the Past
As Your Holiness is no doubt well aware, Holy Ortho-
doxy was introduced into the New World through the
efforts of Russian missionary monks, who came to Alaska
from the Valaam Monastery in 1794. In 1840 the mission
became a diocese, headed by the Apostle of America
Innocent (Veniaminov), and did not cease to develop after
the transfer of the Church center first to San Francisco
(1872) and later to New York (1903). During these long
years, the American Church was headed by a succession
of missionary bishops: Peter (1859-1867), Paul (1867-1870),
John (1870-1879), Nestor (1880-1882), Vladimir (1888-
1891), Nicholas (1891-1898), Tikhon (1898-1907), Platon
(1907-1914) and Evdokim (1914-1917). In 1914, the
Church already numbered several hundred parishes, accept-
ing steadily into its fold Uniates returning to Orthodoxy
and successive waves of new immigrants from Europe.
Patriarch Tikhon Speaks
Throughout this entire period, the leadership of the dio-
cese belonged to a hierarch appointed by the Holy Synod of
Russia. The Russian ecclesiastical authorities were fully
aware of the multinational structure of American Ortho-
doxy and encouraged the organization of special national
entities within the framework of One Church. Such, for
example, was the Syrian vicariate, under the leadership of
Bishop Raphael Hawaweeny of Brooklyn, which was estab-
lished in 1904, and the Serbian Administration, headed by
Archimandrite Sebastian Dabovich. Most of the Greek
parishes were also under the jurisdiction of the American
Mission, with the exception of two or three communities
which recognized the authority of the Church of Greece in
the beginning of the twentieth century. It was assumed that
a special diocese would be set up for these Greek parishes as
was made clear from the well-known and truly prophetic
address of Tikhon, Archbishop of America and future
267
Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, to the Pre-conciliar
Commission in 1905:
‘In North America a whole Exarchate can easily
be established, uniting all Orthodox national churches,
which would have their own bishops under one
Exarch, the Russian Archbishop. Each one of them
would be independent in its own sphere, but the
common affairs of the American Church would be
decided in a Synod, presided over by the Russian
Archbishop . . . It should be remembered, however,
that life in the New World is different from that in
the old; our Church must take this into consideration;
a greater autonomy (possibly autocephaly) should
therefore be granted to the Church of America, a
status different from the other Metropolitan sees of
the Russian Church’ (Opinions of Diocesan Bishops
Concerning Church Reforms, St. Petersburg, 1906,
Part Ie p253'1).
Patriarch Meletios IV
This project reveals the broad-minded and truly mission-
ary spirit of the leaders of American Orthodoxy, who were
fully aware of the specific purpose and special mission of
Orthodoxy in America. They knew that its normal progress
could be guaranteed only on the basis of canonical unity
and independence, with preservation, where necessary, of
all national identities.
It is important to note that not only the Russian hier-
archs were concerned with the future of Orthodoxy in
America. His Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios IV
(Metaxakis), after his two visits to America (in 1918 and
1922), also foresaw the future of Orthodoxy in the New
World as a single, local Church. In his address, given at his
enthronement as Ecumenical Patriarch on January 24, 1922,
His Holiness Meletios said the following:
‘I saw with my own eyes, the biggest and the most
numerous part of the Orthodox Church in diaspora
and I understood the measure in which the name of
Orthodoxy would be exalted, especially in the great
country of the United States of America, if the two
millions of Orthodox Christians were organized there
into one united ecclesiastical organization, as an
American Orthodox Church’ (B. Zoustis, Hellenism
in America and Its Activities, New York, 1954, p. 147).
The Crisis of American Orthodoxy
Half a century has already passed since the time when
these prominent Orthodox hierarchs, each in his own way
and under different conditions, expressed the same thoughts
about the future of Orthodoxy in America. New generations
have grown; hundreds of new churches, schools and religious
institutions. have been built. The whole world is looking at
the Orthodox Church of America and is expecting from it a
witness of the true unity — Christ’s unity — in faith and
love. In the meantime, our Church, living in the lieterodox
western world, is deprived of canonical unity: several juris-
dictions are co-existing on the same territory, often com-
peting one with another, while the flock is led into confu-
268
sion by the absence of a single ecclesiastical authority.
The events which brought about this situation are com-
mon knowledge. The ecclesiastical divisions in Russia,
ensuing after the October Revolution of 1917, left the
American Church without a permanent leadership. The
restoration of normal church life was only made possible
after the return of His Eminence, Metropolitan Platon
(Rozhdestvensky), who had previously headed the Amer-
ican flock and was well-known in America. At the council
held in Detroit in 1924, through conciliar effort of the
entire Church, it became possible to normalize the life of
the Church on a basis of total autonomy. During these
critically painful days for the Russian Church, when His
Holiness, Patriarch Tikhon, himself had been under arrest
and trial for a year, there existed no other way for those
Russian dioceses which did not wish to recognize the schism
of the “Renovation,” than complete independence, and
many dioceses within Russia itself chose to follow this path.
In America, meanwhile, the other national groups —
Greeks, Syrians, Serbs, Romanians, Bulgarians and Alba-
nians — began to organize independent dioceses. In some
cases, the Russian Church gave her blessing for their separate
existence, and the Moscow Patriarchate even to this day
recognizes them, maintaining friendly relations with them.
Thus, the Moscow Patriarchate itself shows that unity of
Orthodoxy in America cannot be realized merely through
the restoration of its territorial canonical rights, which in
1905 Archbishop Tikhon took for granted, but that unity
can be reached only through an agreement between all the
national churches.
As far as our North American Russian Metropolitanate is
concerned, its growth and internal development after the
Detroit Council (Sobor) of 1924 demonstrate clearly that
the way of complete autonomy and independence was the
right solution.
Growth of American Metropolia
During these years, the destinies of the Orthodox Church
in Russia and America have been completely distinct. With
the constant help of God, the Metropolitanate continued
the great task of the Orthodox Mission to the New World
and, since 1946, in Japan as well. It comprises today 11
dioceses, more than 350 parishes, and almost a million
faithful Orthodox Christians — American citizens — a great
majority of whom are American-born. Our theological
schools are growing; future priests of our Metropolitanate,
as well as of other Orthodox Churches, receive in them a
theological education. A missionary and pastoral activity is
developing, drawing to Orthodoxy an ever-increasing num-
ber of Americans.
The English language is in general use, together with
Slavonic, in services and publications. The Orthodox Church
plays a constantly increasing role in the social life of the
country: many of our Orthodox clergymen and laymen
teach in American universities, and our military chaplains
care for the spiritual needs of the Orthodox members of the
armed forces of the United States.
 This growth of our Church under the wise guidance of
my predecessors of blessed memory, the Metropolitans
Platon (1922-1936), Theophilus (1936-1950) and Leonty
(1951-1965), together with the other hierarchs who lead our
American dioceses, shows the rapid movement of history.
It is against our wish that at the time of Russia’s great
troubles the canonical ties with the Church in Russia were
broken, but we firmly believe that our spiritual bonds with
the faithful Russian people, which confess their Christian
hope in an officially atheist state, have never been severed.
We have a holy regard for this spiritual bond, and also for
the memory of those who laid the foundations of Ortho-
doxy in America, especially the holy monk Herman of
Alaska, of blessed memory, as well as Bishops Innocent and
Tikhon, who later headed the Church of Moscow. If such is
the will of God, the popular veneration which they enjoy
today may lead eventually to their official glorification by
the Church.
However, this sacred memory from the past calls us to
responsibility for the future, which must follow the pattern
foreseen in 1905 by Archbishop Tikhon: an independent,
autocephalous church in union with the entire Orthodox,
Ecumenical Church, and realizing full unity locally.
Return to Past Impossible
The return of the American Church to the canonical
leadership of the highest church authorities in Russia is im-
possible — for reasons both practical and canonical.
In practice, the existence of two very different and often
contradictory social structures in America and Russia, and
the fundamental distrust we have towards any instruction
issued from communist countries, make the submission to
the Moscow Patriarchate virtually inconceivable. The griev-
ous events which recently occurred in the Romanian, Bul-
garian and Serbian dioceses in America bear witness to this
fact: the attempt to restore a direct canonical relationship
with the Mother-Churches results in schism and inadmissible
church disorder.
The Canons of the Church
However, practical arguments would not suffice if they
contradicted the holy canons of the Church of God. In
reality, the holy canons themselves clearly stipulate:
— that there should be only one church authority in
each district (First Ecumenical Council, Canon 8;
Second Ecumenical Council, Canon 2; Sixth Ecu-
menical Council, Canons 20 and 29). This unity
reflects the very nature of the Church, which
knows no national, racial or linguistic barriers.
— that, in the words of the 34th Apostolic Canon,
“The bishops of every nation must acknowledge
him who is first among them, and recognize him as
their head, and do nothing which exceeds their
authority without his consent ... ,” and that
“neither let him (who is the first) do anything
without the consent of all.”
Our flock, although multinational in origin, has for some
time already belonged to a single American nation, and the
34th Apostolic Canon, together with all the canons per-
taining to ecclesiastical provinces (in particular, Canon S,
First Ecumenical Council), are certainly applicable to Amer-
ica. We know also with what zeal the ancient Church pre-
served these rules, with what confidence in their rights the
bishops of Africa wrote to the Pope of Rome, protesting
the appeals of some clergy “beyond the seas” to a foreign
primate.
Foreign Control Disapproved
It is entirely understandable why the Church should ex-
press clear disapproval of a canonical structure in which the
Christians of one country are submitted to the ecclesiastical
authority of another state. Even when the political relations
between the two states are normal and friendly, the Church
which is under the authority of a foreign leadership is sus-
pected of being “alien.” What can be said then about our
situation, when the relations between the two political
giants of our era, the Soviet Union and the United States of
America, continue to be grounded in mutual distrust and
competition?
Meanwhile, the work of our Church must progress. By
the will of God, during the great trials endured by Ortho-
doxy in Russia and in other countries, Orthodox Christians
were scattered over the countries of the West. In America
they created a healthy young Church. One cannot but see
in this new development a special grace of God, given not
to any local church in particular, but to the entire Church
as a Whole, and the entire Church must show concern for
the future of American Orthodoxy. In order to establish a
correct ecclesiastical organization in America, the agreement
and the active cooperation of all Orthodox Churches is
essential.
Unity of All
Your Holiness!
We dare hope that you will deem is possible to raise your
voice on behalf of canonical order and justice.
Peace, love and unity are the unique goals of the Russian
American Metropolitanate, entrusted to my humble leader-
ship: to unite with all the Orthodox Churches and, in par-
ticular, with Your Holiness. Insofar as we are able, we strive
towards realizing this unity here in America by participating
in the Standing Conference of Orthodox Canonical Bishops,
under the present chairmanship of His Eminence, Arch-
bishop Iakovos, Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch in
America. We also hope that the time is approaching when,
by the general consent of all the Orthodox Churches, with-
out any external pressure, whether non-ecclesiastical or
anti-ecclesiastical, the entire Orthodox Church will bless and
support the young American Orthodox Church, preserving
all those cultural treasures bequeathed to her by our past.
Again wishing that Your Holiness will spend these com-
ing Holy Days in spiritual joy and comfort and asking for
Your prayers, we remain,
Yours faithfully in Christ,
/s/ +Metropolitan Ireney
269
 Official notification of the Chancellor of the Russian Orthodox Church in America to the parishes, informing them of the
progress of the negotiations leading to autocephaly of the Church in America, December 9, 1969.

Official Notification |
1. In 1919 the link between the Russian Church and her Diocese in America was broken by the revolution-
ary events in Russia. Deprived of the guidance and help of her Mother-Church the American Diocese pro-
claimed its ‘“‘temporary self-government,” acting in compliance with the decisions of the All Russian Sobor of
1917-18 and the Ukase of Patriarch Tikhon about the Dioceses temporarily cut off from central Church
authority. In 1924 at its Sobor in Detroit, the Diocese elected as its head Metropolitan Platon who before the
Revolution served in America as Diocesan Bishop. Since that. time the life of the Diocese, deeply disturbed at
first by the revolutionary turmoil, entered a period of normalization. In fifty years of its de facto independ-
ence it grew into a well organized Metropolitan District, with a stable and truly “sobornyi” form of govern-
ment, eight Dioceses, two Seminaries, a network of Church schools, a planned missionary activity, etc.
Founded as mission, the Metropolia truly fulfilled her missionary vocation: the Orthodox faith became the
faith of hundreds of thousands of native Americans and today a third of her bishops, some 80 percent of her
membership and not less than 65 percent of her clergy are Americans by birth and language.
2. It is this growth of the Metropolia into a real Local Church, her responsibility for coming generations of
Orthodox Americans and for the future of Orthodoxy in this land that forced our Episcopate to consider the
question of a permanent canonical structure and not merely of a temporary one. As early as 1905 Patriarch
Tikhon, then the Archbishop of Aleutian Islands and North America, wrote that “‘the life in the New World
being different . . . the Church here must be granted autocephaly.”’ Now, sixty years later, this prophecy has
become a self-evident necessity. The canonical chaos provoked in America by the Russian Revolution, the
multitude of jurisdictions quarreling with one another and not always on ecclesiastical grounds, endless and
scandalous court cases, mutual accusations of noncanonicity, all this deeply hurts Orthodoxy, leads the
younger generation away from the Church, prevents us from constructive work and compromises and dis-
honors the faith which we confess as true and universal. The only solution lies, thus, in the establishment — in
compliance with the entire canonical tradition of Orthodoxy — of a Local Church in which every one, while
remaining faithful to his own ecclesiastical or ethnic roots, could in unity with all others work for the growth
and welfare of Orthodoxy in America and Americans, and which before 1919 included, in the words of Patri-
arch Tikhon, “not only different Orthodox nationalities but also different national Churches.”’ The Metropolia
always believed it her goal and purpose to become such a Local Church, seeing in it the fulfillment of the best
missionary traditions of Russian Orthodoxy.
3. Throughout its entire and at times difficult history, the Metropolia remained faithful to two fundamental
principles: the necessity for an independent Church here, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the neces-
sity for that independence to be recognized and acknowledged by all Orthodox Churches and, in the first
place, by the Russian Church which implanted Orthodoxy in America and has therefore inalienable canonical
rights on its territory. The Metropolia never assumed the arrogant right to judge the Russian Church. Denounc-
ing persecutions in USSR, she always thought of herself as being in indissoluble spiritual unity with the
whole body of the suffering Russian Church. Yet, firmly convinced, on the basis of her long experience, that
it is impossible to return to a dependence on the Mother-Church living in entirely different conditions, the
Metropolia always believed that sooner or later her conviction and experience will be understood and the
“temporary self-government” would find its fulfillment in autocephaly. This she confessed at Detroit in 1924,
for this she petitioned in Cleveland in 1946, but as long as the Russian Church insisted on some form of sub-
ordination, the Metropolia continued to live by the principles, forced on her ofnecessity and justified by her
history, of “temporary self-government.”
4. In 1963, however, during an unofficial encounter between our late Primate Metropolitan Leonty with
representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate, it became clear that the latter does no longer insist on canonical
dependence and is ready to discuss the question of “autocephaly.” The illness and death of Metropolitan
Leonty delayed for a time the solution of that question, but the beginning of 1969 negotiations were resumed.

270
A commission appointed by the Great Sobor of Bishops and consisting of one bishop and four priests met a
delegation of the Moscow Patriarchate three times: in New York, Geneva and Tokyo. At those meetings all
questions pertaining to our autocephaly were discussed and a general agreement reached. In September 1969
the basic content of that agreement was approved by our Sobor of Bishops and then reported to the Diocesan
conventions of all our Dioceses, where it met with unanimous approval. We must emphatically state that the
agreement has not yet been enacted. It requires further elaboration by our Bishops who carry the responsibility
for the canonical structure of Church life. It does not depend on us alone to transform a dream into reality.
But even now we can openly announce, before God and man, that all we have done, we have done in the spirit
of the Church, openly, guided exclusively by Orthodox teaching and the good of the Church, having no other
aim but the possibility to have for our Church a solid and firm canonical foundation, the possibility for our
children and grandchildren, whose home is America, to live, grow and seek eternal salvation in their own native,
free and independent Church. We have entered into no secret deals but have openly defined that which we
want and hope for, knowing that “‘things impossible for man are possible with God” (Matt. 19:26). Into the
hands of the Chief Pastor and Lord Jesus Christ we entrust the future of our Church.
5. Autocephaly means the complete canonical independence of the Local Church, her entering as an equal
member with full rights into the family of the autocephalous Orthodox Churches, the right and the possibility
to manage her life without any interference from outside. It is this status that our Metropolia always sought.
And if now, by the mercy of God, this desire will be crowned with success, we have before us a future of
peaceful and constructive existence in peace and canonical clarity. Our place within the family of Orthodox
Churches will be clear to all, and with all we shallbe in the fulness of Eucharistic communion and mutual
canonical recognition. For all Orthodox in America the way will be indicated, the way to unity and growth
into one Orthodox Church, in the land which is our earthly abode. We know how great the harvest is and what
effort it requires from the laborers (Matt. 9:37). We believe that the Lord, who poured on us so much mercy,
will not abandon us in the future.
Protopresbyter Joseph J. Pishtey
Chancellor
Devcemver.) [969
(The Orthodox Church)

PROTOPRESBYTER JOSEPH PISHTEY

Father Pishtey was born on April 6, 1899, in Bridgeport,

Connecticut. His parents were Carpatho-Russian immigrants.
He received his primary education at St. Tikhon’s prepara-
tory school and his theological training at St. Platon’s
Seminary in Tenafly, New Jersey. He served as choir direc-
tor in Pennsylvania parishes until his ordination to the
priesthood by Metropolitan Platon at St. Nicholas Cathedral
in New York, on June 16, 1924.
He served parishes in Terryville, Connecticut, Old Forge
and Olyphant, Pennsylvania, and Yonkers, New York. He
was secretary-treasurer of the Metropolitan Council from
1946 to 1964, when he was appointed Chancellor of the
Metropolia by the Synod of Bishops. He was a member of
the delegation which carried on negotiations for auto-
cephaly in Geneva, Tokyo, and New York, and he became
the first to bear the title “Chancellor of the Orthodox
Church in America.” He served in that high capacity until
the eve of his death on November 2, 1972, in New York.

271
 t
i
4

Members of the delegation meeting informally with U.S. Ambas-

sador, Jacob Beame and Metropolitan Nikodim (top photo), and
after a memorial service at the Tomb of Bishop Innocent of
Alaska (bottom photo).
} j * yy)
ae : :

Crowds follow the

delegation on their
visits to Russian
churches.

De,
Official delegation of the Orthodox Church in Amer-
ica with Metropolitan (now Patriarch) Pimen, Bishop
Theodosius and hierarchs of the Russian Church.
THE TOMOS OF AUTOCEPHALY:
The Delegation
The Holy Synod of Bishops of the Metropolia at its
Spring Session of 1970, appointed a delegation officially to
represent the Church in America at the reception of the
Tomos of Autocephaly in Moscow. His Grace, the Right
Reverend Theodosius, Bishop of Sitka and Alaska, was
chosen to represent the Church in America at the funeral of
the late Patriarch Alexis, who signed the official Tomos four
days before he died on Lazarus Saturday, April 18, 1970.
Other members of the delegation included: Mitred Arch-
priest John Skvir, Archpriest Daniel Hubiak, Archpriest
John Nehrebecki, Professor Archpriest John Turkevich (son
of the late Metropolitan Leonty), Mr. Stephen K opestonsky,
editor of the Orthodox Church, and Mr. Constantine
Kallaur, member of the Department of External Affairs.
Upon arrival at the airport in Moscow, the delegation
was met by a delegation representing the Church of Russia
headed by His Eminence, the Most Reverend Alexis, Metro-
politan of Tallin and Estonia, Chancellor of the Moscow
Patriarchate, Bishop Vladimir of Chernigov and Nezhni,
other members of the hierarchy and clergy of the Moscow
patriarchate and members of the Department of External
Affairs. The following day, Saturday, May 16, the delegation
visited the Church of the Holy Resurrection in Sokolni Park
where a solemn Service of Thanksgiving was celebrated
before the Miraculous Icon of Our Lady of Iberia.
On Monday, May 18, 1970, the delegation from America
was received at the Patriarchal Residence by His Eminence,
the Most Reverend Pimen, Metropolitan of Krutitsky and
Kolomensky, locum tenens of the Patriarchial Throne (now
the Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia), members of the
Holy Synod, members of the hierarchy, clergy and lay
representatives of the Orthodox Church of Russia. The
proclamation was read by His Eminence, Metropolitan
Pimen and answered by His Grace, Bishop Theodosius, head
of the American delegation. Following this, a service of
Solemn Thanksgiving was celebrated in the chapel of the
patriarchal residence. An icon of the Blessed Herman of
Alaska was presented to Metropolitan Pimen by Bishop
Theodosius. Present for the granting of the Tomos of Auto-
cephaly and the reception following this was the Honorable
Jacob Beam, Ambassador of the United States to the Soviet
Union.
Other services of note during the visit included a
Panikhida in the Donskoy Monastery in Moscow at the
grave of Patriarch Tikhon, former Archbishop of America
(1898-1907), and a Panikhida at the grave of Patriarch
Alexis in the vault of the Holy Dormition Cathedral, Holy
Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery in Zagorsk. Wreaths of flowers
from the faithful of the Orthodox Church in America were
placed upon the graves at the conclusion of the services. It
is of special note that the Panikhida sung by the delegation
at the grave of Patriarch Tikhon was in English, in com-
memoration of his encouragement of the use of English in
encouraged the use of English in the services in America.
While visiting the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery,
His Grace, Bishop Theodosius, served a Panikhida at the
grave of Metropolitan Innocent (Veniaminov), the first
ruling bishop of Alaska. Metropolitan Innocent, who is
currently being considered for canonization as the “Apostle
of Alaska” is buried in the Church of the Holy Spirit in
Zagorsk.
The visit to the Soviet Union was concluded by pilgrim-
ages to the shrines and holy churches in Kiev, Leningrad
and Pskov in addition to those in Moscow and Zagorsk.
His Grace, Bishop Theodosius was honored by His
Eminence, Metropolitan Pimen, locum tenens of the Patriar-
chal Throne, who requested him to ordain a student of the
Moscow Theological Academy, Victor Korjakin, to the
diaconate at the 40th day Liturgy for the late Patriarch
Alexis at the Holy Dormition Cathedral at Zagorsk.
Bishop Theodosius
 Bishop Theodosius of Alaska receives the Tomos, as Reverend
Daniel Hubiak, present Chancellor of the Orthodox Church in Amer-
ica, and the Honorable Jacob Beame, Ambassador of the U.S. to the
Soviet Union, witness the presentation ceremonies.

Presentation
and Response

RESPONSE
OF HiS GRACE, THEODOSIUS, BISHOP OF SITKA AND ALASKA
UPON RECEIVING THE TOMOS DECLARING THE AUTOCEPHALY OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA

CHRIST IS RISEN!
Your Eminence!
Venerable Hierarchs and Archpastors of Christ’s Church in Russia!
On behalf of our Primate, His Beatitude, Metropolitan Ireney, on behalf of the Bishops, clergy and the
whole God-loving people of the Holy Orthodox Church in America, I have the joy and the honor to receive
from your hands the TOMOS declaring our Church autocephalous.
One hundred and eighty years have elapsed since the day when humble Russian missionaries set their feet
on the American soil, bringing to the New World the holy Orthodox faith and the fullness of grace and salva-
tion contained therein. One hundred and eighty years marked by unceasing growth and innumerable signs of
God’s mercy and also by difficulties, troubles and divisions. But we know that the Lord’s “‘strength is made
perfect in weakness”’ (2 Cor. 12:9). We know that to those who followed Him, Christ announced sorrows and
tribulations, yet added: “‘but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world’ (John 16:33). And thus on this
day which the Lord has made that we may rejoice in it, we learn from God Himself that separations, difficul-
ties and weaknesses, when overcome by Christ’s love, maké healing, reconciliation and unity even more joyful
and precious.
As I receive this TOMOS, hundreds of thousands of Orthodox Americans who, like myself, were born to the
life in Christ in America and whose only desire is to be, with God’s help, fully Orthodox and fully American,

274
 Metropolitan (Patriarch) Pimen delivers the Tomos of Autocephaly together with Metropolitans
Nikodim, Philaret and John.

are united with me in rendering thanks to the Almighty God who never abandons His Church but always leads
her into all Truth. They are united with me also in deep gratitude to you, holy Hierarchs of the Russian
Church, and, first of all to His Holiness, the late Patriarch of Moscow and All-Russia, Alexis, who before he
was called by God to eternal rest, sealed with his blessing, approval and signature this sacred act giving new
life and strength to our American Church. Let his blessed memory be eternal!
At this solemn moment let me say, on behalf of our Church, that we receive this gift of autocephaly not as
recognition of our merits or achievements, not as means of power and pride, but as the challenge for a renewed
dedication to the growth, unity and spiritual welfare of Orthodoxy in America. We pray God that we may seek
not our own but only His will for His Church so that we may grow into the full stature of Christ.
Whatever that Divine will for the youngest of all Orthodox Churches, whatever our own unworthiness and
limitations, we shall always remember the foundations laid for us by the Holy Church of Russia, we shall
always remain faithful to the gifts of the Holy Spirit so abundantly manifested in her Saints and Martyrs, in
her faith and steadfastness. Christ is among us!
As a token of our gratitude, as a sign of unity in faith and love, accept from us this icon of the first Amer-
ican Saint, the venerable and righteous Elder Herman of Alaska, a Saint who came from Russia and gave his
whole life and love to the land and the people to whom he was sent by God.
We pray God Almighty through the prayers of the Saints who shone forth in Russia, of our venerable and
God bearing Father Herman and of all His Saints, to help us and make us worthy of the infinite mercy
bestowed upon us today.
CHRIST IS RISEN!
 Encycical Letter
Of The Great Council Of Bishops To The Orthodox Faithful

Dearly beloved in the Lord; Fathers, Brethren and Sisters of our Orthodox Church in America:
In 1905, our ever-memorable Father Tikhon, then Archbishop of the Aleutian Islands and North America
and later Patriarch of Moscow, in a report to the Holy Synod of the Church of Russia, described his project
for a united and independent Orthodox Church of America. We all know how many trials, divisions and
canonical disturbances have occurred since that time in American Orthodoxy.
However, in these joyful days of Pascha, we are able to announce the good news that, by the power of God
‘“‘made perfect in weakness‘ (2 Cor. 12:9), we now see the day in which a permanent and solid canonical order
is established in our country. By the decisions of His Holiness, the Patriarch of Moscow and the Holy Council
of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in Russia, our Church in America is recognized as autocephalous and joms
the universal family of Orthodox sister churches.
Let us give thanks to the Most-High God for His almighty providence towards His Church. Having acquired
freedom and independence from all external influences, our church life will no longer be based on the prin-
ciple of temporary self-government, but will be in conformity with a permanent, canonical ‘“‘autocephalous”
status, according to the holy canons of the Orthodox Church and to our own Statute, adopted by our All-
American Council of bishops, clergy and laity.
Conscious of being a local American Church, our Metropolitanate has often and publicly stated its belief
that Orthodoxy cannot develop in America except in unity and independence, in conformity with the project
of Patriarch Tikhon. Today, as the Mother-Church which established its Mission in America 175 years ago
solemnly recognizes our autocephaly, a threefold task opens up for us:
— the task of uniting all the Orthodox Christians of America into one Church
— the task of witnessing freely to the true Christian faith in the whole world
— the task of growing spiritually from strength to strength, through the prayers of the holy Father Herman
of Alaska.
The unity of Orthodoxy in America is possible only by free consent and in conformity with the canonical
order of the Church. We believe that all local autocephalous Orthodox Churches, which have branches in
America, will recognize that that which is good for a united Orthodoxy in America, is good for them also, and
that canonical unity does not mean suppression of particular national traditions. The unity of Orthodoxy is
not based on the predominance of one national tradition over the others but on the cooperation of all in love
for the good of the One Church. If some autocephalous Churches should prefer to preserve their jurisdictions
on the American continent and control them directly, the Autocephalous Orthodox Church in America would
always be ready for full cooperation, communion in prayer, and Christian action, in expectation of that day
when the necessity for full unity will become evident to all.

Pais
 A free witness to the true faith of Christ is our other major responsibility. Our Church, living in the midst of
a pluralistic society, must carry on the duty of witnessing to the fact that Christian unity is possible only in the
fullness of faith, in the one true Church, and not through compromise or relativism. On the other hand, we are
called to remember always that millions of our Orthodox brethren live in countries where the preaching of the
Word of God is limited by Constitution and by law, where the State actively supports atheistic materialism
and where confessors of Christ’s Truth: clerics, laymen, the best intellectuals and writers, are subject to repres-
sion and terror. Our task is to use our God-given freedom wisely, without hiding the light of Christ, praying for
those who are deprived of freedom and remembering that deadening materialism is a danger for all of us in
whatever part of the world and under whatever political regime we may live.
All this is possible, dear brothers and sisters, only if we make all efforts in order to grow “according to the
full stature of Christ.” Approaching the day of the solemn glorification of the first Saint to serve God on
American soil, we believe that, through the intercessions of the blessed elder Herman of Alaska and ofall the
Saints, the Lord will not deprive us in the future of His great blessings.
+ LRENEY,
Archbishop of New York
Metropolitan of All-America and Canada
+JOHN, Archbishop of Chicago and Minneapolis
+JOHN, Archbishop of San Francisco and Western U. S.
+SYLVESTER, Archbishop of Montreal and Canada
*VALERIAN, Archbishop of Detroit and Michigan
*KIPRIAN, Archbishop of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania
+AMVROSSY, Bishop of Pittsburgh and West Virginia
+ THEODOSIUS, Bishop of Sitka and Alaska
*DIMITRI, Bishop of Berkeley

MESSAGE TO ALL ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS IN AMERICA

In the Name of the Father and of the Son and ofthe
Holy Spirit. Amen.
We the Bishops, clergy and laity of the Orthodox
Church in America, united in Our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ at our All-American Church Council,
address this message to all our brothers in the Orthodox
Faith in America.
The grace and the mercy of God be with you. Time
has come for us to fulfill Christ’s prayer, “that all may
| be one. . .that the world may believe that Thou hast sent
me” (John 17:21). Our witness to the truth of our
Orthodox Faith on this continent, where we Orthodox
are a minority, lies in our perfect and total unity. How
can the world accept and believe our claim to be the
One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, of having
kept in its fulness the Orthodox faith, if we ourselves are
divided? We have the same Faith, the same Tradition,
the same hope, the same mission. We should then
constitute one Church, visibly, organically, fully. Such is
| the requirement of our Orthodox Faith and we know
that always and everywhere the Orthodox Church has
existed and exists as one Church. There can, therefore,
be no excuse for ourjurisdictional divisions, alienation
from one another, and parochialism. The removal of
such divisions and the organic unity of all-Orthodox in
America is the goal of our Church and we invite you to
become a part of the unity.
But we also know and fully acknowledge that we
have come from different backgrounds and have been
nourished by various traditions within the same and
unique Orthodox Tradition. We firmly believe that this
variety constitutes the richness of American Orthodoxy
and that whatever is true, noble, inspiring and Christian
in Our various customs and practices ought to be fully
preserved and, if possible, shared. Therefore, although
we insist that the One Orthodox Church here must be
the home of all, we equally stress that there must be no
loss of our respective national and cultural heritages and
certainly no domination of any group by any other but a
full equality, total trust and truly Christian brotherhood.
As we send you the peace and love of our First Council
as the Orthodox Church in America, we assure you that
we understand ourselves first and foremost as the
servants of the full unity of the Church in the freedom,
love and mutual respect of all churches and dioceses of
our Orthodox Church in the World and in this blessed
land of America.
Glory to our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Father and
the Holy Spirit, unto ages of ages. Amen.

a) —~] ~)
 I

TOMOS
of ALEXIS, by the Mercy of God
Patriarch of Moscow and All-Russia
For a number of years, the Russian Orthodox Church has observed with
maternal love and concern the development of the Orthodox Church which
she planted on the American continent. In the last few decades she has
sorrowfully witnessed the unfortunate appearance there of a pluralism of
ecclesiastical jurisdictions, a temporary phenomenon, and by no means a
permanent norm of the canonical organization of the Orthodox Church in
America, since it is contrary to the nature of Orthodox canonical ecclesiastical
unity.
The Holy Russian Orthodox Church, striving for the good of the Church,
has directed her efforts toward the normalization of relations among the
various ecclesiastical jurisdictions in America, particularly by negotiating
with the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America, concerning
the possibility of granting autocephaly to this Church in the hope that this
might serve the good of the Orthodox Church in America and the glory
of God.
In her striving for the peace of Christ, which has universal significance
for the life of man; desiring to build a peaceful and creative church life,
and to suppress scandalous ecclesiastical divisions; hoping that this act
would be beneficial to the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church of Christ and
would make possible the development among the local parts of the One,
Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of such relations which would be
founded on the firm ties of the one Orthodox Faith and the love that the
Lord Jesus Christ willed; keeping in mind that this act would serve the
welfare of universal, mutual cooperation; taking into consideration the
petition of the Bishops’ Council of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic
Metropolitanate of North America, which expressed the opinion and desire
of all her faithful children; acknowledging as good for Orthodoxy in America
the independent and self-sustaining existence of said Metropolitanate, which
now represents a mature ecclesiastical organism possessing all that is necessary
for successful further growth, Our Humility together with the Sacred Synod
and all the venerable Hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church, who
have signified their agreement in writing, having examined the said petition,
in sincere love grant autocephaly to the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic
Church in America, that is. the right of a fully independent ordering of

278
church life in accordance with the divine and sacred Canons and _ the
ecclesiastical practices and customs of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic
Church inherited from the Fathers; for which purpose this Patriarchal and
Synodal Tomos is directed to His Beatitude, IRENEY, Archbishop of New
York, Primate of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church in America.
Metropolitan of All-America and Canada, by which we announce:
1. The Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in North America is
confirmed and proclaimed an Autocephalous Church and named, “The
Autocephalous Orthodox Church in America”:
2. By “autocephaly,” which is confirmed in this decision, it is understood
a)

that the Autocephalous Orthodox Church in America shall:

a. be independent and self-governing with the right of electing her
own Primate and all her bishops, without confirmation or the
right of veto over such elections on the part of any other church
organization or representative of the Eastern Orthodox or any
other confession;
b. firmly and inalterably preserve the divine dogmas, being guided
in her life by the sacred Canons of the Holy Orthodox Catholic
Church of Christ and governed in accordance with her own
Statute as accepted, augmented or amended from time to time by
her own highest legislative and executive organ:
c. maintain direct relations with all other Churches and confessions.
Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike;
d. enjoy all the authority, privileges and rights usually inherent in
the term “autocephaly” in the canonical tradition. of the Eastern
Orthodox Church, including the right of preparing and consecrating
Holy Chrism.

(Excluded here are the specific details in the agreement concerning the parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate. )

Confirming the Autocephaly of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic

Church in America, we bless her to call herself. The Holy Autocephalous
Orthodox Church in America; we acknowledge and proclaim her our Sister
Church, and we invite all local Orthodox Churches and their Primates and
their faithful children to acknowledge her as such and to include her in

179
the dyptichs in accordance with the Canons of the Church, the traditions
of the Fathers and ecclesiastical practice.
The newly-established local Orthodox Autocephalous Church in America
should abide in brotherly relations with all the Orthodox Churches and
their Primates as well as with their bishops, clergy and pious flock, who
are in America and who for the time being preserve their de facto existing
canonical and jurisdictional dependence on their national Churches and
their Primates.
With profound. sincere joy, We announce this to the Fulness of the
Church and We do not cease thanking the All-Gracious Almighty God,
who directs all in the world by His right hand for the good and the
salvation of mankind, — for the successful and final formation of Autocephaly.
and we entreat the all-powerful blessing of God upon the younger Sister in
the family of local Autocephalous Orthodox Churches, the Autocephalous
Orthodox Church in America.
May the Consubstantial and Luife-creating and Undivided Trinity.—
Father. Son and Holy Spirit.— acting in Its own wondrous providence.
send down on the Archpastors, Pastors and Faithful Children of the Holy
Autocephalous Orthodox American Church Its heavenly. unfailing help,
and may It bless with success all her future endeavors for the good of
the Holy Church.

Signed in the city of Moscow. April 10th, 1970.

ALEXEI. Patriarch of Moscow and AIl Russia

Members of the Holy Synod:

1. Metropolitan of Krutitsa and Kolomna, PIMEN
2. Metropolitan of Leningrad and Novgorod, NIKODIM
3. Metropolitan of Kiev and Galicia, Exarch of the Ukraine, PHILARET
4. Metropolitan of Orel and Briansk. PALLADY
5. Metropolitan of Alma-Ata and Kazakhstan, IOsIF
6. Metropolitan of Yaroslav] and Rostov, IOANN
7. Archbishop of Irkutsk and Tchita, VENIAMIN
8. Archbishop of Ufa and Sterlitamak, lov
9. Archbishop of New York and the Aleutians, Exarch of North and South
America, [ONAFAN
10. Bishop of Kishinev and Moldavia, VARFOLOMEY
11. Bishop of Tula and Belev, [UVENALY
. Bishop of Chernigov and Nezhinsk, VLADIMIR
13. Bishop of Smolensk and Viazma, GEDEON
14. Chancellor of the Moscow Patriarchate. Metropolitan of Tallin and
Fstonia. ALEXEI.
 14th 1st All-American Council, St. Tikhon’s Monastery and Seminary, South Canaan, Pa., October
AN END AND A BEGINNING:
The Council which met at St. Tikhon’s Monastery and
Seminary October 19-22, 1970, marked the end of one era
and the beginning of another. What had been irrevocably
placed on the Church’s agenda at the Council of 1968 —
namely, that the Church considered herself as the local
American Church — was brought to fulfillment in 1970. In
1969-1970 the Great Council of Bishops, together with the
Holy Synod of the Church of Russia, had given final canoni-
cal sanction to the autocephaly of the Orthodox Church in
America. The “change of name” proposed in 1968 became
in 1970 the reality ~ practical and canonical — of fully-
recognized autocephaly. It was the role of the Council of
1970 to receive autocephaly and to assimiliate it into the
consciousness of the Church. The Council began as the 14th
All-American Council — marking the end ofan era; it ended
as the Ist All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in
America — marking a new beginning.
1970
THE 14th/1st ALL-AMERICAN COUNCIL
Once autocephaly was received it became necessary to
define, in the new circumstances, the statutory form and
administrative structure of the Church. The Council of 1970
resolved to convene the next Council in 1971 for the sole
purpose of adopting a new Statute.
The Second All-American Council!
The 2nd All-American Council, convened at St. Tikhon’s
October 19-21, 1971, based its work on the draft of a new
Statute prepared by the Permanent Statute Commission.
The Statute of 1955 was the inspiration, point of departure
and frame of reference of the new Statute. Experience
accumulated since 1955 served the Church well in adopting
nowa Statute that was fully Orthodox and yet fully relevant
to the American legal and ecclesiastical conditions.
281
 Procession to the Monastery Church
1st All-American Council, October 1970.

THE COUNCILS OF THE

ORTHODOX CHURCH
IN AMERICA

Metropolitan Ireney de-

livering opening remarks to
delegates in the Monastery
Church.

Opening Service of Thanksgiving, October 1970.

uN

202
 LIVE | "7

Delegates to the 3rd All-American Council.

Metropolitan lreney addresses the

3rd All-American Council, Pittsburgh, 1973.

Daily chapel services during the Council were well

attended with many clergy and laity receiving the
sacraments each day.

Bishop Jose of Mexico City explains new texts of Spanish

Liturgy to delegate at exhibit area.

Photo credits: ;
Bob Jennings, Honesdale, 1st All-American Council
Michael Povich, Canonsburg, 3rd All-American Council
The Third All-American Council
At the 3rd All-American Council, held in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, October 13-15, 1973, attention shifted to the
content of the Church’s Statute. The question at the fore-
front now was how to embody the Statute in the actual life
and procedures of the Church and its institutions. For the
first time, the Council was divided into sections: 1) the
National Church; 2) the Parish; 3) Finances; 4) Missions.
Each section drafted proposals and resolutions for the con-
sideration, debate and decision of the Council meeting in
plenary session. In addition to the sections, workshops were
held on the following themes: 1) Youth Work and Religious
Education; 2) Liturgical Music; 3) Inter-Orthodox Relations
and Ecumenism; 4) Information and Public Relations.
The Fourth All-American Council
The 4th All-American Council, meetingat the time of this
book’s publication, has been planned as the Council on
Mission. In the experience of the Orthodox Church in
America the time has come to go beyond structure and
organization. In 1970 autocephaly created canonical perma-
nence and clarity; it also imposed the obligation to be con-
cerned about America and the mission of Orthodoxy in
America. On the foundation of autocephaly the 1971 Coun-
cil erected the Statute. In 1973 the Church explored the
284
Delegates at the 3rd All-American Council
question of what the Statute means in the internal life of
the Church. Finally in 1975, the 4th All-American Council
addresses itself to the very purpose of the existence of the
Church in America: the Orthodox mission to America in the
light of the eternal beauty and power of the saving Gospel
of Christ.
ARCHPRIEST DANIEL HUBIAK
Chancellor of the Orthodox Church tn America
Father Daniel was born on December 19, Lote. in
Akron, Ohio, where his father, Archpriest Afanasy
Hubiak, was founder and pastor of St. Nicholas Church.
During World War II, he served in the United States
Army. After the war, he graduated from Columbia Uni-
versity and St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Semi-
nary in New York. In September 1951, he married
Evdokia Martynuk of Brooklyn, and on September 27,
1952, he was ordained to the Priesthood by Metropolitan
Leonty. From 1952 to 1953, Father Daniel was assistant
pastor at Holy Trinity Church in Detroit, Michigan;
from 1953 to 1955, he was pastor of Holy Assumption
Church in Marblehead, Ohio; from 1956 to 1958, he was
assistant pastor at Holy Transfiguration Church in Brook-
lyn, New York, and from 1959 through 1970, he was
pastor of Holy Trinity Church in East Meadow, New
York. After the All-American Sobor of 1963, the Holy
Synod of Bishops appointed Father Daniel treasurer of
the national Church. In 1970 he was a member of the
delegation which went to Moscow to receive the Tomos
of Autocephaly from Patriarch Alexis. In 1973 the Holy
Synod of Bishops and Metropolitan Council appointed
Father Daniel as Chancellor of the Orthodox Church in
America.
 NEW BISHOPS

In the last decade and a half, the Orthodox Church in

America has gradually achieved the maturity to produce its
own leadership. A new generation of American-born and
American-educated bishops has come forth to serve the
needs of the Church.
Metropolitan Vladimir
Metropolitan Vladimir (Basil Nagosky). was born in
Donora, Pennsylvania, in 1922, and raised in Cleveland,
Ohio. After serving in the armed forces during World War II
and then in the civil service of the United States govern-
ment here and abroad for five years, he received his under-
graduate degree from Western Reserve University in Cleve-
land. He continued his education with graduate work at
Columbia University, Middlebury College, and St. Vladimir's
Orthodox Theological Seminary, where he was ordained to
the diaconate. He was ordained to the priesthood in 1959
and upon graduation from St. Vladimir’s, he served as a
missionary priest in Sitka and later Unalaska. On October
14, 1962, Hieromonk Vladimir was consecrated Bishop of
Kyoto, Japan, auxiliary to the Archbishop of Tokyo and,
in 1964, became ruling Bishop of Tokyo and Japan. He was
raised to the rank of Metropolitan when that Church re-
ceived its autonomy from the Moscow Patriarchate. Return-
ing to the United States as assistant to Archbishop John of
San Francisco in 1972, Metropolitan Vladimir became
ruling bishop of the Western diocese in 1974 upon the
retirement of Archbishop John.
Bishop Theodosius
Born in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, on October 27, 1933,
Bishop Theodosius (Theodore Lazar) graduated from Wash-
ington and Jefferson College in 1960. He continued his
studies at St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary
where he served as ecclesiarch and secretary of the Church
School Teacher Training Program. Following graduation, he
attended the Ecumenical Institute in Bossey, Switzerland,
and visited centers of Orthodoxy in Europe and the Holy
Land. Returning to the United States, he was tonsured as a
monk on March 10, 1961, and ordained to the diaconate on
October 14, 1961. Ordained to the priesthood October 22,
1961, Father Theodosius became rector of the Nativity of
the Virgin Mary church in Madison, Illinois, and assistant
chaplain at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Recalled to New
York to work in the Chancery office in 1966, he was elected
Bishop of Washington, D.C., vicar to Metropolitan Ireney,
on March 31 of the following year. Consecrated on May 6,
1967, Bishop Theodosius was soon sent to Alaska where he
became the ruling bishop. In 1970, Bishop Theodosius
represented the American Church at the funeral of Patriarch
Alexis of Moscow and later returned to receive the Tomos
of Autocephaly. In August of 1970, Bishop Theodosius
witnessed the canonization and glorification of St. Herman
of Alaska in Kodiak. He was transferred to the Diocese of
Pittsburgh and West Virginia on May 30, 1972, by the Holy
Synod. He is a member of the Lesser Synod, and presently
serves as chairman of the Department of Religious Educa-
tion.

Bie
rom)
Bishop Dmitri
Bishop Dmitri (Robert Royster) was born in Texas on
November 2, 1923, and after intense study, he and his sister
were received into the Orthodox Church in Dallas in 1941.
Drafted into the army in 1943, he served as an interpreter
of Japanese and met the leaders of the Japanese Orthodox
Church before returning to Southern Methodist University
in Dallas to complete his studies in Spanish, later becoming
professor of Spanish literature. Prior to ordination, the
future Bishop Dmitri was engaged in missionary work
among Mexican-Americans in Texas and translated most of
the liturgical cycle into Spanish. After ordination in 1954,
he founded St. Seraphim Church in Dallas and continued
intensive missionary work. Father Dmitri studied at St.
Vladimir’s Seminary in 1966, while teaching Spanish at
Fordham University. Elected to the episcopate in 1969, he
was consecrated on June 22, 1969, and assigned as Bishop
of Berkeley, vicar to Archbishop John of San Francisco.
The next year he was transferred as vicar to the Metropoli-
tan with the title of Bishop of Washington. On October 19,
1972, Bishop Dmitri was elected as ruling Bishop of Hart-
ford and New England. He is the chairman of the Depart-
ment of Missions of the Orthodox Church in America.

Bishop Herman
Bishop Herman (Joseph Swaiko) was born on February
1, 1932, in Bairdford, Pennsylvania, and graduated from
Robert Morris College in Pittsburgh with a degree in busi-
ness administration. After service in the armed forces, he
entered St. Tikhon’s Seminary in 1959. There, in 1961, he
was appointed personal secretary to Bishop Kiprian. Gradu-
ating from the seminary in 1963, he was ordained to the
diaconate in March of 1964 and to the priesthood on April
7, 1964. While serving on the seminary administration and
teaching Church Slavonic at St. Tikhon’s, Father Joseph was
‘ rector of St. John the Baptist Church in Dundaff and Sts.
i
Peter and Paul Church in Uniondale, Pennsylvania. He was
given the monastic tonsure on December 4, 1970, with the
: name of Herman and was elevated to the rank of Igumen of
St. Tikhon’s Monastery in 1971. In October of 1972, Father
Herman was elected to the episcopate and raised to the
rank of archimandrite. On February 10, 1973, he was con-
secrated Bishop of Wilkes-Barre in his Cathedral Church of
the Holy Resurrection and assigned as auxiliary bishop of
the Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Archdiocese. Bishop Her-
man is currently the chairman of the Department of Finance
of the Church.

286
 Bishop Gregory
Born in Kiev, Russia, on April 17, 1925, but educated in
the United States, Bishop Gregory (George Afonsky), the
son and grandson of priests, came to the United States in
1949 after three years in German work camps. He served as
a choir director in various parishes of the Orthodox Church
in America for fifteen years. After completing studies at the
University of Connecticut, he entered St. Vladimir’s Theo-
logical Seminary, graduatingin 1965. The same year, he was
ordained to the priesthood and assigned to St. Sergius
Chapel in Syosset, New York, where he served for six years.
During this time, Father George continued his studies re-
ceiving a Master of Arts degree from Hofstra University and
a Master of Theology from St. Vladimir’s Seminary. In
November 1971, Father George was assigned to St. Nicholas
Church in Portland, Oregon, where he remained until his
election as Bishop of Sitka and Alaska in March 1973.
Bishop Gregory was consecrated on May 13, 1973, in Sitka.
He has remained active in academic work and has been a
guiding force in the development of St. Herman’s Pastoral
School.

Bishop Jose

Bishop Jose was born on August 5, 1923 in Santa

Teresa, Guana Juato, Mexico. His parents Juan Jose
Cortes and Maria Del Refugio Olmos were devout Roman
Catholics. Bishop Jose began his primary education at the
age of eight in the Santa Teresa Rural Federal School.
After completing his middle and seminary education in
Jesuit schools he was sent to Barcelona, Spain and Rome
for further theological study, where he received a Doc-
torate in Canon Law. He then returned to Havanna,
Cuba, where he taught at the Jesuit College of Belen and
served as leader of “Catholic Youth Action,” while serv-
icing local Roman Catholic Parishes. A general dissatis-
faction with the Church of Rome led him, in 1950 to
join the Mexican National Church, a reactionary move-
ment against Spanish colonialism. In 1961, he was elect-
ed bishop. In 1971, Bishop Jose, on behalf of his com-
munity, petitioned for acceptance into the Orthodox
Church in America. He was received in his Catholic rank
of priest along with the other priests of his community.
In 1972, Father Jose participated in the life of St. Tik-
hon’s and St. Vladimir’s Theological Seminaries in prepa-
ration for his consecration as Bishop of the Mexican
Church, which took place on April 22, 1972 at Holy Vir-
gin Protection Cathedral in New York City.
 DIOCESAN
According to Orthodox teaching and tradition, the dio-
cese — i.e., the unity within a clearly determined territory
of a bishop, priests and laity — is the essential and organic
expression of the Church (“The Church is in the bishop and
the bishop is in the Church,” in the words of St. Cyprian of
Carthage). But in order to possess within itself the fulness
of ecclesial life and apostolic faith, the diocese in turn
depends on other dioceses, for its bishop is consecrated by
other bishops. In the Orthodox canonical tradition, the
group of dioceses depending on one another for the conse-
cration of their bishops constitutes a local Church, whose
unity is expressed primarily through the diocesan bishops,
under the primacy of one of them, assembling as the Synod,
the highest ecclesiastical authority. The Local Church is in
unity of faith and communion with all other Churches but
is independent from them in its inner government and ad-
ministration.
It is this canonical scheme that we see in America. It was
normal and natural for Orthodoxy here to go through all
these stages: a mission governed directly by the Holy Synod
of the Russian Church (1794-1799); a vicariate of the
Siberian Diocese of Irkutsk (1799-1870): a diocese (1870-
1903); a diocese with vicariates (Alaska 1903, Syro-Arab
1904, Canada 1916, Pittsburgh 1917, Chicago 1922); a
metropolitan district (an autonomous group of dioceses)
1924-1970; and finally a fully developed Local Church, as a
group of canonically established dioceses, with, as their
supreme center, a synod of bishops presided over by a
primate.
This development, as the whole growth of the American
Church, was organic, shaped by life itself and by the needs
of the Church progressively revealed by her life. At the be-
ginning, during the formative period, it was centralization
that was needed: the direct connection between each parish
and the indisputable administrative and hierarchical center
of the Church. As life went on, however, the need for a cer-
tain decentralization began to be felt. The numerical
growth of parishes, the need for “ethnic” units — the
Syrian, the Serbian, the Albanian, the Romanian, the Mexi-
can — and the need for more lay involvement and responsi-
bility made it more and more imperative to establish local
centers of administration and to introduce little by little the
diocesan structure.
288
DEVELOPMENT
The latter was not introduced everywhere simultaneous-
ly and in the same manner. There also was an organic
growth. The first dioceses emerged from former vicariates:
Chicago, Pittsburgh, Canada, etc. (In 1916, Archbishop
Evdokim already greets Bishop Alexander as the ‘“‘first
Bishop of Canada” and not only in Canada, i.e., as Vicar.)
But no real diocesan structure was established. Thus Alaska,
because of the distance, had a bishop for along time (since
1903 as a separate vicariate) but again without its own
diocesan administration.
The general classification of canonical structures and the
de facto transformation of the diocese into a metropolitan
district accelerated the process of decentralization. Partic-
ularly within the last ten to fifteen years, the dioceses have
begun to develop their own internal administration: dioc-
esan councils and courts, regular diocesan assemblies, finan-
cial, educational and missionary departments or committees
to coordinate local diocesan activities, as well as to imple-
ment proposals on the local level of the national church
departments. Such church organs, which were responsible
for the building up of the national church in previous
decades, are now in their parallel structures helping to build
up the local diocese as the center of church life.
DIOCESES OF THE
ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA
Diocese of Alaska
Diocese of Canada
Diocese of Chicago and Minneapolis
Diocese of New England
Diocese of New York and New Jersey
Diocese of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania
Diocese of Pittsburgh and West Virginia
Diocese of San Francisco and Western United States
Exarchate of Mexico
Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese
Romanian Orthodox Episcopate
Diocese of South America (Cathedra Vacant)
Also under the canonical protection of the Orthodox
Church in America are several parishes in Australia.
 THE DIOCESE OF ALASKA IN THE 20TH CENTURY

The transfer of the North American Mission’s major

activity to the continental United States and the consequent
closing of the Mission School at Sitka in 1912 marked the
beginning of Alaska’s being more or less forgotten by the
mainstream of church life in the continental United States.
It would certainly be incorrect to say totally forgotten, be-
cause from time to time, excerpts from travelogues of such
missionary bishops in Alaska as Innocent (Pustynsky),
Amphilokhy (Vakulsky), Alexis (Panteleev), and John
(Zlobin) were appearing in the Russian-American Messenger;
throughout the 1920’s, 1930’s, and 1940’s, in addition
to occasional articles and even pamphlets about the life and
labors of Father Herman of Spruce Island and Metropolitan
Innocent (Veniaminov). Because the North American Dio-
cese for the next sixty years was to be confronted with such
urgent issues as its Own mere existence in America alone,
what was left of the former Russian Mission in Alaska was
hardly even an afterthought in the minds of most faithful
in the continental United States. Apart from the Church
Administration, no one knew what was going on in the
Alaskan Church for these sixty years. Only recently has
Alaska been returned to the remembrance ofthe church in
the continental states by the tragic destruction of St.
Michael the Archangel Cathedral at Sitka in a general town
fire in January 1966.

The Unknown Years: 1900 - 1952

Archimandrite Amphilokhy (Vakulsky).
Since 1870, when Bishop Nicholas Mitropolsky trans- Straits on a Russian steamer to the Chukota Peninsula of
ferred the Diocesan See from Sitka to San Francisco, Alaska
Eastern Siberia on a cold windy night during Bright Week
had no resident bishop. Soon after his arrival in America
to serve Paschal Matins and Liturgy for forty Russian
Bishop Tikhon went to Alaska on an episcopal visit in 1899.
Eskimos, whom he knew about there, who spoke the same
He traveled to all the Orthodox communities there, but
dialect as the American Eskimos. Archimandrite Am-
spent considerable time in the area along the Kuskokwim
philokhy did considerable work in religious education
and Yukon River, a territory known as the Kwipach Mis-
among the Eskimos. He organized a small group of select
sion. The faithful in this area, who were Eskimos, were all
young men from various villages whom he called catechists.
the spiritual offspring of Father James Netsvietov, who had
Their function was to pass on in their villages what he had
worked directly under Bishop Innocent, translating the serv-
taught them about prayer, scripture, church history and
ices of the church and selected Scripture readings for litur-
church music, as well as to train other people in the villages
gical use from Slavonic to Eskimo. His work resulted in
to be religious instructors. After he was consecrated Vicar
printed Eskimo prayer books and liturgy books which were
Bishop of Alaska in 1923, he ordained one of these original
published by Bishop Nicholas Ziorov in 1891. Bishop Tikhon catechists, Vasily Changsak of Russian Mission, to the priest-
decided to appoint a missionary there who could speak the
hood. Father Vasily continued to labor with the same spirit
native tongues. He appointed Archimandrite Amphilokhy
and devotion as his teacher did before him. He served the
(Vakulsky), who served as head of the Kwipach Mission
five Yukon River parishes of the Kwipach Mission until the
from 1900 through 1912. Archimandrite Amphilokhy had
very moment of his death on St. Nicholas Day, December
graduated from the Kazan Theological Academy, where he
19, 1968. Throughout the entire Yukon District the faithful
had completed a special course for missionary work to the
continue to recall him with deep respect and childlike love,
Mongolians in Siberia.
bearing witness to his truly pastoral character which har-
Amphilokhy was young and energetic, and was able tc moniously combined meekness, courage, gentleness, and
learn the language of the Eskimos quickly. He maintainec severity, with compassion and firmness.
as the center of his mission the Church ofthe Elevation o1
the Cross at Russian Mission, the former headquarters of During the first seventeen years of Amphilokhy’s life in
Father Netsvietov. He traveled extensively up and down the Alaska, three different Vicar Bishops were assigned there
river valley by dog sled in the winter and kayak in the sum- for tenures: Innocent (Pustynsky), 1904-1909; Alexander
mer. In 1910 he journeyed from Nome across the Bering (Nemelovsky), 1909-1915; and Philip (Stavitzky), 1916-

289
1917. During the tenure of Bishop Innocent the “Church
Temperance Society,” an organization which combatted al-
coholism among the natives, was started by Priests John
Bortnovsky and Alexander Patelin.
Archpriest Paul Shadura, who had arrived in Alaska
around 1900, was ordained to the diaconate in 1905 and
then to the priesthood in 1907 by Bishop Innocent. Father
Paul was born in the village of Pogorelo in Minsk on Janu-
ary 16, 1875, and after graduation from the Kholm Theo-
logical Seminary taught church music in the Kholm Diocesan
Preparatory School. Soon he volunteered to serve in Alaska.
Until his ordination he served as psalomschik in Holy
Resurrection Church at Kodiak. He was ordained for Holy
Assumption Church in Kenai. In addition to his tireless and
extensive missionary travels throughout the Alaskan Vicar-
Diocese he founded and built churches at Seldovia and
Tyonek. He served the Mission without any salary for forty
years, while he worked at the same time to support his wife
Catherine Isaakevna, the American-born daughter of an
Alaskan native, and their five children, until he retired in
1952. He fell asleep in the Lord in 1956.
In his episcopal rule, Bishop Alexis Panteleev (1934-
1944) continued the extensive archpastoral travels of his
predecessor, Bishop Amphilokhy. Being gifted with knowl-
edge of church music, he devoted much time during his
visits to the instruction of church singing among the Alas-
kans. Since 1937 was the one-hundredth anniversary of
Father Herman’s death, and himself being a monk, Bishop
Alexis was very conscious of Herman’s prophecy about a
290
future monastic community on Spruce Island. With the ap-
proval of the Council of Bishops in America he made several
appeals to all the parishes throughout the country to con-
duct special offerings that would finance the construction
of a small hermitage. Bishop Alexis did succeed in erecting
the shell of such a building, which still stands today on the
shore of Spruce Island. Due to his old age and weakening
health he was forced to leave Alaska in 1944 at the age of
seventy. He retired to St. Tikhon’s Monastery, and was
succeeded by Bishop John (Zlobin), 1945-1952.
The End of an Era: 1956-1966
The episcopal administration of Bishop Amvrossy
(Merejko), 1956-1966, was filled with a series of successively
related events in the life of the Alaskan Diocese, which led
to the resurrection of new life for the Church there. The
Church Administration was becoming more aware of the
state of the diocese, through Bishop Amvrossy’s very effi-
ciently detailed and consistently written reports. Bishop
Amvyrossy continued the policy of episcopal visitation in
the villages, although on a less frequent schedule. He also
continued the policy of training native Alaskans for the
priesthood. During his episcopal tenure he ordained ten
native Alaskan priests. In 1955 a special commission con-
sisting of Bishop Jonah, Father J. Pishtey, and Mr. Alexan-
der Bezsmertny was sent to Alaska by the Metropolitan
Council to take an inventory of Church properties.
In the summer of 1957 Metropolitan Leonty made a
pilgrimage to Spruce Island and at the same time traveled
(Left photo) Archimandrite Amphi-
_ lokhy returning during Pascha Week
_ from Chukchi Peninsula, March 27,
we. 1910. (Right photo) Archimandrite
-— ——. --..___ Amphilokhy returning on the ‘‘Sea
: 7 Wolf” from a second visit to Chukchi
off the Bering Straits in August, 1910.
throughout Alaska with Bishop Amvrossy to investigate the
situation and the possibilities for reviving church life in
Alaska. He found that twelve priests were trying to serve 84
scattered Orthodox parishes, chapels, and communities all
over the state. Some of these places were so far and remote
that they were simply inaccessible to any priest. The native
population in Alaska was near 48,000 and 23,000 of these
were active Orthodox Christians. The majority of parishes
were led in prayer life by tonsured readers, who actually
maintained a formal and extensive liturgical life in their
native languages, as far as was possible. The need therefore
for a local mission school to train priests and instructors
- program was highlighted by several cultural field trips and
was obvious. ‘
Metropolitan Leonty’s visit was followed by that of an
FROC delegation which returned eyewitness reports about
the faith and loyalty of the people in Alaska to the Ortho-
dox Church and of possibilities for the opening of new
parishes.
On January 2, 1966, St. Michael the Archangel Cathedral,
which was built by Metropolitan Innocent (Veniaminov),
was destroyed in a fire that swept through the city of Sitka
that night. News of this tragedy in the public media created
a great impact on the Orthodox faithful in the continental
states. An old structure, which was almost taken for granted
by many people as an eternal monument, was suddenly
gone, and the whole Church was actually struck by an
ominous sensation. Perhaps this tragedy was the very voice
of God Himself, speaking to the Church, as it once spoke to
Moses out of the Burning Bush on Mt. Sinai, asking that His
people Israel be protected, defended and led. Beyond all
doubt this was the end and the beginning of an era for the
Church in Alaska, as well as for the entire Church in Amer-
ica. From this day on nothing but truly providential events
began to occur in the Alaskan Mission.
The Resurrection of Life: 1966 to the Present
In the autumn of 1966, Sophie Koulomzin, Executive
Secretary of the Orthodox Christian Education Commission
and instructor of Religious Education at St. Vladimir’s
Seminary, was sent to Alaska by the FROC to explore
possibilities for the creation of an adequate program of
religious instruction for church schools of the Alaskan Dio-
14 We Bi. ie
Faculty and students of the Reader’s Training Program held at St.
Viadimirs, January, 1967.
Page 291 — Second column should read as follows:
cese. This visit resulted in the Alaskan Reader’s Training
Program, the first of its kind, which was conducted at St.
Vladimir’s by students and faculty of the Seminary the
following summer. The entire program was financed by
contributions from the FROC and many local parishes.
Eleven young Alaskan men and women from ages 15
through 29 went through an eight-week program of basic
studies in Liturgical Practice, Church Music, Church History,
Doctrine, Christian Education, and Church Slavonic. The
many visits to local parishes and church institutions. One of
this group, Eugene Bourdukovsky, returned later to St.
Tikhon’s Seminary to study for the priesthood. He returned
after graduation to his native Alaska to serve the Church as
a priest.
On June 1, 1967, the Holy Synod appointed Bishop
Theodosius (Lazor) as administrator (and later, ruling
bishop) of the Diocese of Alaska. His administration, 1967-
1972, saw an opening of new paths and a flowering of
church life for the whole diocese after more than a half
century of general oblivion and dormancy. Bishop Theo-
dosius took upon himself several major projects during his
administration. After thorough and repeated cycles of
£ a
St. Michael’s Cathedral is destroyed by fire, January 2, 1966.
(Photograph by Martin Strand).
this group, Eugene Bourdukovsky, returned later to St.
Tikhon’s Seminary to study for the priesthood. He returned
after graduation to his native Alaska to serve the Church as
a priest.
On June 1, 1967, the Holy Synod appointed Bishop
Theodosius (Lazor) as administrator (and later, ruling
bishop) of the Diocese of Alaska. His administration, 1967-
1972, saw an opening of new paths and a flowering of
church life for the whole diocese after more than a half
century of general oblivion and dormancy. Bishop Theo-
dosius took upon himself several major projects during his
administration. After thorough and repeated cycles of
cese. This visit resulted in the Alaskan Reader’s Training
Program, the first of its kind, which was conducted at St.
Vladimir’s by students and faculty of the Seminary the
following summer. The entire program was financed by
contributions from the FROC and many local parishes.
Eleven young Alaskan men and women from ages 15
through 29 went through an eight-week program of basic
studies in Liturgical Practice, Church Music, Church History,
Doctrine, Christian Education, and Church Slavonic. The
program was highlighted by several cultural field trips and
many visits to local parishes and church institutions. One of
29]
 Orthodox were permanent residents there, several hundreds
of faithful from the villages passed through the city for con-
siderable lengths of time to receive medical treatment, and
hundreds of children were enrolled in local government
boarding schools in and near the city. Until the coming of
Father Nicholas, there was no parish to serve these people.
With funds chiefly from the diocesan treasury and substan-
tial contributions from parishes in the continental United
States, a parish was established and a new church was built,
which was named after St. Innocent of Irkutsk, patron of
the Alaskan Mission. The parish very soon became a new
center of Orthodox life and pastoral care for all Alaska as
well as for Anchorage itself. It continues to be a living mis-
sion which seeks out and protects the Orthodox faithful in
hospitals, schools and in the entire city who have lost con-
tact with the Church.
In addition to these projects, there were several events
Respect for native culture and traditions has helped to build which were significant for the entire Orthodox Church in
morale in the Alaskan Diocese. Here Sitka residents perform America as well as for the diocese. July 1967 began the
at a church celebration.
first in a series of very successful nationwide appeals for
funds to reconstruct St. Michael the Archangel Cathedral
in Sitka. In the fall of 1968, the first Alaskan Diocesan
visitation to all parts of the diocese, including the most
Assembly was held in Anchorage with one bishop, thirteen
minute and remote communities, chapels and churches, he
priests and two deacons attending. In September 1969, the
made it known that the first task to be accomplished was a
175th anniversary of the Orthodox Mission in America was
general boost in morale and self-esteem among the native
celebrated in Sitka with many secular dignitaries in attend-
Alaskan faithful. They had been totally demoralized by
ance. This event was doubly significant in that for the first
confrontations with oppressive sectarians both through the time, the secular powers in Alaska were publically and for-
media and through inter-personal contacts in society. This mally made aware of the presence of the Orthodox faith in
religious and social demoralization among the Alaskan faith- Alaska, its persecution by secular and sectarian groups, and
ful resulted from the glaringly anti-Orthodox propaganda of its significance for the state.
of the sectarians and from their exploitation on all levels of
social life by white entrepreneurs from the lower continen-
tal United States. Secondly, he disclosed these persecutions
and sufferings of the Alaskan Orthodox faithful to the
general church public in the lower 48 states through reports
to the Holy Synod, numerous articles in official Church
media, traveling slide-lecture programs in parishes of the
lower states. In his contacts with the Alaskan faithful, he
tried to teach them an awareness of the Orthodox faith as
an experience which transcends the parochial limits of
national or tribal identity. He made several public appeals
for material and spiritual assistance, to which parishes and
church institutions in the lower states responded generously.
After these attempts to get Alaska on its own feet, he
worked to establish necessary diocesan structures and pro-
cedures adequate for the needs of the diocese and fulfill-
ment of its mission.
During the administration of Bishop Theodosius, the
number of priests in Alaska was increased from 12 to 22.
He chose several middle-aged men, who were respected
readers and church leaders in their villages, to study for the
priesthood. He and members of his staff, Priests Michael
Irvin and David Black, taught and trained them during a
special course of study in Sitka. After being ordained they
returned to their own villages, where they still continue to
serve the local and neighboring parishes.
In September 1967 Priest Nicholas Harris founded a new
mission in Anchorage. Fifteen hundred native Alaskan Rebuilding of St. Michael’s Cathedral gets underway in Sitka.
1st All-Alaska Diocesan Assembly, Anchorage, 1968 (above); 2nd
Assembly, Anchorage, 1972 (right).
On February 11, 1973, during Father Kreta’s administra-
tion, St. Herman’s Pastoral School was officially opened at
In October, Orthodox Alaskans mourned the death of Kenai by Metropolitan Vladimir, Bishop of Berkeley, with
Father Gerasim (Schmaltz) who came to Spruce Island in Divine Services and an act of inauguration. The school was
1926, where he served as the guardian of St. Herman’s relics transferred to Kodiak after the first year where a new
and wilderness abode until the end ofhis life. seminary building is now nearing completion. The Director
August 9, 1970, was the universal canonization of of Studies at the Seminary is Sister Victoria (Schnurer), a
Blessed Father Herman of Alaska, the first known saint of graduate of St. Vladimir’s Seminary, and the faculty and
the Orthodox Church in America. For the first time in its staff are composed of clergy of the Alaskan Diocese: Bishop
entire history, the Orthodox Church in Alaska, during those Gregory, Archpriests Joseph Kreta, Nicholas Harris; Priests
three days of canonization services, became the center of Paul Merculieff, Theodore Fryntzko and Michael Oleksa.
unity for the entire Orthodox world. Bishops, priests and It is of great significance that the Divine Liturgy which
faithful coming from all parts of the world, gathered in opened the school that day was broadcasted on radio
Kodiak, at the Church of the Resurrection, to acknowledge throughout the entire state of Alaska. On August 27, 1973,
and receive God’s first gift of sainthood to the American the State of Alaska granted certification to St. Herman’s
Pastoral School as an educational institution, thus giving
Church.
the School the right to confer diplomas.
In the summer of 1971, a group of eight students re-
In July 1973, the Diocese of Alaska published A Yupik
sponded to an appeal from Bishop Theodosius and the dioc-
Prayer Book for Yupik Eskimos of the Yukon-Kuskokwim
esan administration to work in various districts of Alaska as
River District. The book contains texts from Father
missionary teachers of the Orthodox faith. The mission was
Netsvietov’s book published in 1897 by Bishop Nicholas
financed by the Diocese of Alaska and by parishes on the
(Ziorov), plus additional translations from the early part of
East Coast. The purposes behind this three-month mission
this century by Father Vasily Changsak of Russian Mission,
were to investigate further the possibilities for religious
Reader Matthew Berezkin of Napaskiak, as well as more
education among the native faithful, with the prospect of
current translations by Father Michael Oleksa of Kwethluk
developing a program of religious education peculiar to the and Readers Yako Fisher and Phillip Alexie. It is the first
Alaskan way of life, to give the Alaskan faithful some first-
such publication by the Mission since 1897.
hand contacts with Orthodox Christians from a different
Vasily Lickwar
cultural setting and to supply the lower 48 states with in-
formation about the life of the Alaskan Church. On return-
ing, the students gave numerous programs throughout the
country about Orthodoxy in Alaska.
On February 2-5, 1972, the second All-Alaskan Diocesan
Assembly was held in Anchorage. In May, 1972, the Holy
Synod appointed Bishop Theodosius as ruling Bishop of the
Diocese of Pittsburgh and West Virginia. Archpriest Joseph
Kreta followed him as administrator of the Alaskan Diocese
until the consecration of Archimandrite George Afonsky as
Bishop Gregory of Sitka and Alaska, in Sitka on May 13,
1973. Father Kreta and Bishop Gregory have labored to im-
prove the financial and administrative situation in the dio-
Cad tee Sag ‘
cese, and have also organized a formal pastoral school for |

native deacons, priests, readers, teachers and choir directors Father Nicolai O. Michael, first native Alaskan priest to attend the
of the Alaskan diocese. All-American Council, with Father Theodore Fryntzko, 1973.

193
 ADDRESS
OF THE GREAT COUNCIL OF BISHOPS OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX GREEK CATHOLIC CHURCH OF AMERICA
(THE METROPOLIA) CONCERNING THE CANONIZATION OF THE SPIRITUAL FATHER HERMAN OF ALASKA

Beloved in Christ; Pastors and God-loving Children of our Church:

In our Archpastoral concern and care for the spiritual progress and well-being of all the faithful children in
our care, and remembering that our Lord gives to all of us the command to increase in our spiritual life to
achieve the image of the perfection of our Heavenly Father (Matt. 5:48), and knowing how important it is to
have before us in this saintly task the exalted example of such a spiritual feat in the name of Christ (1 Tim.
2:12) already revealed in the life of the Holy Church, we, your Archpastors and Servants declare, after a
lengthy and all-embracing examination and consideration, in conformity with the Holy Canons and Traditions
of our Holy Orthodox Church, that we have defined by our conciliar decision in full unanimity, and firmly
believing in the consent of the Holy Spirit in this matter, to accomplish, to the glory of the living God, the
canonization of the Venerable Spiritual Father the monk Herman of Alaska. The Venerable Spiritual Father
Herman of the holy Monastery of Valaamo was one of the first Russian Orthodox missionaries who arrived in
Alaska in 1794. He remained for forty years on Spruce Island, near the Island of Kodiak, in the spiritual work
of apostolic service among the natives whom he illumined by the light of the truth of the Gospel.
The Venerable Spiritual Father Herman was born in 1760 in the town of Serpoukhov in the County of
Moscow. As a sixteen-year-old youth, he left for the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Hermitage near Petersburg, where
he became a monk, and where he was considered worthy to receive miraculous healing from a critical ailment
while praying before the icon of the Mother of God. After having spent approximately six years at the Saint
Sergius Hermitage, he departed for the Valaamo Monastery where he received as his Spiritual Father and guide
the charismatic Igumen Nazary, who had been called to Valaamo from Sarov. Having such a guide, the future
Spiritual Father Herman, while still at Valaamo took upon himself physical and spiritual tasks, and later re-
ceived the blessing to continue his spiritual feats in a hermitage which has since been called the Herman
Hermitage.
The Blessed Spiritual Father Herman labored in Alaska longer than all his devoted co-workers in the field of
enlightening the pagans. His personal piety which found its expression in continual prayer, in severe fasting
and the use of a rigid wooden bench which served as his bed, caused astonishment. But, still more important,
our Lord God gave him the great gift of compassionate love for those whom he led to Christ.
The Spiritual Father Herman gave forty years of his life to the service of people. He baptized them, taught
them, prayed for them and interceded before the authorities for those who had been unjustly treated. His
heart was filled with tenderness towards children. He founded an orphanage, a school for them; he was con-
stantly concerned about them and gave them bread. The children themselves were attracted towards their
Holy “Apa” (Grandfather).
The gift of foreseeing the future, as the fruit of a pure heart, amazed all those who came in touch with
Father Herman. He had the eminent gift of convincing and enlightening non-believers. Testimonies have been
preserved of this from highly educated people, converted to God by the Venerable Spiritual Father, to a living
Faith in Christ, to participation in the saving Sacraments of the Holy Church. The grace of God was repeatedly
manifested through his prayers. Fires ceased at limits indicated by the Spiritual Father and waters did not rise
higher than the place where he laid a holy icon. People were healed from their infirmities through his prayers.
This grace of God did not cease after his departure from this life. In a short encyclical it is impossible to de-
scribe in detail all the deeds of his holy life in Alaska. Those who met him once, those who had contact with
him could never forget him. He is remembered by hierarchs; priests and believers living in America today
remember him as an intercessor before God.
The day of his death was fore-announced from above to the Venerable Spiritual Father Herman; he knew
the day of his death and he departed this life while, according to his wish, the Acts of the Apostles were read.
The knowledge of the day of one’s death has always been considered by the Church as one of the signs of the
holiness of the deceased. The remains of the Spiritual Father Herman were preserved until this time at the very
place of his death, Spruce Island.

294
 We believe that it was the will of God to reveal to us on this continent, and in this country, the Blessed
Spiritual Father Herman as a sublime example of the Holy Life, for our spiritual benefit, inspiration, comfort
and the confirmation of our Faith.
Therefore, we the Bishops of the local Orthodox Church of America, the beginning of which was laid in
Alaska, have decided by the manifest will of the Holy Spirit, and our Archpastoral action, to canonize the
Spiritual Father Herman of Alaska of blessed memory, and to enter his name in that catalog of Saints of our
local Church in America.
The Lord permitting it, the church celebration with an appropriate rite of canonization of the Spiritual
Father Herman will take place on (27 July) 9 August 1970 in Alaska. Being filled with joy on the occasion of
this forthcoming Great Feast of Faith, we invite all believing people to spiritually prepare themselves with
proper disposition for this festival. While canonizing the new Holy Servant of God, the first in America, we
once again confirm our faith in’ the divine counsel, in the perspective of which our local American Church is a
historical fact, and we furthermore believe that our Church stands not on the unsure foundations of this world
but on the evangelical covenant of our Savior, “‘Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever |
have commanded you” (Matt. 28:19-20).
Through the Prayers of Our Holy Father Herman of Alaska, God grant us to fulfill his holy will in every
place of his dominion.
VENERABLE FATHER HERMAN, PRAY TO GOD FOR US.
The Members of the Great Council of Bishops of the
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America (The Metropolia):
Humbly,

+Jneney, Ar ChRi ship 4] Nel Sore and

Kedron06tan 6 CL Aineuce and banade.

“he, Lo had 2 ie
andPORE
itm
5 (J)

eee eg ola wh,

Catepst St EO,

+ue“de, ofChitorgandUjat Virginia:

aaa pv Oilertilplrs aadAnns gljonia

+ Vheewa
ove ae ee, x Sethe anc

cypearWishup of Colmenlor

Given at The Metropolitan’s Residence

Syosset, Long Island, New York
11 March 1969
(The Orthodox Church, August-September 1969)

195
 St. Herman of Alaska

ST. HERMAN OF ALASKA

Ikon painted by Petros Sasaki, a Japanese Orthodox ikonographer presently living in Finland.
Picture used by kind permission of His Grace, Theodosius, Bishop of Sitka and Alaska.

296
 ENCYCLICAL
OF HIS EMINENCE, THE MOST REVEREND METROPOLITAN IRENEY,
ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK, METROPOLITAN OF ALL AMERICA AND CANADA,
TO THE CLERGY AND GOD-LOVING FLOCK CONCERNING THE 175TH ANNIVERSARY
OF HOLY ORTHODOXY IN AMERICA (1794-1969)

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit! Beloved Pastors and Children in the Lord of our Holy Orthodox
Church in America:
“Grace to you and peace from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ... who comforteth us in all our tribulation.”
(II Cor. 2-4)
In September of this year we shall prayerfully commemorate the beginning of our Jubilee Year, one hundred and seventy-five
years of Holy Orthodoxy in America. If it will be well pleasing unto the Lord, the crown and accomplishment of this Jubilee
Year will be the Canonization of the first Orthodox Saint of America, the Righteous Spiritual Father Herman of Alaska, which
will take place on August 9th, 1970, in Kodiak, Alaska.
Every church celebration, according to its very nature, is different from worldly festivities. We are called to enter into our
Jubilee Year, before everything else, with heartfelt thanksgiving to God, whom it pleased to show us His rich mercies. From that
distant day in September of 1794 when the first Orthodox missionaries, monks from the Holy Valaamo Monastery, landed on
American land, and to this day, Holy Orthodoxy was preserved and expanded not by human wisdom and strength but by the
Grace of God, the strength of God, which operates in our weaknesses.
In the Jubilee Year, we are called, as well, to partake of that spirit which inspired the Orthodox missionaries of blessed
memory, who looked not for glory, honor and earthly power, but only for the “imitation of Christ.” In their missionary task,
there were no alternative motives. They served not earthly masters and their interests, but the will of God. Thus the Diocese
which arose from their labors, the center of which was subsequently moved from Alaska first to San Francisco; then to New
York, was never Russian in the narrow meaning of the word: everyone who confessed Holy Orthodoxy — Russian, Aleut, Serb,
Syrian, was received with love in its boundaries. It was in this spirit that Archbishop Tikhon (future Patriarch and Confessor of
faith) considered the fate of the local American Church, whose foundations were laid by heroic missionaries in Alaska. For us
there can be no road other than this which was prophetically foreseen by the great toilers for the Faith, the Orthodox mission-
aries of America.
The Righteous Spiritual Father Herman of Alaska, the Servant of God, whom it befits us to glorify together, was an indefat-
igable missionary and humble spiritual father, a man of constant and fervent prayer, who nevertheless was willing to receive all
who came to visit his humble dwelling. He spent all his life in the harsh land of Alaska and peacefully departed this life after the
time of his blessed passing had been foretold him by God. His holy relics remain here on American soil which is sanctified by
them, and this gives us the right to glorify here on earth the Righteous and God-bearing Herman, who is already glorified by the
Lord in heaven.
In this Jubilee Year, we cannot forget the other toilers in the Orthodox mission to the American Land, such as Father John
Veniaminov of blessed memory. He arrived in the Aleutian Islands in 1824 and at first lived in a mud hut on the Island of Un-
alaska. By his labors a church was built there. He learned the Aleutian language and translated the Gospel of St. Matthew, the
text of the Divine Liturgy and the Small Catechism into it. He opened a school for boys in which he himself taught from text-
books prepared by him. For ten years, living on the Island of Unalaska, he visited the islands in a small canoe, and not for one
day did he cease his apostolic labor. In 1834 he was transferred to the Island ofSitka, built there St. Michael’s Church and the
first Orthodox seminary on American soil. When he was widowed, the Episcopal Office fell upon him, which he carried out in
Alaska. At the end of his life with failing health, and being almost blind, this distinguished missionary returned to Russia and
died as Metropolitan of Moscow.
In this Jubilee Year we are called upon to remember with gratitude those nameless missionaries who labored here in the last
and the beginning of this century. These heroic priests were truly pastors, laying down their lives for their sheep, and together
with their flock, they shared hardships and material deprivation, suffering persecution and humiliation by false brethren. In spite
of all this, they gathered together their Orthodox flock for prayer, built churches and taught the faith to the children. We are
eternally indebted to them, and our Jubilee Year ought to be marked by our ceaseless prayers for the repose of these Pastors in
the dwellings of the Righteous.
“Glory to God for everything” (St. John Chrysostom)! Entering our Jubilee Year, let us support one another in our common
service to our Lord, to whom belongeth honor and glory, unto the ages of ages. Amen.
/s/ +Metropolitan Ireney
Archbishop of New York
September 1969 Metropolitan of All-America and Canada
New York, N. Y.

97

In the history of the Orthodox Church in America the
dates of the 8th and 9th of August, 1970 will forever
remain most joyous, bright and festive. On these dates in
Alaska, in the Church of the Resurrection of Christ in
Kodiak, the official canonization of the Holy and
Righteous Herman of Alaska, Wonderworker of all
America, took place.
In essence the canonization of saints in our day remains
the same as it was in the Ancient Church: in the transition
of prayers from those for the repose of the soul to prayers
of supplication to the saint to intercede for us before God.
Canonization is usually the expression of the whole Church
based on the holy life of the one canonized and based on
confirmed miracles which occurred during his life or as a
result of his prayers and acknowledged as such, and finally
on the affirmation and sanction by the highest Church
body of the local Orthodox Church.
Father Herman’s disciples speak about the holiness of his
life. Already in 1821 Fr. Herman is addressed in letters as
“Holy,” “‘Father,’ “Your Holiness,” which clearly
characterize him as a loving and caring “Apa’’—
grandfather—as a great ascetic and intercessor before the
Lord for the Orthodox Aleuts.
In 1939 Bishop Alexei (Panteleev) gathered and
proposed for consideration to the Council of Bishops the
factual information about the miracles performed during
the life of the starets or by his prayers. The first miracles
belong to the years before the death of the starets in 1837.
Later we find dates of recorded miracles, beginning with
1842 until 1939. Thus, Russian by birth, Saint Herman
worked among the Aleuts and through his prayers miracles
were performed throughout the American continent. It is
for this reason that Father Herman became the first
wonderworker of Alaska and all America just as the Russian
bishop, Nicholas (Kasatkin) was canonized as the first saint
of the Japanese Orthodox Church.
Zoe
The Orthodox Church Newspaper August-September 1970
Photo: Clergy prepare to carry the Holy Relics for one of the
many processions during the ceremonies.
CANONIZATION OF FR. HERMAN
Already in 1894 the Holy Synod resolved to print “The
Life of the Valaamo Monk, Herman,” including in it the
then known miracles. In 1900 the Valaamo Monastery
published the book “Valaamo Missionaries in America”
which gave similar information about the starets Herman,
his correspondence and miracles performed by him. Soon
an English text of his life appeared in America, translated
by Vera Johnson.
In 1927 Archimandrite Gerasim (Schmaltz) arrived on
Spruce Island and, until his death in 1969, watched over
the relics of the saint. The American Metropolia Council of
Bishops on September 28, 1939, resolved “‘to approve the
paper by Bishop Alexel concerning the canonization of the
Starets Herman and to instruct a commission to investigate
the life and miracles of the starets.’ The Council on
October 9, 1941, decided “‘to instruct the commission to
formally examine the relics, to place the official seals and
to put them in a metal reliquary.” From that time a yearly
remembrance of the starets Herman was established on the
day of his death, Dec. 26, 1837. With the blessings of
Metropolitan Leonty (Turkevich) the Very Rev. Steven
Liashevsky composed in 1952 a biography and akathistos.
In 1957 Metropolitan Leonty personally visited Spruce
Island where he examined the relics of the starets and
predicted the forthcoming canonization of the saint to its
inhabitants.
And truly the joyous day came. The Great Council of
Bishops on March 11, 1969, solemnly proclaimed the Act
of the Universal Church Canonization of the starets Herman
to Sainthood in the Orthodox Church in America: “Taking
into consideration the long and undisputed witness of the
grace of God, appearing through the servant of God, the
Starets Herman of Alaska...decided to perform his
canonization on August 7-9, 1970.”
Then the preparatory work in connection with the
canonization began to move very quickly. In July of 1969
Metropolitan Ireney went to Kodiak where a thorough His Beatitude, Metropolitan Ireney, together with the
investigation of the relics was made and about which an Archbishop of Finland, Paul, and the Protodeacon Nicholas
appropriate act was drawn up. The liturgical commission Poliansky, arrived on Tuesday, Aug. 4, and immediately
under Archbishop Kiprian began to prepare the services and began to serve at the grave of Fr. Herman. On Thursday a
the icons of the saint. Fr. Vladimir Borichevsky composed general Memorial Service for all American missionaries was
the “life” and service in English, and Fr. George Benigsen served. By this time Metropolitan Andrel, Archbishop John
translated it into Church Slavonic. Fr. George Afonsky of Chicago, Archbishop Kiprian of Philadelphia, Bishop
prepared the order of canonization, using as a model the Dmitri of Berkely, Bishop loasaph of Edmonton as well as
canonization of Seraphim of Sarov, of the Venerable the Rt. Rev. Fathers Alexander Schmemann, Paul
Josaph of Belgorod and others. In New York a new large, Jeromsky, Nicholas Veiglais and 35 priests and several
carved reliquary was done by Paul Moses according to the hundred pilgrims from all corners of the USA had arrived.
architectural plan of G.A. Greitz. On Friday Archbishop of Kiprian presided over the Vigil
Service in concelebration with 20 priests and two
The canonization committee under Bishop Theodosius protodeacons. On Saturday the Divine Liturgy was
also worked very hard in organizing it in Kodiak. Because celebrated by Metropolitan Ireney together with two
the local three hotels could not accommodate all the archbishops. For the last Memorial Service three more
pilgrims, the city and the Armed Forces offered the use of bishops and more than 30 priests joined. The singing of the
dormitories and army barracks in Kodiak so that everyone responses was in English, Church Slavonic, Aleutian, Greek
was assured of a place to stay. The sisterhood of the local and Finnish: On Saturday at | o’clock Metropolitan Ireney
church and their pastor, Fr. Macarius Targonsky were most and two bishops transferred the relics of the Saint into the
hospitable, as well as the entire city of Kodiak which gave a new reliquary. At this time some relics were placed into
special tea and later a festive dinner for all the pilgrims. previously prepared receptacles. These relics were for new
Nothing, however, can be compared with the actual act antiminsia, for the Church in Finland, for the monastery,
of canonization. We can say with assurance that to the for the seminaries and for the altar of the chapel in Syosset.
pilgrims, these days will remain for the rest of their lives a The Orthodox Church in America has found a permanent
climax of spiritual joy and a witness of the grace of God. source of the grace of God.
Sunday Molieben and Procession with the Holy Relics before the reading of the Gospel.
ul rs y Ey

299
 LA
Metropolitan lreney presides at Friday morning
The Vigil Service was served by Metropolitan Ireney,
seven bishops, 20 priests and 2 protodeacons. Before the
Litiya Fr. Schmemann read the decision of the Council of
Bishops concerning the canonization of Fr. Herman. During
the Litiya in a solemn procession around the church, the
reliquary with the relics was transferred from the place of
burial to the center of the church. The opening of the relics
was the most solemn and glorious part of the canonization.
At the singing of “Praise the Name of the Lord’’ all the
celebrants came out to the center of the church and
Metropolitan Ireney opened the relics of the saint. Then the
icon was blessed and parts of the relics were taken from the
reliquary for veneration. For the first time the Metropolitan
read the prayer to the Saint, followed by “We venerate
thee,” sung by the whole church. An unusual feeling of
joyous awe seized the souls of the faithful—“‘It is good for
us to be here, O Lord!” The faithful then
venerated the relics and were anointed with the holy oil. At
the end of the Vigil Service a first akathistos was sung by
Bishop John and Fr. Sergius Garklavs.
On Sunday, Aug. 9th, two liturgies were celebrated. The
first one was celebrated by Bishop Theodosius. Almost the
entire church received communion at that service. The
second liturgy was celebrated by Metropolitan Ireney with
4 bishops and 20 priests. (At the same time on Spruce
Island a liturgy was celebrated by Fr. Joseph Kreta and Fr.
Mason.) During tne Little Entrance the reliquary with the
relics was carried by the bishops around the altar, and after
the Thanksgiving Service (Molieben), in solemn procession
the reliquary with the remains was placed into a new shrine
where it will stand from now on and where every year on
Aug. 9th the faithful will gather from all corners of the
world to venerate it.
At the Liturgy the sermon about the meaning of
canonization was preached by Biship Dmitri and after the
300
Liturgy. Archbishop Paul of Finland presents awards to the Governor of
Alaska and to church leaders.
Thanksgiving Service words of warm greetings from “New
Valaamo” were delivered by Archbishop Paul, head of the
Finnish Orthodox Church, who in a sense represented the
Universal Church at the canonization. Archbishop Paul also
gave church awards to Metropolitan Ireney, Bishop
Theodosius, Fr. Schmemann, Fr. John Meyendorff and Fr.
John Nehrebecki. Metropolitan Ireney concluded the
festivities with a Paschal invocation: “This is the day which
the Lord hath made: we will rejoice and be glad in it.”
After the kissing of the cross there were endless private
Thanksgiving Services to the Saint. The church was open
the whole day and night for the veneration of the relics and
prayer.
On Monday morning Archbishop Kiprian and Frs.
Schmemann, Daniel Hubiak, John Kuchta, Nicholas Solak,
George Afonsky and subdeacon Serge Butenev took a
individually helicopter to Spruce Island where Fr. Schmemann served
the Liturgy in a chapel over the grave of Fr. Herman. It is
difficult to relate that feeling of grace which we all
experienced during the communion.
This was not the end of ithe festivities, but only the
beginning. St. Herman began to visit his faithful children.
On Sunday, Aug. 16, the relics of St. Herman, which
Archbishop Kiprian carried with him, visited St. Theodosius
Cathedral in Cleveland where Fr. Sergius Kuharsky and the
clergy and laity of the Ohio diocese venerated them. Even
now more festively the relics were met at St. Tikhon’s
Monastery, where Archbishop Kiprian served a Thanksgiving
Service in the presence of clergy from two dioceses, the
monastic community and visiting laymen. The life-carrying
stream of the grace of God has entered the life of the new
Orthodox Church in America. “O Venerable Father
Herman, pray for us.”
Bishop Gregory
(Translated by Constantine Kallaur)
 ORTHODOXY
Orthodoxy in Canada reflects in many ways the overall
historical prominence of its southern neighbor, the United
States. Canada, first settled by the French and by the
“loyalists” of the Revolutionary War era, has necessarily
been driven to extricate its own history and identity from
that of the United States: from the Revolutionary War to
Vietnam, the goals and aspirations of the two countries
have coincided at times, at times diverged.
A relatively high percentage of the “Founders of Ortho-
doxy” in Canada arrived from the United States. Attracted
by the promise of a better life, they‘left the Old World in
hopes of finding it. Many did not in the United States, and
“went North” to Canada. Many of the “farming parishes”
in the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba
were peopled at the turn of this century by homesteaders
who had failed to make good in Montana, the Dakotas, and
Minnesota. (cf. Chapter II, Parish Development in Canada)
Problems abounded during this initial period. The clashes
between Uniates and Orthodox, so familiar to Pennsylva-
nians and others, were not unknown in Canada’s prairie
provinces. One of the reasons for Bishop Tikhon’s pastoral
journey through Canada in 1904 was to counteract the de-
signs of a certain “Metropolitan Seraphim of America,” a
shadowy figure from Yonkers who claimed to have beer
consecrated “in the Holy Land” by the “Patriarchs,” and
who roamed about the provinces ordaining his “‘priests” for
profit and perversion, sowing discord and confusion among
the Orthodox. Differing political and national allegiances in
the Old World also proved to be a hindrance to regular
Church life; among other things, this led eventually to the
formation of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada in
the early 1920’s, causing splinter parishes in centers of
population throughout the country. Finally, the vastness of
geography in Canada did nothing to aid communication and
unity among the parishes, and this can be felt to the present
day.
In spite of all these difficulties, parishes have been estab-
lished in most of the major cities and regions. In Manitoba,
Winnipeg’s Holy Trinity Cathedral was founded in 1904,
and the church building was consecrated by Bishop Tikhon
a few years later. Originally serving as the hub of all Ortho-
dox activity in the area, the parish suffered great losses in
the 1920’s with the formation of the Ukrainian group; it
acquired thereby a strictly “Russian” label which has
hindered its original missionary intent. However, by the
early 1930's, with the return ofits former rector as a Bishop
(Arseny), the Cathedral resumed its former role by serving
as a kind of seminary (see below). The arrival of displaced
persons after World War II increased the membership con-
siderably; but the lack of ongoing developments, such as
the use of English in services, adequate religious education
programs, Once again threatened church vitality.
The episcopal seat of the Canadian Diocese is currently
Montreal’s St. Peter and St. Paul Cathedral, incorporated in
Quebec in 1907. The present church building was erected
over 100 years ago as St. Luke’s Anglican but was purchased
IN CANADA
Page 3\4 — S ‘econd column should read as follows:
and converted by the Orthodox during the pastorate of
Father Serge Snegirev in the late 1920’s; Metropolitan
Platon consecrated it for worship. The first dean of the
community was Father Theodore Buketoff, followed
through the years by Fathers Afendik, Sviridov, Sakovich,
Poplavsky, Glebov, Piatrovsky, Gromcev, Snegirev, Klopo-
tovsky, Archimandrite Anthony (Tereschenko; later, for a
time, the first Bishop of Montreal), Boldireff, Fotiev, Benig-
‘sen, and the present priest, John Tkachuk. At various times,
the Cathedral clergy served the churches in Quebec City,
Rouyan-Noranda, Val d’Or, Rawdon and Ottawa. Montreal
is the only parish in the “Slavic branch” of the Orthodox
Church in America currently using English and French
regularly in the liturgy; a number of Canadian parishes in
the Romanian Episcopate also use English.
In Ontario, Toronto’s Christ the Saviour Cathedral
served as the diocesan see during Archbishop Nikon’s tenure
in Canada. Organized prior to World War I, the parish ac-
quired its own premises for worship in 1929 during the
pastorate of Father A. Pyza. Since 1941 the dean has been
Archpriest John Diachina, a graduate of Bishop Arseny’s
Seminary-Monastery of the Ascension in Sifton, Manitoba
(late 1920’s). Toronto lately has taken the lead from
Montreal as Canada’s fastest-growing metropolis, and the
church reflects this: a community of new Greek immigrants
has recently joined the Orthodox Church in America, to-
gether with its pastor, Father Dorotheos Tsevlikos. But
Christ the Saviour has remained the most dynamic force for
Orthodoxy in Ontario.
Ottawa, the capital of Canada, boasts two Orthodox
Church in America parishes: the Bukovinian Cathedral of
the Holy Trinity, founded in 1919, and St. Nicholas Russian
Church, organized for the most part by more recent emigrés
in 1956. Holy Trinity erected a new church building not
LILLISE ULC OaVIOUL Lldd LEalUICU LILES LUdSt Uy lidillie LOLCE LUL
Orthodoxy in Ontario.
Ottawa, the capital of Canada, boasts two Orthodox
Church in America parishes: the Bukovinian Cathedral of
the Holy Trinity, founded in 1919, and St. Nicholas Russian
Church, organized for the most part by more recent emigrés
in 1956. Holy Trinity erected a new church building not
and converted by the Orthodox during the pastorate of
Father Serge Snegirev in the late 1920’s; Metropolitan
Platon consecrated it for worship. The first dean of the
community was Father Theodore Buketoff, followed
through the years by Fathers Afendik, Sviridov, Sakovich,
Poplavsky, Glebov, Piatrovsky, Gromcev, Snegirev, Klopo-
tovsky, Archimandrite Anthony (Tereschenko; later, for a
time, the first Bishop of Montreal), Boldireff, Fotiev, Benig-
sen, and the present priest, John Tkachuk. At various times,
the Cathedral clergy served the churches in Quebec City,
Rouyan-Noranda, Val d’Or, Rawdon and Ottawa. Montreal
is the only parish in the “Slavic branch” of the Orthodox
Church in America currently using English and French
301
Mr. George Ganga and Rev. Janjulitch discussing the new parish in
Ottawa, 1915-1916.
long ago, mainly through the efforts of the pastor, Father
George Pokrovsky; St. Nicholas purchased its present
church in 1965.
On the West Coast, Vancouver’s Holy Resurrection
Church was founded in 1924. Metropolitan Platon conse-
crated the first church building built by the parish in 1929;
this one was razed by the city in 1954, and a new one was
constructed. This parish has served the Orthodox commu-
nities in Abbotsford and, more recently, Victoria. The
auxiliary bishop of Canada, the Right Reverend Joasaph of
Edmonton, resides and serves in Vancouver.
Back in the prairies, the “farming parishes” of Manitoba
and Saskatchewan have for a long time been the “‘vineyard”’
of Archpriest Euthemius Moseychuck, another graduate of
Bishop Arseny’s Seminary in Sifton. Narol in 1912,
Minitonas after World War I, Sandy Lake in 1901, Stennen
in 1903, Gardenton in 1897 are among the oldest parishes
in the Orthodox Church in America. A number of others,
both through hardship and neglect, have come under the
jurisdiction of the Russian Synod in Exile, the Ukrainian
Church of Canada, and the Moscow Patriarchate.
In Alberta, Father Ostachek serves a number of the old
parishes: Wostok, Kiselevo, Serediaky, Star and others. In
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, Father Svetoslav Balevich is the
only graduate of St. Tikhon’s Seminary who has remained
in Canada.
Besides these traditional centers of the Canadian Church,
many recently-growing areas now show an increasing num-
ber of Orthodox with no church to serve them. These in-
clude Halifax, Nova Scotia; St. John’s, Newfoundland;
Calgary, Alberta; London, Ontario, and others. What is
painfully lacking are priests and missionaries, to be leaders
of the Church.
The priests and bishops who were instrumental in organ-
izing and founding the older churches in Canada were mis-
sionaries in the best sense of the word: preachers and
teachers who “‘edified” the faithful and built-up the Church.
But almost to a man, as missionaries they eventually left
Canada to carry on their work in other places (usually back
in the United States), leaving the day-to-day care of the
Church to native Canadians. Two attempts were made to
set up centers of pastoral and theological training in Canada.
302
Boarding School in Mundare, Alberta, 1916 (Cf. Educational
Activity, Chapter 1V.) Students shown in photo below.
In 1915, with the blessing of Bishop Alexander, Father
Vladimir Sakovich initiated a “winter seminary” in Mont-
real: classes were conducted after work for men interested
in preparing themselves for the priesthood. This venture
lasted only one winter, but three of the students were in
fact ordained. Unfortunately, all three served only a short
time in parishes, eventually being overcome by financial
difficulties and other woes. This example rightly dis-
courages any ““one-man”’ operations as a basis for the future.
In 1926, Bishop Arseny accepted a number of candidates
for training at Holy Ascension Monastery in Sifton, Mani-
toba, not far from Winnipeg. Assisted by a monk from
Pochaev Monastery and another from Mount Athos, the
“Canadian Chrysostom” (as he was called by some later)
lived to see a number of his former pupils serve the Church
faithfully for many years, including two priests who are still
active: Fathers Euthemius Moseychuk and John Diachina.
The latter, with the blessing and assistance of Bishop Nikon
in the late 1950's, tried to duplicate his mentor’s efforts in
Toronto, but for various reasons met with little success.
The Most Reverend Sylvester, the present Archbishop of
Montreal and Canada, has singled out priests as the most
pressing need of the Canadian Diocese. Of the fourteen
priests active in Canada, all but one are Canadians and have
served most of their priestly lives in Canada, and almost all
are well-advanced in years. Recently some Canadians have
entered seminaries abroad, in Europe or in the United
States, a hopeful sign for the future of the Diocese.
 THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX EPISCOPATE OF AMERICA

Transylvania
The majority of the Romanian Orthodox in the United
States and Canada emigrated from the province of Transyl-
vania starting at the turn of the century. At that time,
Transylvania was a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Even though the Romanians were native to the province
and formed the bulk of its population, they were dominated
by the Hungarians, who started to settle there in the tenth
and eleventh centuries.
The Romanians are the only Latin people to belong to
the Orthodox Church. They spring from the intermarriage
of the native Dacians and conquering Romans in the first
three centuries. Their unity in the faith was broken when a
part of the Romanians of Transylvania joined the church of
Rome in the beginning of the eighteenth century, to form
the Romanian Catholic Church of the Byzantine Rite. The
minority Hungarian and Saxon population of Transylvania
belonged to the Roman Catholic Church prior to the Prot-
estant Reformation in the sixteenth century. Some of the
Hungarians became either Calvinists or Unitarians and most
of the Saxons became Lutheran. Attempts to convert the
Romanians to one or the other of these churches met with
very little success. Yet the Orthodox Church, which was
still the largest religious group of the province, was merely
“tolerated,” and the Romanians were little more than serfs
in their own country.
The plight of the Romanians in Transylvania improved
somewhat after the Revolution of 1848. The Romanian
Orthodox Church progressed considerably under the able
leadership of Metropolitan Andrei Saguna during the second
half of the nineteenth century. Nevertheless, the Romanians
were still very poor and endured further privations under
foreign domination at the beginning of the twentieth cen-
tury, when a serious campaign of ““magyarization” of the
Romanians was started.
ing to note that very few Romanians from Romania proper
emigrated to the United States prior to World War I.
At first the immigrants worked building the railroads,
the roads, the factories and the towns themselves. Eventu-
ally, as did so many other immigrants, they migrated to
coal towns and industrial areas, where wages were somewhat
better. They finally settled in these communities. Thus,
there are many Romanians in the industrial areas of north-
eastern and western Ohio. Some also settled in the mining
towns of Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. In addition,
the great packing houses of Chicago, St. Paul, Indianapolis
and Omaha attracted quite a number.
During and immediately after World War I, many Ro-
manians throughout the United States moved to the grow-
ing automotive area of Detroit and to the larger industrial
centers, attracted by higher wages. As a result, such cities as
Detroit and Cleveland have large concentrations of Roma-
nians. More recently, many Romanians- have retired to
Florida, California and Arizona, and many Canadian Roma-
nians have left their farms and moved to cities such as
Regina, Windsor, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Montreal, Calgary
and Detroit.
The political unrest after World War II brought in a new
influx of Romanian refugees, displaced persons, expatriates

Early Immigration
Because of this oppression and to improve their eco-
nomic conditions, an exodus of Romanians from Transyl-
vania started about this time. The majority were lured to
North America, the land of promise. Mostly peasants with-
out education and training, they arrived by steerage and
were shunted wherever hard and menial labor was needed.
These young men hoped to eventually return to their home-
land. Their motto was “mia si drumul.” Loosely translated,
it meant “earn a thousand dollars and the fare back home.”
Besides the Transylvanian Romanians, Romanian immi-
grants also came from Bukovina and Banat, which were also
Austria-Hungarian provinces. The majority of Romanians
from Bukovina settled in the farming regions of Western
Canada and Detroit. The Banat Romanians gravitated most-
ly towards Philadelphia, Chicago and St. Paul. In addition,
Macedo-Romanians from Greece, Yugoslavia and Albania
settled in Bridgeport, New York, Southbridge, Woonsocket, eile He

St. Louis, Providence and other Eastern cities. It is interest- First Romanian Orthodox Church in America, St. Mary’s Cleveland,
 In the meantime, a few Romanian itinerant priests served
the spiritual needs of the Romanian Orthodox. They went
from Romanian community to community baptizing, mar-
rying, burying and counseling. Had the bishops in the old
country been more alert to the spiritual needs of these early
immigrants and sent along priests from the beginning, no
doubt the religious situation of the Romanian Orthodox
parishes would have been much better. As it was, laymen,
rather than bishops or priests, founded the parishes. Only
after a parish was founded and the congregation could
afford to pay a priest was the call made to bring one. It is
largely because of sacrifices, both of time and money, by
Romanian Orthodox laymen that we have the Romanian
Orthodox churches of today.

Some Early Priests

There is no record of the first Romanian Orthodox priest
to come to the United States. History does mention a
English class for Romanian immigrants, St. Louis, 1915. Father Samuil Damian in the middle of the eighteenth
century, who spoke Latin, belonged to the ‘““Greek Church,”
and immigrants. Most of them have been integrated into the
and travelled in Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia to
existing Romanian communities, but in some areas they
learn about electricity. He even corresponded with Ben-
founded new communities, such as San Francisco, Toronto,
jamin Franklin. However, he did not function as a priest.
Hamilton and Kitchener. Among them are many Romanians
Finally he settled in Charleston, South Carolina, where he
from the Yugoslav Banat province.
died sometime before the American Revolution.
General Statistics At the beginning of this century, there is mention of
The exact number of ethnic Romanians in the United Father Geroge Herta, but he did not stay very long. The
States and Canada is not known. Those who have studied first to stay permanently among the Romanian Orthodox
this immigration estimate that there are about 100,000 in America was Father Moise Balea, who arrived in 1905.
between the two countries. A little more than half of these
are to be found in some kind of organized Romanian com-
munities. The other half are scattered in small numbers
throughout the country.
There are about 50,000 Romanian Orthodox in North
America, plus a few Romanian Catholics of the Byzantine
Rite, Baptists, Nazarenes, Adventists, Pentecostals, Jeho-
vah’s Witnesses and other sects. Not all the Romanian
Orthodox are organized in Romanian parishes. A few
attend ethnic Orthodox churches other than Romanian.
Some do not attend any churches, but many of them who
do not live in communities with Romanian Orthodox
churches go to Roman Catholic or Protestant churches. In
such cases, most are eventually lost to the Orthodox Church.

Church Life in America

For a number of years after their settlement in commu-
nities in America, the Romanian Orthodox did not often
organize parishes or build churches. Most of them had
hoped to return to their native land. As a matter of fact,
after World War I, when all the Romanian provinces orig-
inally under foreign domination were united in “‘Greater
Romania,” a great number of Romanians did return home.
Statistics show that, proportionately, more Romanians re-
turned to their native land than almost any other ethnic
group. Only those who remained behind, especially after
marrying and establishing families, gave serious thought to
organizing their spiritual and fraternal life and building
churches and social halls. Erection of the Romanian Church, Gary, Indiana, 1910.

304
He was sent here by the Metropolitan of Transylvania at the
request of the newly organized parish in Cleveland, Ohio.
Though he had good theological training and even some
private financial means, he was impetuous and often grew
impatient with the inactivity and uncertainty of the people.
But with the help of God, Father Balea went from com-
munity to community, organizing and building at least 15
churches. He was truly a pioneer and builder and did more
than any one person to develop Romanian spiritual and
fraternal life in this country. Being restless, he travelled far
and wide. He died penniless during World War II and is
buried in the central cemetery of the Romanian Orthodox
Episcopate at the Vatra, in Grass Lake, Michigan, where a
beautiful granite monument graces his grave.
Another priest just as controversial as Father Balea was
Father John Podea, who was active just before and after
World War I. He organized a few parishes, defended the
Orthodox Church and organized the first company of
Romanian volunteers to fight for America during World
War I. After the war he was influenced by socialistic think-
ing and spoke in derogatory terms of the Church and priest-
hood. He returned to Romania, where he was defrocked. He
died only a few years ago as a functionary of the Com-
munist government in Romania. However, his early efforts
on behalf of the Romanian Orthodox Church in America
are still remembered.

The new St. Mary’s Romanian Orthodox Church with

The Churches its distinctive architecture, Cleveland, Ohio.

The oldest Romanian Orthodox parish and church on the

North American continent is that of Regina, Saskatchewan,
Canada. The parish was established in 1902, and the church,
built in 1904, still stands. The first parish established in the
United States was St. Mary’s in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1904. A
church was built shortly thereafter. It is still standing and is
now being used by an Orthodox group of Russian back-
ground also belonging to the Orthodox Church in America.
The parish built a new church, school, cultural and social
hall between 1955 and 1975. After St. Mary’s, many other
parishes were organized and new churches built so that
today there are 47 Romanian parishes in the United States
and Canada. Many of the original structures have been re-
placed by modern buildings with many facilities for social,
cultural and educational activities.
Canonical Affiliation
Prior to World War I, most of the Romanian parishes in
the United States were affiliated with the Metropolitan of
Transylvania and those of Canada with the Metropolitan of
Moldava. The early priests came from Romania, but during
World War I travel to America became impossible. This
situation caused some parishes to urge cantors or persons
with some knowledge of the services to be ordained priests.
Bishop Stephen Dzubay, his successor, Bishop Adam Phili-
povsky, and in Canada, Bishop Arseny of Winnipeg were
ready to ordain these untrained men, in some cases for a
monetary agreement. The number of priests without proper
theological training was about 45, and at one time they out-
numbered those with formal training. Since there were two
sources of the priesthood, there soon arose a conflict be-
tween the trained clergy ordained in Romania and the un-
trained clergy ordained in this country. For some time there
were more priests than parishes, resulting in competition
for desirable positions. After World War I, the Metropolitan
of Transylvania sent a number of priests for the vacant
parishes in America, and the conflict between them and the
untrained priests ordained in this country became acute.
The two factions met separately and tried to organize the
fragmented church life into an episcopate, but without
success. Finally, in 1928, Father Trandafir Scorobet of
Sibiu was sent by the Metropolitan of Transylvania to report
on the status of the Romanian Orthodox parishes in Amer-
ica. He met with the clergy on January 30, 1929, in Cleve-
land, Ohio, and recommended the reorganization of the
Church in America and the establishment of an episcopate.
As a result of this meeting, a general Congress of clergy
and laity was called in Detroit on April 25, 1929. The Con-
gress formally decided to establish an “Autonomous Mis-
sionary Episcopate” under the canonical jurisdiction of the
Holy Synod of Romania but with large autonomy in all
administrative matters, including the selection of its bishop.
The resolution of the Detroit Congress was accepted by the
Romanian Patriarchate, and in November 1930, by Decree
No. 10210, the Holy Synod of the Church of Romania pro-
claimed the canonical establishment of the Romanian
Orthodox Episcopate of America.
The Detroit Congress also appointed an ad interim com-
mittee, under the presidency of Father John Trutza of

as
 Detroit Conference, April 25-28, 1929.

Cleveland, to govern the episcopate until a bishop should Romania in 1939 to attend the session of the Holy Synod.
arrive from Romania. The committee drew up a constitu- World War II broke out, and he was never able to return to
tion and by-laws, which were approved at a second national America.
Church Congress, held in October 1932, in Cleveland. In
1935, at the request of the interim committee, the Holy World War II and its Consequences
Synod of Romania formally elected Archimandrite Policarp During World War II, church congresses under the presi-
Morusca as the first bishop, on January 26, 1935. He was dency of a vicar concentrated mostly on administrative
consecrated on March 24, 1935, by the late Patriarch Miron matters in the absence of Bishop Policarp, and after the war
Cristea of Bucharest and arrived in America in June of the the Congress informed him that they eagerly awaited his
same year. He was solemnly enthroned at the Church Con-
gress in Detroit on July 4, 1935. He healed the breach be-
tween the two factions of priests in this country by declar-
ing: “I accept you as I found you, but from now on, we
shall have order and discipline.” He soon set out to pay
canonical visits to all the parishes under his jurisdiction.
Unfortunately, he was attacked by some of the lay press,
who did not wish to see the Church consolidate its position.
In his short time in America, Bishop Policarp founded
the diocesan newspaper, Solia, in 1936, which has been
published ever since — first weekly, then bi-weekly and now
monthly. He set about organizing the youth and ladies in
national Church auxiliaries, but these were able to take
active form and substance only after World War II. In addi-
tion, he was instrumental in buying the Vatra. This property
was to become the headquarters of the episcopate in 1937.
He officially inaugurated it on July 4, 1938. After a short
but productive pastorate, Bishop Policarp returned to Bishop Policarp on a pastoral visit.

306

BISHOP POLYCARP (MORUSCA)
Pompei Morusca was born into a priestly family on
March 20, 1883, in Cristesti in the Alba County of Transyl-
vania. He studied theology after completing his secular
education and was ordained to the priesthood in 1908.
Following eleven years as a parish priest, Father Morusca
served as administrative assistant to the Metropolitan of
Transylvania. He went on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land
and upon his return to Romania was tonsured a monk with
the name of Polycarp in 1925. Father Polycarp was then
appointed abbot of the Hodox-Bodrog Monastery. In 1935,
a number of Romanian Orthodox parishes in the United
States requested that Patriarch Miron (Cristea) and the Holy
Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church send Father
Polycarp to America as the first Romanian bishop. He was
consecrated on March 24, 1935, and sent to the United
States. After being warmly received by his people, he
settled down to the organization of the diocese. Bishop
Polycarp centered his diocese in Detroit, Michigan, with
the Church of St. George as his cathedral. In 1936, he estab-
lished Solia as the official publication of the Episcopate and
later purchased the bishop’s residence known as the Vatra.
Late in 1939, Bishop Polycarp returned to Romania and,
although he wanted to return to the United States, was un-
able to do so because of the outbreak of World War II. He
was eventually retired, died on October 26, 1958, and was
buried at the Monastery of St. John the Baptist in Alba
Iulia, Romania.
that henceforth the sending of Church leaders for Romanian
Orthodox living outside Romania is to be done by the
Patriarchate “with the approval of the government.” In im-
plementing this policy of control, the regime at first tried
to replace Bishop Policarp with Bishop Antim Nica, ap-
pointed from Bucharest in 1947, but the Diocese in America
refused to accept him. Tactics changed in 1950. At a secret
meeting, a new episcopate, the “Romanian Orthodox
Missionary Episcopate in America,’ was chartered, and an
American citizen, Father Andrei Moldovan, was called to
Romania to be consecrated bishop for the American
Diocese. Though repudiated by the Executive Council of
the legal episcopate and by a great majority of the parishes
on the grounds that he had not been elected or requested
according to the provisions of the diocesan by-laws, Bishop
Moldovan returned to the United States and began a series
of lawsuits for control of the diocesan properties. This
triggered a fight for control of Romanian parishes through-
out the United States and Canada. Long and expensive
court trials ensued, but the position of the legal Romanian
episcopate was regularly confirmed, and under the leader-
ship of Father John Trutza, all efforts on the part of the
Moldovan episcopate to control the diocese were thwarted.
The Church Congress of July 5, 1951, had no other
alternative than to declare the episcopate completely auton-
omous not only in administrative but also spiritual affairs.
The Congress unanimously elected the lay theologian, Mr.
Viorel D. Trifa, as bishop to replace Bishop Policarp, who
was still under house arrest in Romania.

return. However the new Communist regime in Romania Bishop Valerian D. Trifa
would not permit him to return to his see. Bishop Policarp The bishop-elect was consecrated on April 27, 1952, in
responded to the Church Congress through a pastoral letter Philadelphia by three bishops of the Ukrainian Church.
of July 30, 1947, thanking the clergy and the people for With the enthronement of Bishop Valerian, a new and pro-
their devotion and informing them of the difficulties about
his return. He added, however, that “‘in spite of the distance
and the obstacles preventing my return, up to a pronounce-
ment by the Congress of the Episcopate, I consider myself
the Bishop of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of
America.” A few months later, on December 8, 1947, he
wrote another letter, to Father John Trutza of Cleveland,
Ohio, in which he related some bad news: “After many
delays, now the Episcopate of America has been eliminated
from the budget, starting with September 1, 1947... This
is equal to the dissolution of the Episcopate of America
from the point of view of the Romanian government . .
The head of the diocese (i.e. Bishop Policarp himself) will
be placed in retirement, according to the provisions of Law
No. 166 of 1947.”
Though the Episcopate of America had been “eliminated
from the budget” and Bishop Policarp was in involuntary
retirement, isolated in a remote Transylvanian village, the
new communist regime had not forgotten about America
and tried there, as in Romania, to implement a policy of
control over the Church. On April 4, 1949, Bishop Policarp
wrote another letter to the Episcopate Council in America,
informing the members, without comment, that a new law
for the Romanian Orthodox Church in Romania had been The familiar Grey Tower landmark at the Vatra, the episcopal
promulgated by the government, providing in its Article IV residence and diocesan center of the Romanian Diocese.

J
' oy)pane—
 An old winter scene at ‘‘Vatra Romanesca,’’ Grass Lake, Michigan, headquarters of the Romanian
for the annual Church congress, youth and children’s camps, and a small monastic community.
ductive era began for the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate
of America, in spite of a continuing campaign against him,
first in the press and then in the courts. The financial status
of the Episcopate was greatly strengthened and expanded.
The new bishop laid great emphasis on religious education,
urging all parishes to found church schools, publishing edu-
cational materials, setting up a commission on religious edu-
cation, giving over much space in the diocesan paper to
educational questions, setting up mini-conferences, exhibits,
summer camps and conferences. In addition, he has written
many books and pamphlets, published service books in
parallel English and Romanian texts, set up scholarships for
the training of new priests and established summer camps
and summer religious education courses and retreats.
A member of the Central Committee of the World Coun-
cil of Churches, he has attended most of the Council’s
meetings and has been on its various Committees longer
than any other Orthodox bishop. He hasalso transformed
the Vatra into a first-class headquarters, with a residence,
offices, chapel, pavilions, recreational areas, kitchen, dormi-
308
Orthodox Episcopate and the setting
tories and many other facilities for the annual Church Con-
gress, camps, retreats, pilgrimages and other activities.
Episcopate in the Orthodox Church in America
Even before the granting of autocephaly to the Orthodox
Church in America, the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate
entered the canonical jurisdiction of the Metropolia, and in
1961 its bishops consecrated Bishop Valerian to remove any
doubt of his canonicity. Bishop Valerian has been active in
all the affairs of the Orthodox Church of America and was
instrumental in revising its Statutes along the lines of the
Episcopate Statutes. He is the head of the Department of
Canonical and Pastoral Affairs and is a hard worker for the
unity of Orthodoxy in America. In recognition of his many
achievements, the Church has raised him to the rank of
Archbishop. As a sign of the place of the Romanian Epis-
copate in the Orthodox Church of America, the Episcopate
voted to send lay and clergy representatives to the Church’s
All-American Council.
Father Vasile Hategan
 THE ALBANIAN ORTHODOX
“And Our Eyes Were Filled With Tears”’
“When Fan Noli celebrated the first Divine Liturgy in
the Albanian language — after five centuries of the oppres-
sion of our people — our eyes were filled with tears...”
With these words Konstandin Demo, one of the faithful
elders of the Albanian Orthodox Church, described that
Divine Liturgy on March 22, 1908, at the Knights of Honor
Hall in Boston. For in the person ofthat singular man and
priest and later hierarch Metropolitan Theofan, the Alba-
nian people had reversed an ethnic pattern characteristic of
most immigrant peoples in America. In most cases, Ortho-
dox immigrants brought the Divine Liturgy in their native
language with them to America, but the Albanians — for
centuries prohibited the use of their own language in both
church and schools — established their church first in Bos-
ton, later transplanting it to their homeland.
The Beginnings
The first Albanian to arrive on America’s shores was
Father Kole Kristofer. Born in the village of Katundi, a
parish of Korcha, he arrived in 1884; later, in 1917, he was
ordained an Orthodox priest. He was one of the founding
fathers. as it were, of the Albanian Orthodox Church in this
country. Most immigrants of the first decades were males
who lived in “konaks”’ — simple dwellings where 10 or more
men would live and share domestic duties while earning
their living. It was not until the 1920’s that Albanian
women — as wives and mothers — came and settled, and
thus gave to the community a sense of being “‘at home” in
the new land.
America’s opportunity for religious freedom enabled im-
migrants from Albania to be Orthodox and Albanian for the
first time in five centuries. Fraternal societies formed, the
first of which was called ‘“‘Malli i Memedheut”’ (‘Longing
for the Motherland’) in Jamestown, New York, in 1905S,
and to which Fan Noli first gravitated when he arrived in
1906. In Boston, Sotir Peci — one of the great pioneers of
the Albanian renaissance — published the first newspaper in
Albanian, Kombi (The World), in 1906, as numerous
national organizations began to spring up throughout New
England, the Mid-Atlantic and Great Lakes states. Now re-
garded with the golden aura of nostalgia, those were humble
days: it was rumored that Fan Noli and Peci between them
shared a single overcoat and took turns wearing it! A year
later, they formed a new society “Besa Bessen” (“Word of
Honor”) and published the newspaper Dielli (The Sun),
now the oldest Albanian newspaper in America, which was
also edited by Faik Konitza, the preeminent Albanian liter-
ary stylist.
While the spirit was now mounting for Orthodox worship
in a language they could understand, it was the so-called
“Hudson Incident” which coalesced the Albanians in Amer-
ica and thrust Fan Noli into the forefront of that effort. A
young man, Kristaq Dishnica, died in Hudson, Massachu-
CHURCH IN AMERICA
setts, in 1907, and his death was pivotal in the formation of
the Albanian Orthodox Church. Nini Demo tells us the
story:
Four deaths had occurred in our midst in the years
1901-1907: one from Treska, one from Katundi and
two from Stratoberdha — and the Greek Church re-
fused to bury our dead. One could’not be Orthodox
and an Albanian patriot at the same time, we were
told. We were forced to take our departed brothers to
Lowell, Massachusetts, and in those days, Lowell
seemed very far away. There, a Syrian Orthodox
priest performed the funeral. When another death oc-
curred in Hudson, Mass., the Greek Church went so
far not only to refuse to bury the man, but to per-
suade other Orthodox churches of other nationalities
to do likewise. And the young patriotic Albanian
Kristaq Dishnica, was laid to rest in a Worcester
cemetery without benefit of clergy from the church
Ol his beliefas,
This incident was to trigger events which not only sponsored
the formation of the Albanian Orthodox Church, but would
help to reshape Balkan history for the next three decades.
The Albanians of New England rallied around Fan Noli and
a leader was born.
The Ordination of Fan Noli
Due to the lack of Albanian clergy, Noli decided that
God was calling him to minister to the Albanian Orthodox
faithful in America. Therefore he journeyed to New York
several times, not an easy trip in those days, and petitioned
Archbishop Platon, then ruling bishop of the Russian Arch-
diocese of North America, to ordain him to the priesthood
and to take the Albanian communities under his spiritual
care. Following an investigatory commission headed by
Father Jacob Grigorieff, Archbishop Platon consented to
this, and the rest is well-documented history. Fan Noli was
ordained to the Holy Priesthood on March 18, 1908, after
receiving monastic tonsure. Father Theofan had already
prepared the definitive Albanian translation of the Liturgy.
On March 22 of that year, the “Sunday of Orthodoxy,” he
celebrated the Divine Liturgy in Boston and organized the
Church of Saint George. Wrote Faik Konitza: ““The day on
which he conducted his first Albanian Liturgy is a turning
point in the history of the Albanian renaissance. We cannot
forget it and we cannot let others forget it...”
On March 24, 1918, ten years later, Bishop Alexander,
ruling bishop in North America, raised Fan Noli to the rank
of Mitred Archimandrite and appointed him Administrator
of the Albanian Orthodox Mission in America. Thus he ac-
quired the same status that Bishop Raphael (Hawaweeny)
had for the Syrians, that Archimandrite Sebastian Dabovich
had for the Serbs, and that Archpriest Michael Andreades
had for the Greeks in the western part of the United States.
309
 Priest Fan Noli with friends in Boston,
Fan Noli the Statesman
While it is often assumed that, in his early years, Fan
Noli saw the Albanian Orthodox Church as a way of rescu-
ing Albania, it may be said also that the Church rescued Fan
Noli as a public servant and as a man. In an interview in
1958, in his library in Boston, he writes: “Of all my activi-
ties, my first love is Christ and His Church...” and “My
first introduction to the Albanian movement was reading
the New Testament translated into Albanian in 1872 by
Konstandin Kristoforidhi, which I began to read at the age
6 iN|, is
Fan Noli’s role as spiritual leader coincided with, but
rarely intruded upon, his work as a spokesman for the cause
of Albanian independence. On April 28, 1912, he had
helped to found the Pan-Albanian Federation of America
Vatra, which during the First World War would serve as
Albania’s Government-in-Exile. On July 4, 1917, he met
with President Woodrow Wilson and secured the American
President’s pledge that he would support Albania’s cause at
the Paris Peace Conference. But it was on December 20,
1917, that Fan Noli attained what he called: “my greatest
political achievement . the admission of Albania to the
League of Nations . . . This established once and for all the
310
1908.
boundaries of Albania and gave her world-wide recognition.”
Although Albania had proclaimed her independence in
1912, it is quite possible that without Fan Noli’s dynamic
efforts in Geneva in 1920, the Albanian nation as a cohesive
entity might never have survived its inauspicious beginning.
In an editorial in England’s prestigious Manchester Guardian,
the following tribute was made: “Fan Noli is a man who
would have been remarkable in any country. A learned
clergyman, an accomplished diplomat, an expert in inter-
national politics, a skillful debater, from the outset he made
a deep impression on Geneva. He knocked down his oppo-
nents from the Balkans in masterly fashion, but always with
courtesy and a smile. He is a man of vast culture who has
read everything worth reading in English and French.”
Fan Noli’s efforts earned him the appointment of Alba-
nia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in 1923; and on June 17,
1924, he was elected Premier. He attempted various
measures of agrarian reform from the patterns he had come
to admire in the United States; but his efforts were cut
short by his overthrow on Christmas Day, 1924. Like
Thomas Jefferson, he was an articulate humanitarian and an
energetic reformer: cerebral, concise and anxious to liberate
his people from centuries of feudal servitude.
The Church Was His Home
Always a humble, self-denying mendicant, Fan Noli’s
life-style was deeply monastic. He was never the worldly
ethnarch, but lived as the spiritual guide who pointed to the
Kingdom “not of this world.” He spent nearly 10 years in
exile in Germany, translating Shakespeare, Ibsen, Cervantes
and other masters of world literature into Albanian during
the 1920’s. Wrote the eminent Austrian scholar, Professor
Norbert Jokl: “Fan Noli’s translation of the Rubaiyat of
Omar Khayyam is better than the best translation in any
European language, with the possible exception of that of
Edward Fitzgerald.” He was to receive acclaim as a man of
letters from such notables as Composer Jean Sibelius for his
work in the field of music, from author Thomas Mann for
his literary efforts; he was to receive one of the six compli-
mentary letters from author-critic George Bernard Shaw for
his work on Beethoven; and Henry P. Van Dusen was to call
his translation of the New Testament “‘. . . better than the
New English New Testament.” But all his achievements as a
man of letters were pale for him in comparison to his en-
deavors for the Church. He often considered his translation
of the Kremtore (Menaion) into Albanian as the work which
most challenged his spiritual, intellectual, liturgical and
literary sensibilities. As a man of letters, he was deeply en-
amoured of literature, music and the arts. But as a man of
God, he knew of no greater “literature” than Holy Scrip-
ture, no more powerful music than the voice offered in
praise of God, and no more beautiful art than the ‘“‘art”’ of
prayer.
The Albanian Orthodox Church became his home and
his family; and it enabled him to give expression to his
leadership instincts and provided the channel for the deep
well of piety and faith which sprang from his mystical lone-
liness.
Father Stathi Melani
Autocephaly for the Homeland The Reverend Father Stathi Melani served St. Nicholas Church in
Southbridge from 1914-1917. In 1918, he journeyed to Albania to
Although Albania itself constituted a predominantly assist in the national awakening, and was martyred in that year for
Moslem population, with a large Roman Catholic popula- attempting to celebrate Divine services in the Albanian language.
tion in the North centered around Shkodra, the Orthodox Fe EAs prompted many heroic, popular ballads during the
S.
Church wielded great respect and influence and always
played a disproportionate role in the life of the nation. Soon after the Congress of Berat, the Patriarch of Con-
Yet among Albanians themselves there had never been a stantinople Benjamin sent a delegation to Albania to study
religious persecution — the only East European nation that its resolutions, comprising Bishop Hierotheos, Andon Yaho,
can make the claim. Albanian Orthodox clergy from Amer- his plenipotentiary exarch, and Bishop Kristofor Kissi (later
ica played a significant role in the Congress of Berat in Primate of the Church of Albania). On November 21, 1923,
1922, which proclaimed the Autocephaly of the Church of they consecrated Fan Noli as bishop in the Cathedral of
Albania: Father Vangel Chamche (later Bishop Agathangel Saint George in Korcha. (The consecration had been ap-
of Korcha) and Father Vasil Marko from St. Louis, Missouri. proved by Bishop Alexander of the Russian Church in
These two clergymen, in fact, had celebrated the first Divine America who, coincidentally, had been visiting in Constanti-
Liturgy in Albanian to be celebrated in Albania, on April nople on émigré matters.) On the same day, Fan Noli was
18, 1921, at the Cathedral of Saint George in Korcha. For a appointed Metropolitan of the See of Durres, Gora and
similar act, Father Kristo Negovani, also from America, had Shpata, one of the most ancient sees of the Balkans and
suffered martyrdom (from Orthodox hands!), as did Father from which every ecumenical council had received a repre-
Stathi Melani, of whom ballads are still sung today. As all sentative. It was not until 1937 that the Patriarch of Con-
too often in the history of our Church, the political aspira- stantinople officially issued the Tomo s of Autocephaly for
tions of worldly powers attempted to use the Church to the Church of Albania; but the role of Albanian-American
their ends. And the great Albanian-American grammatist, clerics was clearly instrumental in the formation of a Church
Petro Nini Luarasi also suffered martyrdom for the same in the homeland that would serve in the language of the
cause. people.

Consecration of Bishop Noli, 1923, with Bishop
Bishop Kristofor.
Prophet of the American Church
Metropolitan Theofan served as Premier of Albania only
six months before his overthrow and subsequent exile in
Western Europe from 1924-1930. Then, in 1931, he was
able to return to America to lead the Albanian Orthodox
Church here. Although he had played so significant a role
in the national awakening of his people, he was a man of
vision who knew that in a generation or two, divine services
in America would have to meet the needs of these younger
generations. His translation into English of nearly 15
volumes of Eastern Orthodox Church prayer books, service
books and hymnals are the most eloquent testimony to his
abiding dream for an Orthodox Church in America truly in-
digenous to this continent. In consultations and corres-
pondence with Metropolitan Leonty, he persistently urged
the Russian Orthodox Church to take the initiative — as the
jurisdiction which first planted Orthodoxy in America — in
gathering all Orthodox Americans into a single jurisdiction.
No one prophesied this dream more than Metropolitan
Theofan, who dedicated the larger part of his later works to
“The American Orthodox Church of the Future, which will
unite all Orthodox groups and enable them to fulfill their
evangelic mission in the United States of America, for the
glory of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
Bishop Stephen, Successor to Fan Noli
While Metropolitan Theofan helped to prepare and point
the way to the “promised land” for his flock, it was not
given him to go thei. His successor, Bishop Stephen (Lasko)
was consecrated to the episcopate by the Holy Synod of
the Church of Albania on March 20, 1965. After nearly five
years of internal turmoil in his diocese, a new spirit of
reconciliation was prompted, in the words of one observer:
“As if the Holy Spirit had suddenly awakened us and re-
minded us that to be called Christians, we must be prepared
to act like Christians.”
With the granting of the Tomos of Autocephaly to the
former Russian Metropolia, the Annual Convention of the
Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese in America overwhelmingly
OO i)
resolved to become a canonical part of the newest of the
world’s autocephalous churches, the Orthodox Church in
America. On October 14, 1971, at the Cathedral of the
Holy Virgin Protection in New York, His Grace, Bishop
Stephen, plenipotentiary of the Albanian Archdiocese, was
received together with his entire diocese into the Orthodox
Church in America, and in November of that year, as the
Second All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in
America convened at Saint Tikhon’s Seminary in South
Canaan, Pennsylvania, the necessary mutual agreements
were duly executed, which guaranteed the administrative
autonomy and ethnic identity of the Albanian Archdiocese.
In his homily on the day of the union, Bishop Stephen
remarked: ‘‘Today, our Albanian Church has made a full
circle. It was the Russian Church in America which gave us
succor and enabled us to serve a generation of immigrants.
Hierotheos and Today, we arrive together as an Orthodox Church in Amer-
ica to serve newer generations...””
It was Bishop Stephen’s estimation that the problem
facing Orthodoxy in America is not the fact that there exist
multiple national and ethnic groups — for this nation is so
posed of so many, diverse peoples — but that the presence
of multiple jurisdictions, side by side, each governed by
Churches abroad, has unintentionally caused disunity among
Orthodox and hindered Orthodox missionary activity.
Bishop Stephen’s foresight was no more evident than in
his preparation for his death. With his house in order, he
fell asleep in the Lord on Holy Wednesday, 1975, and was
granted the sublime privilege and joy of burial during Bright
Week.
Under the omophorion of its Locum Tenens, His Grace,
Bishop Dmitri, the Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese during
its Annual Convention in 1975 focused upon the theme of
mission. It is time to look beyond our obvious needs and
to consider our brethren who have not yet experienced the
fulness of Orthodoxy. In so doing, not only will we fulfill
part of our responsibility as Christians, but will strengthen
the fiber of our own faith by sharing it with others.
Today, the Albanian Archdiocese may be seen as a
microcosm of the whole Church. Orthodox Christians of
Albanian, Serbian, Swedish, Ukrainian, Russian, Lebanese,
Syrian and Greek heritage minister to the faith which knows
no national boundary. In a sense, Metropolitan Theofan’s
dream has come to pass for his flock, and to his eternal
credit it remains as he possessed the vision and was given
the strength to prepare his people for the coming of an
Orthodox Church in America. “... and our eyes were filled
with tears...”
Saint Nicholas Albanian Orthodox Church
Southbridge, Massachusetts (1912)
Although Albanians settled in Southbridge, Massachu-
setts before 1906, religious services did not begin until that
year. Their first place for worshipping God was a house on
Page Hill in Southbridge. The first building of Saint Nicho-
las Church was begun in May 1912, and was completed in
the autumn of the same year. It was the first church built in
 THE HOLY SYNOD
OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA

In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
WHEREAS, the Doctrine and the Canons of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church clearly require
that there be a visible and organic unity of all Orthodox Christians in every land;
WHEREAS, the Holy Orthodox Church in America, as the local and autocephalous Church of this land, has
the right and the sacred duty to take all necessary canonical measures for the fulfillment of this unity;
WHEREAS, the Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese in America has satisfied the Holy Synod that it is Ortho-
dox in Faith and practice, and has unbroken Apostolic Succession of its Holy Orders;
WHEREAS, the Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese in America has, at present, no canonical ties with any
autocephalous Church, and, therefore, requires no canonical release, having always been in communion of
prayer with the Orthodox Church in America;
WHEREAS, this Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese in America has duly and freely petitioned the Holy Synod
to be accepted as an integral part of the Orthodox Church in America;
THEREFORE, We, the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America, at our session held in New York
City, on the fourteenth day of October in the year of Our Lord nineteen-hundred-and-seventy-one, have
| unanimously proclaimed and decreed that the Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese of America is to constitute,
henceforth, a Diocese of the Holy Orthodox Church in America, with all the rights, privileges and obligations
as defined by the Constitution of the Orthodox Church in America;
And, further, that the canonical head of the Archdiocese, The Right Reverend Bishop STEPHEN, be a
member of the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America with all rights and obligations as defined by
the Constitution of the Church, and that his title be “Bishop of Boston’’; so that there may be unity of the
People of God and that the Name of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, may be glorified forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, This Synodical Decree is issued, signed on behalf of the Holy Synod, by the
Primate of the Holy Orthodox Church in America and the Secretary of the Holy Synod.

+IRENEY
Archbishop of New York
Metropolitan of All-America and Canada

+KIPRIAN
Archbishop of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania
Secretary of the Holy Synod

the New World by Orthodox Christians in which God was
worshipped in the Albanian language. In 1941, due to the
growth of the community, the present stone structure was
erected on the site of the original building on a green hill
overlooking several acres of typical New England country-
side. The momentous decision to erect the new church
resulted from a meeting in Eagles’ Hall on Main Street under
the leadership of the late Father Lambi Michael. Orthodox
Christians of Albanian descent throughout the world con-
tributed generously to the erection of the church.
Among the first clergy was Father Stathi Melani, who
served from 1914 through 1917. In 1918, he returned to
Albania to assist in the national awakening which was
sweeping the homeland, and was martyred in that year for
his attempts to celebrate divine services in the Albanian
language. Today, his grandchildren and great-grandchildren,
like so many other descendants of Albanian pioneer church
leaders, are active Orthodox laypeople helping to bring
Orthodoxy to fulness in America.
The dedicated clergy who have served our community
are: Fathers Zaharia Katundi, Stathi Melani, Naum Cere
(the noted iconographer), Pandi Sinitza, Damian Angeli,
Lazo Kozma, Kole Kristofer (the first Albanian immigrant
to America in 1884), Nicholas Pfifti, George Suli, Vani
Chani, Lambi Floqi, Stephen Lasko (later Bishop Stephen),
Mina Pfifti, Vasil Dhimitri and Nicholas Liolin.
Albanian Orthodox Cathedral of Saint George
Boston, Massachusetts (1908)
The Mother Church for Albanian Orthodox Christians in
America is the Cathedral of Saint George, located in an
historic “Victorian-Gothic” edifice on East Broadway in
South Boston. The present structure serves as a link
between American history and Albanian Orthodoxy, inas-
much as the edifice was built in 1872 as a Congregational
church, from the proceeds which noted abolitionist Julia
 MESSAGE OF BISHOP STEPHEN
on the acceptance of the
ALBANIAN ARCHDIOCESE
into the
ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA

Cathedral of the Holy Virgin Protection

New York, October 14, 1971.

“Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!” (Psalm 133)
Your Beatitude, Metropolitan IRENEY, Your Eminences, Reverend Fathers, Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
Today, we are very happy to have the privilege and honor ofjoining the distinguished body of Hierarchs of
the Orthodox Church in America as representative of the Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese in America.
In our case, history has made its full circle. The Albanian Orthodox Church in America was first established
by the then Russian Orthodox Church in 1908. So, we are not strangers with one another. Metropolitan Platon
ordained the first priest to serve the Divine Liturgy in the Albanian language, an event which was then possible
only here in America, this land of liberty. That priest was Theofan S. Noli who later in 1923 was consecrated
Bishop in Albania and administered the Albanian Orthodox Church in America for 42 years.
In all these years, my venerable predecessor was among the farsighted pioneers and chief advocates of the
American Orthodox Church. He wrote. He preached. He pleaded with the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox
Church to proclaim an autocephalous Orthodox Church in our land which would encompass all the Orthodox
Americans and would cut across all national divisions. He took into consideration the unique canonical status
of the Russian Orthodox Church which first planted Orthodoxy in America, and even more, he recognized its
energetic missionary spirit.
We have seen this dream become tangible with the proclamation of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church
in America, and today, with much joy, we join this “future church”? which, through Divine guidance and
human labors, is made a present reality.
In a spirit of brotherhood, and with our deepest prayers, we hope to urge and encourage all of our sister
churches on this continent to share together with us the fulness of Autocephaly. Let us not tarry; for the
world in which we find ourselves moves quickly, and all too often in frightening directions.
Recalling the Paschal Homily of Saint John Chrysostom, our Church rejoices with those who come at the
eleventh hour, after much meditation, just as Our Church rejoices with those who have come in the first hour.
So, for the salvation of our Orthodox youth, and for the glory of our Lord’s Holy Church, let us unite. Let |
us not be concerned with who leads our Church; our leader is our Redeemer, Jesus Christ.
So, thank you again, and I pray to Almighty God to bestow on us humility, understanding and love for each
other, and let us go forward until unity will be achieved for the salvation of Orthodoxy in America and the
glorification of the name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
+STEPHEN, Bishop of Boston

314
Ward Howe received for composing ““The Battle Hymn of
of the Republic.”
The iconostasis and mural icons were executed in large
part by Albanian-American craftsmen, including Usta Dhi-
mitri (Master Dimitri), who carved the iconostasis in 1924
for the earlier Saint George Church, which was located on
Emerald Street. The icons were painted by Nicholas Zengo
in 1912 and by Thomaidha Kiatos in the late 1940’s, when
the present Cathedral was acquired and consecrated.
The splendid cathedral was quite an achievement for a
community that still remembered the earlier, more modest
beginnings, when faithful parishioners would each have
the responsibility of carrying home icons from the various
halls in which services were held and ofbringing them each
Sunday morning for the Divine Liturgy. From 1908 until
1922, when the church on Emerald Street was purchased,
each communicant literally took a part of the church with
him, and for each liturgy the faithful came together to
“build the church” for the Divine worship!
It was on March 22, 1908, the “Sunday of Orthodoxy,”
that a meeting was held in Phoenix Hall on Tremont Street
in Boston for the organization of Saint George community,
under the leadership of Father Fan Noli. That first commit-
tee consisted of Kole Kristofer (later Father), Toli George,
Vasl Philip, Misto Millona, Harry V. Kachka, Kozma John,
and Kosta Ratska. The following priests have served Saint
George Cathedral: Fathers Fan Noli, Naum Cere, Damian
Angeli, Stathi Melani (later martyred in Albania), Kole
Kristofer (the first Albanian immigrant to America in
1884), Dhosi Katundi, Vangel Camche (later Bishop Agath-
angel of the Church of Albania), Vani Chani; Archiman-
drite Thimi Theodos; Rev. Stephen Lasko (later Bishop
of the Albanian Archdiocese in America); Very Rev. Christ
E. Ellis; Father Sotir Dilogika and Very Rev. Arthur E.
Liolin (current Chancellor of the Albanian Archdiocese).
The choir of the Cathedral was first organized in 1916
by Professor Thomas Nassi, eminent Albanian composer
and conductor of the Cape Cod Symphony. It was re-
organized in 1934 by Father Jacob Grigorieff of the Russian
Orthodox Church, under the supervision of Metropolitan
Theofan, and today serves in both English and Albanian.
The Daughters of Saint George is the ladies auxiliary of
the Cathedral, founded in 1935 and is the mainstay of com-
munity activity. The Ladies Guild of Saint George super-
vises projects for the Church School, which has been
directed for over 25 years by Dr. George Atwater. The Sons
of St. George is the official laymen’s league of the com-
munity and operates cathedral-sponsored functions and
colloquia.
St. Nicholas Albanian Orthodox Church, Southbridge, Mass., the
first church where the Albanian language was used for worship.
 & the newly arrived Orthodox immigrants from Albania. In
the same year an Albanian Church Society was organized,
but for ten years the community was without a pastor.
During this time, the Albanian Orthodox established a warm
relationship with the Russian community of Bridgeport and
attended services and received the sacraments in the Russian
Orthodox Church. This close relationship continued after
the establishment of a permanent church organization and
assignment of the first priest, Father Vasil Mandy, in 1935.
When Metropolitan Theophan Noli dedicated the church in
1935, he was assisted by Fathers Alexander Veniaminoff
(Bridgeport) and Jacob Grigorieff (Ansonia) as well as by
members of the Albanian clergy. Colonel Luke Bakoota of
the Russian Orthodox Church of the Holy Spirit, Bridge-
port, helped to establish the first choir.
Other parishes of the Albanian Diocese include: Annun-
ciation Church in Natick, Massachusetts, Assumption Church
in Worcester, Massachusetts, St. Thomas in Detroit, Michi-
gan, Prophet Elijah in Jamestown, New York, St. Nicholas
in Jamaica Estates, New York, Sts. Peter and Paul in Roch-
ester, New York, Saint E Premtja in Cleveland, Ohio, St.
John Chrysostom and Sts. Peter and Paul churches in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Prepared by the Chancery Staff
of the Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese
Boston, Massachusetts

ei, ale: oss

BINT
BALEALree eae’
Tegeretcl
Pye hid
et
sili tts E $5 isi : :
St. George Albanian Cathedral, Boston, Massachusetts. St. George Albanian Church, Bridgeport, Conn.

The Chancery of the Albanian Archdiocese, which serves

also as the Cathedral Church School and Albanian School
facility, was acquired in 1955. Formerly it had been the
first building to house the world-reknown Perkins School
for the Blind, where Helen Keller began her noble struggle.
Today, it houses the Archbishop Fan Noli Library of
Eastern Orthodoxy and Albanian Culture.

St. John the Baptist Albanian Orthodox Church

Boston, Massachusetts (1934)
Also in South Boston is the Albanian Orthodox Church
of St. John the Baptist, formed on December 16, 1934, by
a group of people froin the Korcha region of Albania. The
first pastor, Father Dhosi Katundi, served until his death in
1943. Since then the parish has been served by Fathers
Haralamp V. Dode, Stavro Shekembi and Michael Terova.

St. George Albanian Orthodox Church

Bridgeport, Connecticut (1925)
The history of St. George Albanian Orthodox Church in
Bridgeport, Connecticut, goes back to Palm Sunday, 1925,
when the first church service in Albanian was conducted for

GUIKS)
 The Orthodox Cathedral
THE MEXICAN
The “Iglesia Ortodoxa Catdlica en México” has its
origins in the Mexican Revolution, when antagonism against
the Roman Catholic Church was aroused by its association
with the hated Spanish colonialists. In fact, some of the
first laws of the new Mexican Republic were antireligious.
In 1917 all church properties were nationalized, many
churches were closed, monasteries were abolished and their
communities dispersed, and clergymen were required to
obtain licenses to function.
In 1926, after several attempts to establish a national
church, a Roman priest, with government support, was
made a bishop by the head of the independent Old Roman
Catholic Church of North America, and the Mexican
National Catholic Church was founded. The church thrived
under the patronage of the government and at one time ex-
tended to Mexican communities in Texas.
The National Church continued as an Old Catholic com-
munity until Father José Cortes y Olmos was appointed its
bishop in 1964. The new bishop and his clergy were becom-
ing gradually convinced, through study and reflection, that
the Old Catholic ecclesiological principles did not conform
to the criteria of the One, True Catholic Church. They
came to identify with the Orthodox doctrine and tradition
in Mexico City, under construction.
EXARCHATE
and adopted the designation “Orthodox” in the name of
their church.
In 1965, Bishop Olmos and his clergy contacted the then
rector of St. Seraphim’s Church in Dallas, Texas, Father
Dmitri Royster (now Bishop Dmitri of Hartford), who had
been instrumental in converting many Mexicans to Ortho-
doxy. Father Dmitri presented their case to authorities of
the Orthodox Church in America, and after several ex-
changes and visits, the Holy Synod of Bishops of the
Orthodox Church in America appointed Bishop Dmitri to
visit Mexico officially and report on the Church there.
Bishop Dmitri’s report was studied by the Department
of Canonical Affairs, which recommended accepting the
Mexican community into the Orthodox Church. Thus in
February 1972, the Synod established an Exarchate, or
church province, in Mexico. An exarchate is within the
jurisdiction of an autocephalous (i.e., canonically independ-
ent) church, but outside her geographical limits. The Mexi-
can Exarchate was to include all the communities and the
members of the former National Church.
Bishop José, the newly consecrated Orthodox Bishop of
Mexico, will head a community consisting of a Cathedral
parish in Mexico City, six other fully established parishes,
317

Bishop Dmitri and Bishop Jose celebrate liturgy in the
unfinished cathedral.
and 15 missions, including several among Otomi and Huichal
Indians. The entire community numbers some 20,000
faithful.
A large number of liturgical books have been translated
into Spanish by Bishop Dmitri and will become the official
texts for the Orthodox Church in America. The Mexican
Exarchate, under its Bishop, will assume responsibility for
the Orthodox mission to the Mexican people (within the
boundaries of the Mexican Republic).
Interest in the work of the Exarchate has grown since it
became a part of the Orthodox Church in America. Inquiries
from other Spanish-speaking countries have been received,
and the Bishop-Exarch José has been invited to visit several
places outside of Mexico.
A monthly theological-liturgical publication, La Revista
Ortodoxa, was initiated in September 1974, and is now in
its tenth month of publication. It has attracted much atten-
tion both in Mexico and in other parts of Central and South
America. It contains translations of theological works and
liturgical texts. In addition, translations of services and edu-
cational and devotional material are published separately
from time to time. Music has been prepared for several of
the services: the Divine Liturgy, vespers, the wedding, and
the funeral.
During the winter and spring of 1974-1975, two new
missions were opened, one in Guadalajara, Mexico’s second
city, and in Ajusco, in the outskirts of Mexico City. Only
the shortage of clergy prevents the establishment of many
more missions.
Much of the attention of the Exarchate’s personnel has
been to the completion of the Cathedral of the Ascension
in Mexico City. Only a part of the structure is in use at the
present time. It is the hope of the Exarchate to complete
the construction by 1976.
The parishes and missions of the Exarchate are: in
Mexico City, the Cathedral of the Ascension, the Church of
Nuestra Senora del Perpetuo Socorro, the Mission at Ajusco;
in the state of Veracruz, the Church ofla Santa Cruz, Pisa-
flores, the Church of Santa Maria, Apipihuasco, the Church
of San Pedro, San Pedro, the Church of San Martin, San
Martin; in the State of Hidalgo, the Church of San Esteban,
San Esteban; in the State of Chiapas, the Mission of San
German, Mazatan; and in the State of Jalisco, the Mission at
Guadalajara.
Bishop Jose with members of his flock in Mexico.
 SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENTS IN OUR TIME

It is too early to write a definitive history of Orthodoxy

in America. At best we are still in the initial stage of gather-
ing materials and compiling data, such as that recorded in
this volume. It is also too early, and not a little foolish, and
perhaps even dangerous, to tryto assess the developments
of the years in terms of their spiritual value. Nevertheless,
some tentative attempts must be made to summarize the
spiritual progress of Orthodoxy in America. Let the follow-
ing considerations, therefore, be a subject of debate for the
present, and a record of some preliminary judgments of the
American Orthodox experience — a record which future
generations of Orthodox Americans will have to evaluate.

The Missionary Spirit

From the beginning Orthodoxy in America was a mis-
sionary endeavor, first to the Alaskan peoples and later to
the immigrants from the old countries who were called by
divine providence to be the foundation of the Orthodox
Church in North America. For many years the missionary
spirit of the original Russian archdiocese — still called to
this day by many old-timers among the Russian Orthodox
by the simple name of “the mission” — was obscured and
sometimes lost. This happened in the middle years of this
century for many well-known sociological, ethnic and
political reasons. In our time, however, we cannot fail to see
a certain revival of the missionary spirit among us. It is not
by accident that in this bicentennial year of the United
States the main theme of the All-American Church Council
of the Orthodox Church in America is the subject of
mission. Neither is it an accident that the Alaskan Diocese
is now experiencing a time of renewal reminiscent of the
golden days of missionary activity during the days of Father Sister Victoria (Schnurer) assists Sunday School in Alaska.
Veniaminov. Neither is it an accident that in these
days, when the Mexican Orthodox Exarchate has been
established and virtually every new parish in the United
States is an English-speaking community comprised of
that the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in the Americas,
Orthodox Christians from various national backgrounds,
whose national program this year is Spiritual Renewal, has
collected thousands of dollars for missionary work, some of
which has been sent to Alaska for the promotion of the
newly-established pastoral school in Kodiak, called by the
name of Saint Herman.
Undoubtedly there is still much to be desired and de-
manded in the area of Orthodox missionary activity in
America. The majority of members of all of the Orthodox
jurisdictions is hardly missionary minded. Most members of
the Church today still consider Orthodoxy as their own
faith, for themselves, as part of their cultural heritage, and
it is presented to others in precisely this way, primarily
for the sake of gaining recognition and respect in American
society. Nevertheless it can be claimed that these last
decades have witnessed a rebirth of the missionary spirit
among many members of the Church, who see the Orthodox
faith as the way of life willed by God for all peoples and
es
attempt — however poorly and weakly — to present it to
Youth ‘March for Alaska” at St. Tikhon’s Seminary. others as God’s gift for all mankind.

319

Choir conferences and special classes for directors are helping to improve the quality of liturgical services.
Educational Efforts
At no time in the history of Orthodoxy in America has
there been such an emphasis on education in the Church as
there is today. And at no time has there been a greater op-
portunity for Orthodox education for those who want it.
From the higher theological schools in Brookline and New
York, to the seminaries and pastoral schools, to the dioc-
esan and parochial programs, education in the Church is
demanded and given as never before. As little as twenty
years ago, books on the Orthodox faith available in the
English language could be placed on a single bookshelf.
Today, and as every new day goes by, books are being
written and published on every aspect of Orthodox doctrine
and life, at every level of churchly experience. Recent years
have seen the development of the Orthodox Christian Edu-
cation Commission’s work in the educational field, primarily
for the school-aged members of the Church. Virtually all the
departments of religious education of the various jurisdic-
320
ie
Summer camps provide an opportunity for Orthodox children
to participate in a Christian community under the guidance of
counselors committed to a Christian style of life.
tions have been reformed and renewed in recent years, with
more effective assistance being provided for the school
teachers who over the years have been heroically faithful to
their thankless task of conducting educational programs
under the most adverse conditions imaginable. Not only are
the parish schools more effective than ever before, having
more and better materials and facilities, but other forms of
instruction and educational activities have appeared, not the
least of which has been the organization of many parish day
camps during the summer months and boarding camps in
which Orthodox faith and worship from the context of the
young people’s life and activity together.
The educational and spiritual care of Orthodox college
students also has greatly expanded in recent years, spear-
headed by the work of the Campus Commission of the
Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the
Americas, the publisher of Concern magazine and the guid-
Adult classes in many parishes provide opportunities for deepen-
ing one’s understanding and practice of the faith.

Diocesan, Seminary and Deanery

educational programs and retreats
for adults are now regular events
occurring throughout the year and
especially during Great Lent.

St. Tikhon’s and St. Viadimir’s Sem-

inaries sponsor special Adult Institu-
tes and extension programs for lay
persons interested in theological edu-
cation.

32]
ing spirit behind innumerable campus, regional and national
conferences and retreats. In 1971, for the first time in his-
tory an international conference of Orthodox youth — the
Syndesmos Assembly — took place in America, at Hellenic
College in Brookline, Massachusetts.
It can be affirmed, therefore, that the desire for Ortho-
dox education which was so powerful in the early days of
Orthodoxy in America — a desire which struggled to remain
alive in the dark days of the 1920’s and 1930’s and which
began to find fulfillment in the 1940’s and 1950's — today
burns as never before.

College youth conferences provide opportunities for discussion,

education, counseling and spiritual renewal.

All-Parish Conferences at St. Tikhon’s Seminary, sponsored by

the Department of Religious Education bring youth and adults
together in a common search for and greater commitment to
Christian life.

Syndesmos Assembly of International Orthodox Youth Movements meets at Holy Cross Seminary, Brookline, Mass., 1971.
% F
Liturgical Renewal
Historians of Orthodoxy in America will certainly
remember the last decades of this century as a period of
liturgical awakening for the Church. As little as twenty
years ago the average Orthodox parish in our land was
liturgically asleep. The services went on, to be sure. The
sacraments were performed in great numbers. The festivals
were celebrated. The choirs were beautiful. The churches
were crowded. Many church buildings were constructed.
But for the majority of participants in Orthodox worship,
the spiritual depths of the Church’s liturgical life were un-
sounded, its spiritual treasures were unknown, its spiritual
resources were untapped. The people went to church with
devotion and piety. They were moved by the beauty of the
services. But the significance and power ofthese services as
revelations of the Kingdom of God, in spirit and in truth,
were hardly understood and experienced. Today this is no
longer the case. In more and more places, for more and
more people, through educational enlightenment and pas-
toral guidance, the liturgy of the Church has come alive as
the source of divine wisdom and power which it is.
Each year Great Lent sees a fuller realization of the
Church’s worship as prescribed by the Lenton Triodion.
Symbolic of this has been the restoration of the Liturgy of
the Presanctified Gifts, which until quite recently was virtu-
ally unknown and unused in American parishes. Holy Week
and the Holy Pascha are now also celebrated with greater
fulness and understanding in many more parishes. Here the
main achievement has been the restoration of the services
of the Blessed Sabbath, the Great and Holy Saturday before
Easter, which are among the most meaningful and crucial
services in the entire church year.
The festal seasons of the Church have also found new
emphasis and fulness of celebration in our day, becoming
the sources of instruction and inspiration in the faith for
thousands of people who before were in total ignorance of
their meaning, if not their very existence. In many
Feast-day vigils are recovering their place in church life, especially
among the youth who search out the parishes where such services
are regularly celebrated.
parishes in recent years, Saturday evenings have become
times of preparation for greeting the Lord’s Day, as they are
meant to be in the Orthodox spiritual tradition. Vespers,
vigils and services of sacramental confession and reconcilia-
tion with the Church have become normal parts of parish
life in many places, as they should be, on the eves of the
celebration of the Divine Liturgy. And Divine Liturgy itself,
the center and focal point of Orthodox Christian life, has
become increasingly more present and powerful to many
more people, not only because of the many books, tracts,
lectures and sermons that are now available concerning it,
but primarily because many more of the faithful members
of the Church are now being prepared and encouraged to
participate regularly in Holy Communion.
Perhaps no fact in the history of American Orthodoxy
has had deeper and greater impact on the life of the Church
in this land than this renewed participation of the faithful
in Holy Communion. Certainly any future history of the
spirituality of Orthodox America will recognize the great
significance of the 1973 encyclical letter of the Synod of
Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America concerning
communion, with its official appeal to all the members of
the Church to prepare themselves carefully and to partici-
pate frequently and regularly in the sacrament of sacra-
ments, the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ in the
eucharistic mystery of the Church.
Increased participation of the faithful in the holy eucha-
rist at the Divine Liturgy has improved the quality of the
spiritual life of the Church with far-reaching effects. Because
of the heightened awareness of the meaning of the Christian
life through participation in the liturgy with deeper involve-
ment in it by sacramental preparation and participation in
Holy Communion, the other sacraments of the Church have
received new meaning and significance for many people.
Baptisms, weddings, the services of anointing the sick and
burying the dead have come alive with spiritual significance
and power for many of the faithful. So also have the seasons
more
of fasting and festal celebration. And so also have the
Church’s programs of social and charitable activity, as well
as its administrative functioning and its educational and
missionary efforts and actions. These things have happened
in ways that a quarter century ago could hardly be imagined.
And the root of this has undoubtedly been the revitaliza-
tion of the liturgy as the center and source of Christian
spiritual life.
The Pastoral Dimension
The various new developments in Orthodox Church life
in America in recent years, rooted in the liturgical reawak-
ening, have not been accomplished without a certain spirit-
ual development within the ranks of the clergy of the
Church; just as the bolstering of the ranks of the clergy in
recent times, and their greater inspiration in the pastoral
ministry, has not been without the general liturgical and
spiritual renewal of life in the parishes. The new inspiration
found among many of the clergymen of the Church and the
new inspiration found among many of the lay members
goes hand in hand, the one enabling and influencing the
ow) ee oy)
 other. If present trends continue in the enrollment in the
theological schools in America, the future generations of the
Church in this land will be able — and even be compelled —
to produce and cultivate new forms of service in the Church
for both clergy and lay people. It may even be the case, and
God grant that it will be, that the pastoral work of the
Church, always governed and guided by the bishops and
priests, will be extended to include many more services per-
formed by many more people not ordained to the sacra-
mental clerical offices of the Church. The increased number
of women with professional theological training and having
other professional skills as well is one of the most significant
developments in the Orthodox Church in our time, not only
in America but throughout the world.
The increased number of clergymen and professionally
trained leaders, their more competent training, and their
deeper interest in the spiritual life of the Church is another
of those aspects of Orthodox life in America which was de-
sired, and to some extent accomplished, in the early years
of Orthodoxy in America, only to be lost in the middle
years and regained in the present, at least to some measure.

In teen retreats, scout jamborees, camping programs, and

any occasion where Orthodox Christians gather, opportu-
nity is given for renewed commitment in the eucharistic
gathering.

The return to the sacramental

life is responsible for the re-
vitalization of parish life
throughout the country.

324
 Members and guests of the Orthodox Theological Society in America
cal Conference sponsored by the Society.
Only when we recall the quantity of students in the first
pastoral schools and the quality of their studies, and when
we consider the total absence of any schools for the training
of church leaders in America for a number of years in the
1920’s and 1930’s, and when we recall the struggles of the
schools to become established on a firm foundation in the
1940’s and 1950's, can we truly appreciate the growth and
development of this critical area of churchly life in our own
time.
Not only has there been a significant improvement in the
training of church leaders in recent years, but there has
emerged in our time a more homogeneous clergy, a clergy
more united and more willing and able to communicate not
only with the members of the Church, but with each other
as well. There is little doubt that one of the major achieve-
ments of the second half of this century in American Church
history will be the improvement of spiritual, liturgical and
theological unanimity and harmony among the bishops and
priests of the Church, as well as the Church membership as
a whole. The reason for this increased possibility for Church
people to be more closely united in one mind and heart is
not only the fact that more and more are American-born
and educated and are formed in the ideas and convictions
by common sources and influences; neither is it simply be-
cause there are more efficient and effective means of com-
munication today than ever before. It is also due to the
fact that conscious attempts are being made today to bring
together Church leaders and workers on many different
levels, in order to express opinions, ideas, problems, griev-
ances and frustrations in carrying out the work of the
Church. In addition to the Standing Conference of Canon-
ical Bishops in the Americas, there exist today many more
councils and conferences of priests in various deaneries,
gather at St. Viadimir’s Seminary for the Second International Theologi-
dioceses and local regions, to help in confronting and_re-
solving spiritual and pastoral difficulties. Many dioceses have
conferences for priests dedicated exclusively to pastoral
problems and questions. Priests and church workers from
various schools and dioceses gather together expressly to
discuss and share spiritual and pastoral concerns, so that
each can learn from and be inspired by the other.
More personal contacts between pastors and church
workers take place today as well, not merely for social or
personal purposes, but for spiritual and pastoral discussion
and debate. If there was once a period in American Ortho-
dox history when the clergy of the Church were closed and
defensive toward one another — and toward the people as
well — and were reluctant to open themselves to others for
counsel and advice, it can happily be said that this is no
longer generally the case.
In addition to pastoral meetings, there are more and
greater contacts today between church teachers and musi-
cians as well. There are also examples, very sadly too few, of
cases where Orthodox charitable and social workers are
combining their efforts and sharing their experiences. Men-
tion also must be made at this point of the recent establish-
ment of the Orthodox Theological Society in America,
comprised primarily of people in the academic world, whose
efforts are greatly responsible for shaping and forming the
minds and spirits of the Orthodox people in our land. That
the teachers and scholars are meeting to test their theories
and opinions on one another and to see if each is reading
and grasping the Tradition of the Church in its various ex-
pressions in a common and harmonious way can only be to
the benefit of all of the members of the Church.
bo tn
Social and Charitable Activities
As the spiritual and liturgical life of Orthodox parishes
develops, with more effective pastoral care and more com-
petent Christian education, it can be expected that Ortho-
dox Christian action will move out of the walls of the
church temples and communities and become more power-
fully present in the daily lives of the people. From the be-
ginning, the daily care and service of the neighbor — the
sick, the troubled, the oppressed, the underprivileged, the
poor, the ignorant, the elderly — was an essential element
of Orthodox life in America. Marvelous examples of this are
seen in the Alaskan mission, particularly in the lives of
Saint Herman and Father John Veniaminov. And wonder-
ful examples are also found in the ethnic communities The Good Samaritan Society and other similar groups sponsor
weekly hospital visitations to New York area institutions.
which were formed by the life of the Church, where mutual
aid and charitable associations were central and normal in
the lives of the people.
groups as the Good Samaritan Society in the metropolitan
In the troubled years of Orthodox American life — in the New York area, the St. John’s Brotherhood in Ohio, and
middle years of this century — while structures for social
many parish organizations directed primarily toward help
service and mutual benefit remained in the churches and
for the aged and the infirm.
dioceses, they were most often transformed into organiza-
tions for the social entertainment of the members, losing In many parishes and dioceses today the absence offor-
their outgoing character as societies organized essentially mal and official church service to others is coming to be
and primarily for the needs of others. While personal acts of understood as a scandalous fact which must be corrected
service and brotherly concern remained, as well as cases of immediately. And steps are being taken to correct this
Orthodox churches and groups being mobilized for aid in deficiency. An example of united Orthodox action on an
exceptional instances, organized forms of Christian social issue of social and legal morality is the unanimous condem-
and charitable service of a permanent character all but dis- nation by Orthodox Christians of the practice of aborting
appeared. Today the desire for such organized efforts of unborn children by medical means. This issue is probably
Christian action has returned, and can be seen in such the first case in American life where the Orthodox have

Seminary students representing five Orthodox Theological Schools gather at St. Tikhon’s Seminary for a meeting of the Orthodox Inter-Sem-
inary Movement, a student attempt to manifest the unity of Orthodox in America.

326
acted officially and formally, with harmony and unanimity,
for the good ofothers on a social and legal matter not solely
and specifically connected with the Orthodox Church.
Monastic Life
Monastic life has always existed in some form in Ortho-
dox America. For monasticism to become a living and
organic part of church life in America, however, it is no
doubt necessary for a truly organic American Orthodox
piety and spiritual life to develop in the Orthodox parishes,
so that young members of the Church may be exposed to
the depths of Christian life as revealed in the Church. It
seems that this possibility of experiencing the Church as the
mystery of the Kingdom of heaven — and not merely as
the expression of one or another ethnic style of life — has
begun to happen in our time; and this, we must hope and
pray, will be the good earth from which genuine monastic
vocations will grow and flourish in the Church.
The forces against true monastic life in America are
legion. Concern for strictly material and earthly profits and
pleasure is fostered in young people, not only by society
and school, but even by well-meaning parents who, having
been socially and materially deprived, desire that their
children should have and enjoy that which they lacked.
Pressures in American life to social and spiritual activism of
the most external and superficial sort denigrate contempla-
tive life as idle self-indulgence. But the most serious danger
is that people without a sound and sane basis in Christian
faith and life will seek the monastic way for unsound and
insane reasons and will therefore, by their very interest and
entry upon what appears to be the monastic way, corrupt
and destroy genuine and proper monastic life and activity.
There are instances of this demonic danger already with us
in our time. And there are instances of it being understood
and overcome as well. We would only mention here, as the
most recent attempts to provide a true, humble, simple and
genuine monastic witness in the Orthodox tradition, two
small communities: the Monastery of the Resurrection in
Jackson, Michigan; and for women, the Monastery of the
Transfiguration in Ellwood City, Pennsylvania. Let us pray
that these, and other monastic communities, will be raised
up by God in our midst, for an Orthodox Church that is
truly healthy and whole cannot fully exist without them.
dox faith and way of life to others, and to discern in others
what was positive and good while rejecting what was in-
correct and harmful. Today this seems to be overcome, at
least in some measure. While there are still some who call
for the complete withdrawal of all Orthodox Christians
from any sort of ecumenical activity, seeing in this activity
a betrayal of the Orthodox faith; and while many more con-
tinue to hold forth for Orthodox representation everywhere
and anywhere as a status symbol for the Orthodox in Amer-
ica political and social, with no challenge to others in the
slightest way; there are those who are coming to see that
both of these positions are un-Christian and un-Orthodox,
and that the proper Orthodox way is much more hard and
narrow than either of these two extremes.
Today many people are less interested in the appreciation
of Orthodoxy by others as a “major faith” with a respect-
able place in society, but they are more interested in the
essence and depth of genuine spiritual life that Orthodoxy
provides for themselves and for others. Sounding of the
depths of Orthodox Christian faith and life has liberated
people from their sectarian fear of others and has allowed
them to be free in the truth of Christ to affirm what is
good, true and beautiful in those not of the Orthodox faith,
while rejecting what is evil, false and ugly. The ecumenical
problem will be with us in America and in the Orthodox
Church for generations to come. The present time seems to
demonstrate that more and more of the Orthodox are gain-
ing the power to handle it in a truly Orthodox way.
Administrative Developments
While the various Orthodox jurisdictions in North Amer-
ica have not yet come to full administrative and organiza-
tional unification, and most likely they will not be able to
do so for years to come, it can be said that certain adminis-
trative changes have taken place in the Church in America
All-American Councils have revealed a new spirit of cooperation and
unity among clergy and laity in the Church.

Ecumenical Activity
While all of the difficulties concerning the involvement
of Orthodox Christians in ecumenical activities and agencies
continues, with developments in recent years, particularly
the tremendous changes in the Roman Catholic Church,
greatly complicating the issue, it does appear that Orthodox
action in the ecumenical area has matured and deepened. In
times past it seemed to be the case with very few exceptions
that the Orthodox in America either refused all contacts
with other Christian and religious groups, or else met with
others almost exclusively for the purpose of gaining recog-
nition for Orthodoxy and for taking one’s rightful place, as
it was said, in American life. Almost no attempt was made
to present the theological and spiritual essence of the Ortho-

' oe)

<
Between sessions of the Councils the Holy Synod and the Metro-
politan Council carry on the administrative tasks of the Church.
in recent years that are positive and wholesome. The most
significant characteristic in much of Orthodox diocesan and
parochial administration in recent years has not been greater
operational efficiency of a bureaucratic nature, or greater
financial power and stability, or more effective communica-
tions and public relations. It has rather been the fact that
the unique character of the Orthodox Church as a sacra-
mental and spiritual community has begun to play a much
greater role in the way that Orthodox ecclesiastical struc-
tures operate and function. There was certainly a time in
the history of Orthodoxy in America when the conscious
attempt was made to pattern church organization and oper-
ation after purely secular American patterns. It was con-
sidered the epitome of success by many to structure church
organizations along the lines of American secular institu-
tions, and to use the techniques of American business man-
agement in ecclesiastical affairs. Today it appears that such
Hierarchy, clergy and laity cooperate
in such projects as the St. Vladimir's
Theological Foundation or the Century
Club of St. Tikhon’s for the spiritual
moral and financial support of theolog-
ical education in the Church.
328
an approach, while still powerfully present, no longer carries
the influence that it once had, and in many instances is al-
most totally overcome and rejected. The heated debates in
the 1950’s and 1960’s in the Russian Orthodox Metropolia,
now the Orthodox Church in America, as well as in other
jurisdictions over the governing statutes of ecclesiastical life,
seem to be bearing fruit in destroying the un-Christian and
un-Orthodox idea that there can exist a division between
the “material” and the “spiritual” in church life, with some
sort of division in powers and privileges in these two spheres
between the laity and the clergy. At present it seems that
the truly Orthodox “‘sobornal” approach to the totality of
Church life and activity, including everything from the
collection and disbursing of funds to the celebration of the
sacraments of the Church, is beginning to be understood.
Church life as a whole is being understood as the concern
of all members of the Church, both clergy and laity.
Symbolic of this new approach is not only the prayerful
context of parish and diocesan meetings, extending into all
business sessions, policies, decisions and actions, but also
the outright rejection of certain methods of government and
fund-raising as utterly opposed to the teachings of God in
the scriptures and tradition of the church — methods which
were formerly used (and continue in places to be used) in-
volving deceit and gambling, justified in their immorality
because they are being used “for the church”!
If nothing else has taken place in recent years but the
recognition that not all forms of church government, organ-
ization, administration and financial policies and programs
are permissible to Christians — regardless of their alleged
usefulness, and productivity, and their supposedly demo-
cratic and progressive character — and that as the Church of
Christ the Orthodox Church must be administered accord-
ing to Christian principles, then this in itself is a major
accomplishment, for which God must be praised.
 The liturgical, educational and spiritual dimensions of church life today are the key to the formation of a new
church, those for whom Orthodox America is already a nascent reality whose potential is yet to be fulfilled.
Looking toward the Future
As we look to the future in Orthodox America we can be
certain that the Church will never be without its difficulties
and problems. Christ himself has promised that where He is
followed, there will always be difficulties, troubles, tempta-
tions, and even persecutions, betrayals and schisms. But not
all difficulties and problems are of equal value and worth.
There are troubles that the Church can have that are indica-
tive of the low and unworthy level of the interests and con-
cerns of its earthly members. And there are troubles and
difficulties that arise because the Church’s members are
truly attempting to follow the teachings of God and His
Son Jesus Christ by the grace and power of the Holy Spirit.
As we look back in history we can dare to claim that the
troubles of the earliest period in American Orthodox
Church life were productive troubles, meaningful and fruit-
ful. We can say as well that for many years, many of the
generation of leaders for the
difficulties that plagued the life of the Orthodox Church in
this land were foolish and unworthy of Christian people.
And we can dare to say that today we are returning once
again to problems and difficulties indicating that many
more Orthodox Christians in North America have been
touched by the Spirit of God to discern what is truly neces-
sary and truly needful for Orthodox Christian life. In a
word, it seems clear that the Orthodox in America have
matured as a Church even in their problems and difficulties,
in the way that they recognize them, in the way that they
confront them. If this is true, then the hope that abides
among Christian people in the Orthodox Church always and
forever, can be a hope in our time that bears within it many
positive and happy results for God’s children. ‘‘For salvation
is nearer to us now then when we first believed; the night is
far gone, the day is at hand.” (Romans 13:11-12)
Father Thomas Hopko
329
 Chronology
1741—1840
1741 July 15, Alaska discovered by Captains John J. Bering
and Alexis J. Chirikov. Chirikov discovers Sitka Bay
on July 15, 1741.
July 20, 1741. The priest-monk Ilarion Trusov assisted
by the priest Ignaty Kozirevski celebrates the first
Orthodox Liturgy in America on the Feast of St. Elias
on the ship St. Peter, under the command of Vitus
Bering, 58°, 14 northern latitude and 141° western
longitude.
1747 An Aleut boy from Attu Island is baptized (in
Bolsheretsk, August 1, 1747) and named Paul. Taken
Ca.
to Kamchatka by the hunter Nevodchikov.
759-1761 Stephen Glotov sails the small ship Julian to Umnak
Island in the Aleutians. During his two-year stay, he
baptizes an Aleut boy, naming him Glotov, as his god-
son. In 1763, he arrives at Kodiak Island.
1784 Gregory Ivanovich Shelikov lands at Three Saints Har-
bor (now known as Old Harbor) and spends two years
on Kodiak Island; before his departure he baptizes 40
men into the Orthodox Faith.
1788 Gregory Shelikov visits the venerable Russian Monas-
tery of Valaamo on Lake Ladoga and notes the desir-
ability of sending missionaries to Russian America
1824-1834 Priest John Veniaminoy translates the Gospel of St.
from this region.
1793 The Empress Catherine directs the Most Reverend
Gabriel, Metropolitan of St. Petersburg to recruit
missionaries through the renowned Abbot Nazarius
of Valaamo Monastery.
December 25, 1793. Eight monks leave St. Petersburg
for America: Archimandrite Ioasaf (head of the Mis-
sion), Monk Herman (steward), Monk Joasaph, Priest-
monk Makary (from Koniev Monastery near Valaamo),
Priest-monk Juvenaly, Priest-monk Athanasy, Deacon-
monk Nectary (St. Alexander Nevsky Monastery,
St. Petersburg), and Deacon-monk Stephan.
1794 September 24. Arrival of the “Kodiak Mission” on
Kodiak Island after a journey of 293 days and 7,327
miles, the longest missionary journey in the history of
the Orthodox Church.
November 21, 1794. Church of the Holy Resurrection
founded on Kodiak Island.
794-1796 Father Herman organizes a school for girls in Kodiak.
1796 Priest-monk Juvenaly, Ist martyr of the Orthodox
Church in America. Met his death at Lake Iliamna in
Alaska on September 29, 1796, at the hands of
natives.
Construction of the Holy Resurrection Church, Ist
Orthodox Church in America is completed in Kodiak
with bells from Russia.
WW 1%)©
1798 Bishop loasaf (Bolotov), the former Archimandrite
and head of the Mission, is consecrated as the first
bishop for America, with the title “Kodiak,” in
Irkutsk, April 10, 1798.
1799 Bishop loasaf is lost at sea returning from Irkutsk,
May 1799, together with priest-monk Makary and
Deacon-monk Stephen.
1812 The Chapel of St. Helen is established at Fort Ross,
north of the Russian River, approximately 80 miles
north of San Francisco, California.
1816 Martyrdom of Peter the Aleut at the instigation of
Spanish missionaries in California (San Francisco area).
1816 Arrival of the first Orthodox priest in New Archangel
(Sitka), Alexis Sokolov. The first church in Sitka is a
remodeled ship that is hauled up on land and con-
verted into a church.
1824 July 29. Arrival at Unalaska of the 27-year-old priest,
John Popoy-Veniaminov. During this year, he estab-
lishes a church in Unalaska dedicated to the Ascen-
sion of Our Lord, a school, and Alaska’s first meteor-
ological station. The church was consecrated July 29,
1826.
Matthew and parts of the Divine Liturgy and the cate-
chism into Aleut, for which he creates an alphabet
from the Cyrillic, a dictionary, a grammar and a
primer. He also compiles a 3 volume ethnographic
work: Notes on the Islands of the Unalaska District.
1825 Arrival on Atka Island (Aleutian Chain) of the first
native Orthodox priest, James Netsvietov, a graduate
of Irkutsk Seminary.
1834 Priest John Veniaminov moves to New Archangel
(Sitka). Visits Fort Ross in 1836.
1837 December 13. Death of Father Herman, on Spruce
Island. Last survivor of the first Kodiak Mission.
Locally revered as the saintly Blessed Elder of Alaska.
1839 Father John Veniaminov visits St. Petersburg where
where he arranges for the publication of his ethno-
graphic study of the Aleut peoples; he presents his pro-
gram for the restructuring of the Alaskan mission to
the Holy Synod, which is studied and accepted. His
wife dies in Irkutsk the same year.
1840 The American Mission is removed from the jurisdic-
tion of the Diocese of Irkutsk. Priest John Veniaminov
who takes the monastic name of Innoéent, is conse-
crated Bishop of Kamchatka, Kurile and Aleutian
Islands on December 15, 1840, in the Cathedral of
our Lady of Kazan, St. Petersburg, for the American
Mission.

1841 Bishop Innocent arrives in New Archangel (Sitka) in
September to administer the affairs of the mission.
Sale of the Russian holdings at Fort Ross to John
Sutter.
1841-1858 The New Archangel Spiritual Consistory and the
Ecclesiastical Seminary of Sitka are established.
1842 Construction begins in Sitka on the Mission House
and the Annunciation Chapel (Podvorye).
1843 Dedication of the Mission House, including the
Bishop’s residence and the Annunciation Chapel. To-
day, it is the oldest standing building in Alaska. The
Annunciation Chapel is the oldest house of Orthodox
worship in continuous use in the Western Hemisphere.
1844 Construction begins on the erection of St. Michael the
Archangel Cathedral in New Archangel (Sitka), the
first Orthodox Cathedral in the Americas.
1848 The Cathedral of St. Michael the Archangel is conse-
crated November 20, 1848, by Bishop Innocent.
Approximately SO clergy of the Alaskan mission
gather for the consecration.
1852 Bishop Innocent is given charge of the Yakutsk Dio-
cese in Siberia and elevated to Archbishop.
1858 Archbishop Innocent transfers his administration to
Yakutsk in eastern Siberia together with the New
Archangel Seminary, September 12, 1858.
The Bishopric of Sitka receives the status of an auxili-
ary See to the Kamchatka Diocese, January 6, 1858.
1859 Archbishop Innocent pays his last visit to Sitka, where
he served 15 years as a missionary priest and 22 years
as a missionary Bishop.
Bishop Peter (Lysakov), the former rector of the Sitka
Seminary, is appointed as Auxiliary Bishop for Sitka.
1860 Report of a government inspector estimates the num-
ber of native Alaskan Christians at 12,000, in 43 com-
munities, with 35 chapels, 9 churches (2 in Sitka),
17 schools and 3 or 4 orphanages.
1862-1864 First Orthodox parishes in Galveston and New Orleans
are founded as mixed ethnic parishes.
1867 Sovereignty in Alaska is ceded by the Russian Em-
peror to the United States government, October 18,
1867, as the United States purchases the Territory of
Russian America.
The Bishop of Alaska initiates the first formal inquiry
into the life of Father Herman.
Bishop Paul (Popov) is appointed as Bishop for the
New Archangel See.
1841—1888
1868 Holy Trinity parish is founded in San Francisco, Cali-
fornia, composed of Greeks, Russians and Serbians,
with services in several languages (including English)
and meetings in English.
1870 The Slavonian, a multi-lingual newspaper, is published
in San Francisco.
In view of the United States sovereignty in Alaska,
the Holy Synod creates the Diocese of Alaska and the
Aleutian Islands, June 10, 1870. Bishop Paul is trans-
ferred to Russia and Bishop John (Mitropolsky) is ap-
pointed bishop of the newly erected Diocese.
The Russian Imperial Missionary Society is formed by
Metropolitan Innocent of Moscow to aid the Alaskan
Mission especially.
Holy Trinity Greco-Russian parish is organized in New
York City (941 Second Avenue) by Father Nicholas
Bjerring. It is consecrated by Bishop Paul on Novem-
ber 12/24, 1870, on his way back to Russia.
1872 Bishop John unofficially moves the Bishop’s See from
Sitka to San Francisco. This move is officially sanc-
tioned under Bishop Nestor.
1876 Bishop John leaves America for Russia (August 7) and
retires the following year due to ill health.
1877 A decree of the Holy Synod of Russia, May 27, stipu-
lates that the American Diocese be governed tempo-
rarily from St. Petersburg until a new bishop is
appointed.
1879 Bishop Nestor (Zakkis) is appointed Bishop of the
Aleutian Islands and Alaska.
Archbishop Innocent, now Metropolitan of Moscow,
dies March 31, 1879.
1882 Bishop Nestor perishes at sea in Alaskan waters on
June 30. His body is recovered and buried at Unalaska
beside the Holy Ascension Cathedral.
The See remains vacant until 1888 and is governed by
Metropolitan Isidore of St. Petersburg.
1885 Greco-Slavonic Brotherhood is formed by Greek and
Slavic immigrants in Chicago to provide religious serv-
ices for the Orthodox community.
1888 Bishop Vladimir (Sokolovsky) is appointed to Amer-
ica after being consecrated bishop of the Aleutian
Islands and Alaska, December 20, 1887; he governs
the diocese from March of 1888 to October 1891.
Pastoral school for readers and choir directors begun
by Bishop Vladimir in San Francisco with 24 students.
Ordination of Father Sebastian Dabovitch. first
American-born to be ordained to the Holy Priesthood
in America.
0) we)
1889—1905
1889 First Orthodox parish organized in South America is
established in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
1890 A group of priests from Hungary, under the chairman-
ship of Father Alexis Toth, meets in Wilkes-Barre,
October 15 to 17, to discuss the problems the Uniates
are facing in America.
1891 Holy Virgin Protection, Minneapolis, Minnesota, or-
ganized in 1887, led by Father Alexis Toth is the first
Uniate parish in America to return to Orthodoxy.
Bishop Vladimir personally receives the parish in
Minneapolis on March 25, 1891.
Bishop Vladimir returns to Russia. Bishop Nicholas
(Ziorov) is consecrated Bishop of Aleutian Islands and
Alaska, September 29, 1891.
1892 The first Serbian parish in America is founded in
Jackson, California, by Archimandrite Sebastian
Dabovich.
St. Vladimir’s Russian and Annunciation Greek Or-
thodox parishes are founded in Chicago.
1894 The first official biography of Father Herman of
Alaska is published by the Valaamo Monastery.
1895 First conference of Orthodox clergy held in Wilkes-
Barre, Pennsylvania, in April.
First church for Arabic-speaking Orthodox founded
in Brooklyn, New York.
Establishment of the Orthodox Mutual Aid Society,
April 10, 1895. (ROCMAS)
1896 Father Alexander Hotovitzky is appointed rector of
the St. Nicholas parish in New York and begins editing
the Russian Orthodox American Messenger, a bi-
lingual publication in Russian and English, for the
Diocese.
1897 Opening of the Minneapolis Missionary School, Octo-
ber 15 1897.
Nicholas B. Orlov is commissioned by Bishop Nicholas
to translate the Horologian and the General Menaion
into English for use in the Diocese.
First missionary travels of Russian Orthodox priests
in Canada: Father Dimitri Kamnev accompanied by
Vladimir Alexandrov, and Father M. Malyarevsky.
1898 Bishop Nicholas is called back to Russia; Bishop
Tikhon (Bellavin) of the Diocese of Lublin is ap-
pointed as Bishop of the Aleutian Islands and Alaska.
330
1899 Second conference of Orthodox clergy, held in Alle-
gheny (now North Side Pittsburgh) at St. Alexander
Nevsky Church, May 9.
1900 Title of the Diocese of the Aleutian Islands and Alaska
changed to the Diocese of the Aleutian Islands and
North America, February 9, 1900.
1901 Construction of the first Orthodox Church in Canada,
at Vostok, Alberta.
Printing of the first Russian Orthodox Calendar in
America.
1902 Construction is begun on November 10/23, 1902, ofa
permanent Orthodox Church in New York, St. Nicho-
las Cathedral, to replace the home chapels in use.
Clergy meeting of the Mission held in New York and
the question of establishing a Seminary raised.
1903 Establishment of the Auxiliary Bishopric of Alaska
within the Diocese of the Aleutian Islands and North
America with the Cathedral in Sitka, Alaska, Novem-
ber 29, 1903.
The Greek Holy Trinity parish in New York City be-
comes legally the private property of three Greek lay-
men.
1904 Establishment of the Auxiliary Bishopric of Brooklyn
within the North American Diocese for the Syro-
Arabic Mission, February 1, 1904.
Arrival of the Auxiliary Bishop of Alaska from Russia,
Bishop Innocent (Pustynsky), February 24, 1904.
Consecration of Archimandrite Raphael (Hawaweeny)
as Bishop of Brooklyn, May 6, 1904, in St. Nicholas
Cathedral in New York City. First Orthodox bishop
to be consecrated in the United States.
The first Romanian parish is organized in Cleveland,
Ohio.
1905 The Missionary School in Minneapolis is reorganized
by Archbishop Tikhon into the Orthodox Theological
Seminary of North America, June 1, 1905. The Mis-
sionary School is moved to Cleveland, May 6.
The Episcopal See is transferred from San Francisco
to New York City. Bishop Tikhon is elevated to the
dignity of Archbishop.
The “Hellenic Eastern Christian Orthodox Church’ is
incorporated in the State of New York.
Opening of the Russian Orthodox Monastery of St.
Tikhon of Zadonsk at South Canaan, Pennsylvania.

Hieromonk Arseny (Chavtsov) heads the first Ortho-
dox monastery in America. An orphanage is also
attached to the Monastery.
1906 The Service Book of the Holy Orthodox Catholic
Church, commissioned by Archbishop Tikhon, is pub-
lished. Translation was done by Isabel F. Hapgood.
1907 The First All-American Church Sobor (Council) is
convened in Mayfield, Pennsylvania, by Archbishop
Tikhon on February 20-23, 1907.
Archbishop Tikhon leaves for Russia on March 13/26.
The Archdiocese is administered by Bishop Innocent
of Alaska until the arrival of Archbishop Platon.
The first Bulgarian parish is established in Madison,
Illinois.
Archbishop Platon (Rozhdestvensky) arrives in Amer-
ica on September 5/18 to assume the duties as Arch-
‘bishop of the Aleutian Islands and North America.
1908 Diocesan clergy meet at St. Tikhon’s Monastery on
October 14/27.
Russian Immigrants Brotherhood and Home is opened
in New York, December 1.
Theophan Noli is ordained to the Diaconate (February
9) by Bishop Raphael and to the Holy Priesthood
March 8) by Metropolitan Platon, at the request of a
large Albanian community in Boston.
1909 Bishop Innocent, Auxiliary Bishop for Alaska, re-
turns to Russia in March; Archimandrite Alexander
(Nemolovsky) is consecrated as Bishop of Alaska,
November 15, 1909.
Protopriest Alexis Toth dies on April 24/May 7; he is
buried at St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
A Bulgarian Mission is organized.
1912 Archbishop Platon transfers the Theological Seminary
from Minneapolis to Tenafly, New Jersey, July 1.
Establishment of the Brotherhood of Orthodox
Zealots of North America, February 12.
1913 Serbian clergy meet in Chicago to secede from the
Diocese and join the jurisdiction of the Serbian
Metropolitan of Belgrade.
1914 Archbishop Platon leaves for Russia May 20/June 2.
Bishop Alexander (Alaskan Auxiliary Bishop) is ap-
pointed pro-tempore Administrator until the appoint-
ment of a new Archbishop.
Archbishop Evdokim is appointed to head the diocese
of the Aleutian Islands and North America, July 29/
August 11. Arrives and assumes duties on May 14/27,
1915.
1905—1922
1915 Bishop Raphael of the Syro-Arabic Bishopric of
Brooklyn dies on February 14, 1915.
The Orthodox Women’s College is organized in Brook-
lyn; it exists for one year on a high school-junior col-
lege level with 12 students.
The first women’s monastery (convent) and orphanage
is organized in Springfield, Vermont, dedicated to the
memory of Father Alexis Toth.
1916 Bishop Alexander of the Alaskan Bishopric is ap-
pointed to the Bishopric of Canada, July 6, 1916.
Archimandrite Philip (Stavitzky), rector of Tenafly
Seminary, is consecrated in New York City, as Bishop
of Alaska, August 6.
Archimandrite Stephen (Alexander Dzubay) is conse-
crated in New York City as Bishop of Pittsburgh for
the Ugro-Russian Bishopric, August 7.
October 5, 1916. Second Assembly of Serbian priests
and parishes meets in Chicago, under the presidency
of Archibishop Evdokim. The by-laws of the North
American diocese are accepted with a few added
amendments for use in Serbian parishes.
1917 Archimandrite Aftimios is consecrated Bishop of
Brooklyn for the Syro-Arabian Bishopric, April 30/
May 13.
Bishop Philip of Alaska returns to Russia.
Delegates from America (Archbishop Evdokim,
V. Rev. Leonid Turkevich and V. Rev. Alexander
Kukulevsky) attend the All-Russian Church Sobor in
Moscow, which restored the Patriarchate and elected
His Holiness Tikhon (formerly Archbishop in America)
as Patriarch. Bishop Alexander serves as Administrator
in the absence of Archbishop Evdokim and by his
request.
1919 Second All-American Church Sobor (Council) meets
in Cleveland, Ohio (February 12-15) and elects Arch-
bishop Alexander (Nemolovsky) as ruling Archbishop.
(Confirmed by Patriarchal Decree, September 7, 1920)
First Assembly of the Albanian Diocese in America,
presided by Bishop Alexander. Father Theophan Noli
elected bishop, but consecration postponed.
1921 Metropolitan Platon returns to America.
Establishment of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of
North and South America by Archbishop Meletios of
of Athens (later Patriarch of Constantinople).
1922 Archbishop Alexander leaves the United States and
the North American Diocese.
The Third All-American Church Sobor (Council)
meets in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in September
ws)oS) ws)
 1922—1946
Metropolitan Platon is elected ruling Archbishop.
(Confirmed by the Russian Church, Sept. 29, 1923).
Consecration of Priest Theodore Pashkovsky as Bishop
Theophilus, Bishop of Chicago on December 3, 1922.
1923 St. Platon’s Seminary in Tenafly, New Jersey, is closed.
Bishop Aftimios of Brooklyn raised to status of Arch-
bishop by Metropolitan Platon.
Consecration of Archimandrite Amphilokhy (Vakul-
sky) as Bishop of Alaska.
1924 Fourth All-American Sobor (Council) meets in Detroit,
Michigan, in February; proclaims temporary auton-
omy and Metropolitan Platon receives the title:
“Metropolitan of All America and Canada.”
1925 Independent Syrian Antiochian jurisdiction is formed.
1926 Metropolitan Platon rejects the claims of the Synod
of Russian-Bishops-in-Exile (Sremsky-Karlovtsy) to
ecclesiastical power over the American Metropolitan-
ate.
925-1926 Archimandrite Arseny is elected Bishop of Winnipeg,
and consecrated in Belgrade in 1926.
1927 First convention of the Russian Orthodox Youth in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the founding of the
Federated Russian Orthodox Clubs (FROC). (Father)
Vladimir Prislopsky is elected as the first president.
Archimandrite Emmanuel (Abo-Hatab), administrator
of the Canadian Mission to Syrians is consecrated
Bishop of Montreal and Vicar to Archbishop Aftimios,
September 11. (Consecrated by Archbishop Aftimios,
Bishop Theophilus and Bishop Arseny by decree of
Metropolitan Platon)
Archimandrite Alexis (Panteleev) is consecrated
Bishop of San Francisco on February 6, 1927.
1928 Archimandrite Paul (Gavrilov) is consecrated Bishop
of Detroit by Metropolitan Platon, December 17/30.
1931 Bishop Theophilus is transferred to San Francisco.
Archimandrite Antoninus (Pokrovsky) is consecrated
by Metropolitan Platon as Bishop of Alaska.
Bishop Emmanuel of Montreal is appointed by Metro-
politan Platon as the Bishop of Brooklyn for the
Syro-Arabian Bishopric.
Metropolitan Platon rejects the request of Metro-
politan Sergius of Moscow to pledge “loyalty” to the
Soviet regime.
1933 Bishop Paul of Detroit is transferred to Chicago in
January. Dies in Chicago April 10, 1933.
Father Leonid Turkevich is consecrated as Bishop of
Chicago, taking the name Leonty.
334
Archimandrite Benjamin (Basalyga) is consecrated as
Bishop of Pittsburgh. He is the first American-born
bishop consecrated in America.
Bishop Benjamin (Fedchenkov) arrives in America
from Russia as Patriarchal Exarch. Beginning of the
Moscow Patriarchal Exarchate in America.
1934 Metropolitan Platon dies on April 20, 1934.
Fifth All-American Church Sobor meets in Cleveland,
Ohio (November 20-23); elects Archbishop Theophilus
as Metropolitan.
Bishop Antoninus leaves for the Moscow Exarchate.
1935 Archpriest Michael Iljinsky, former rector of the Ten-
afly Seminary, is consecrated Bishop Makary of
Boston, October 13, 1935.
Metropolitan Theophilus accepts the “temporary
status” which establishes a brotherly relationship
with the Synod of Karlovtsy.
1937 Sixth All-American Church Sobor meets in New York
City (October 5-8) and establishes the general statutes
of church administration with three levels of adminis-
tration: (1) the Metropolitan as Ruling Primate; (2)
the Bishop’s Council; and (3) the Metropolitan’s
Council, elected by the All-American Church Sobor.
Also recommends the establishment of a Theological
School and a Pastoral School.
The “temporary status” accepted by Metropolitan
Theophilus in Karlovtsy is accepted with the provision
that it in no way affects the autonomy of the Church
in America.
Bishop Makary of Boston is appointed Bishop of
Brooklyn; becomes rector of St. Vladimir’s Seminary
in New York.
1938 St. Vladimir’s Seminary opens on October 3, 1938,
in New York City.
St. Tikhon’s Pastoral School opens in South Canaan,
Pennsylvania, October 24, 1938.
1943 First Orthodox chaplain appointed in the United
States Armed Forces, November 6, 1943.
1944 150th anniversary of Orthodoxy in America celebrated.
1946 Seventh All-American Church Sobor meets in Cleve-
land, Ohio, November 26-29, and recognizes a
“spiritual” (but not administrative) dependence upon
the Mother Church of Russia.
Bishop Benjamin of Pittsburgh is sent to Japan to
assume the leadership of the Japanese Orthodox
Church, which is placed under the spiritual protection
of the North American Metropolitanate after World
War II.
 1946-1965
Negotiations with Metropolitan Gregory of Leningrad 1957 Bishop John (Garklavs) is elevated to the rank of
for restoration of ties with the Russian Church fail. Archbishop; appointed Archbishop of the Chicago-
1947 Archimandrite John (Dimitri Shahovskoy) is conse- Minneapolis Diocese.
crated as Bishop of Brooklyn; appointed Dean of St. 1959 Tenth All-American Church Sobor meets in New York
Vladimir’s Seminary. City (November 10-13).
Bishop Nikon (de Greve) arrives in United States from Bishop Nikon is elected Archbishop of Tokyo and
Europe; appointed rector of St. Tikhon’s Seminary Japan.
(1947) and Bishop of Pennsylvania (1948). 1960 The Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox
1948 St. Vladimir’s Seminary reorganized as a Theological Bishops (SCOBA) in the Americas holds its first meet-
Academy (Graduate School of Theology) and St. ing March 15 at the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in
Tikhon’s Pastoral School reorganized as a Theological New York.
Seminary. The Romanian Orthodox Episcopate is received into
Bishop Dimitry (Eugene Magan) arrives in United the jurisdiction of the Metropolia, March 31, 1960,
States from Europe; assigned as Bishop of Canada, by the Great Council of Bishops.
later as Bishop of Boston. Bishop Ireney returns to the United States as Bishop
1949 Bishop John (Garklavs) arrives in the United States of Boston.
from Europe and is appointed Bishop of Detroit and 1961 Archimandrite Kiprian (Borisevitch) is consecrated
Cleveland. Bishop of Washington, D.C.
1950 Metropolitan Theophilus dies on June 27, 1950. 1962 Archimandrite Vladimir (Nagosky) is consecrated as
Administration of the “Synod Abroad” arrives in Bishop of Kyoto, Japan, Auxiliary to Archbishop
America. Nikon of Tokyo, October 14, 1962. Second American-
born Bishop consecrated in America.
Eighth All-American Church Sobor meets in New
York City (December 5-8) and elects Archbishop St. Vladimir’s Seminary moves to Crestwood, New
Leonty of Chicago as Metropolitan of All-America York.
and Canada. 1963 Eleventh All-American Church Sobor meets in New
Bishop John of Brooklyn transferred to San Francisco York City (November 12-15).
in December. Archbishop Nikon returns to the United States from
1951 Archimandrite Jonah is consecrated as Bishop of Japan.
Washington, D.C., December 9, 1951, in San Francisco. Archbishop Benjamin dies on November 15, 1963,
1952 Archbishop Benjamin returns to the United States; while attending the All-American Sobor. Buried at
resumes leadership of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
1953 Father John Bekish is consecrated as Bishop Ireney Bishop Sylvester (John Haruns) arrives in the United
and appointed as Bishop of Tokyo, Japan, to succeed States from Europe; elected ruling Bishop of Canada
Archbishop Benjamin. and Administrator of the New England Diocese.
1954 Delegates of the Church take part in the Second As- 1964 Bishop Kiprian elected Bishop of Philadelphia and
sembly of the World Council of Churches in Evanston, Pennsylvania.
[llinois. Bishop Vladimir appointed Ruling Bishop of Tokyo
1955 Ninth All-American Church Sobor meets in New York and Japan.
City and adopts the Statutes of the Russian Orthodox 1965 Metropolitan Leonty dies on May 14, 1965; is buried
Greek Catholic Church in America. at St. Tikhon’s Monastery.
Archimandrite Amvrossy is consecrated September Miss Constance Tarasar is graduated from St. Vladi-
11, 1955, in San Francisco, as Bishop of Alaska. mir’s Seminary, becoming the first woman in America
to receive a graduate degree in Orthodox Theology.
1956 The Orthodox Christian Education Commission is
founded; a meeting is held at Reed Farm, Valley Cot- Extra-ordinary Twelfth All-American Church Sobor
tage, New York, October 26-27, 1956. Representatives meets in New York City (September 22-23) to elect
of five jurisdictions participate: Carpatho-Russian, the new Metropolitan. Archbishop Ireney of Boston
Russian, Greek, Syrian, and Ukrainian. is elected Metropolitan of All-America and Canada.

ws)ws)nN
1966—1975
1966 St. Michael’s Cathedral in Sitka, Alaska, is destroyed
by fire, January 2.
St. Vladimir’s Seminary is accepted to Associate
Membership in the American Association of Theologi-
cal Schools.
[267 St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary is
granted the power to award the degree of Bachelor of
Divinity (now the Master of Divinity), March 31, 1967.
Archimandrite Theodosius (Lazor) is consecrated on
May 6 as Bishop of Washington, D.C., and Vicar to
the Metropolitan. Appointed ruling bishop of Sitka
and Alaska, November 16, 1967. Bishop Amvrossy
is transferred to the Diocese of Pittsburgh.
Thirteenth All-American Church Sobor meets in New
York City (November 14-16).
1968 Archimandrite Joasaph (Stephan Antonuk) is conse-
crated on April 7 as Bishop of Edmonton, Canada,
Vicar to Archbishop Sylvester of Montreal.
1969 Archimandrite Dmitri (Royster) is consecrated as
Bishop of Berkeley, California, Vicar of Archbishop
John of San Francisco. First episcopal consecration of
a convert to Orthodoxy in America, June 22, 1969.
1970 St. Vladimir’s Seminary is granted the authority to
award the advanced degree of Master of Theology,
January 21, 1970.
The Canonical Status of Autocephaly is granted on
April 10, 1970, to the Russian Orthodox Greek
Catholic Church of America, by the Mother Russian
Church. The Tomos is signed by Patriarch Alexis, who
subsequently dies on April 16, 1970.
Official delegation of the Orthodox Church in Amer-
ica, headed by the Bishop of Sitka and Alaska,
Theodosius, arrives in Moscow and receives the offi-
cial Tomos of Autocephaly from the Guardian of the
Patriarchal Throne, Metropolitan Pimen, on May 18,
1970.
The Church of Japan is granted autonomy under the
Patriarchate of Moscow. Bishop Vladimir is elevated
to the rank of Metropolitan.
The Venerable and God-bearing Father Herman
Alaska, Wonderworker of America and the last surviv-
ing member of the original Kodiak Mission sent to
America in 1794, is the first Orthodox Saint in Amer-
ica to be canonized, August 9, 1970, in Kodiak, Alaska.
The Fourteenth All-American Church Sobor meets at
St. Tikhon’s Monastery-Seminary (October 20-22),
becoming the First All-American Council. Auto-
cephaly is officially proclaimed.
330
(OFA The Second All-American Council meets October 19-
21 at St. Tikhon’s Monastery-Seminary. The Official
Statutes of the Orthodox Church in America are
adopted.
The Albanian Orthodox Archdiocese is received into
the canonical jurisdiction of the Orthodox Church in
America at the Second All-American Council.
Loe The Exarchate of Mexico is established to care for the
Mexicans received into Orthodoxy. Archimandrite
José (Cortes y Olmos) is consecrated as Bishop of
Mexico City, Exarch and Auxiliary Bishop of Mexico.
Bishop Dmitri is appointed Bishop of Hartford and
New England.
Bishop Theodosius is elected Bishop ofPittsburgh and
West Virginia, replacing Bishop Amvrossy who left
the Orthodox Church in America for the “Synod
Abroad.”
St. Herman’s Pastoral School is established in Alaska
for the training of native Alaskan clergy.
Metropolitan Vladimir is released by the Patriarchate
of Moscow and returns to the United States.
1973 Archimandrite Herman (Joseph Swaiko) is consecrated
Bishop of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, and Auxiliary
to the Archbishop of Philadelphia, Kiprian, on
February 10; 1973.
Archimandrite Gregory (George Afonsky) is conse-
crated as Bishop of Sitka and Alaska, on May 13, in
Sitka, Alaska.
St. Vladimir's Seminary is accepted as a fully-
accredited member of the American Association of
Theological Schools.
The Third All-American Council meets in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, November 13-15.
1974 On the Sunday of Orthodoxy, the first full-time half
hour radio show on Orthodoxy is instituted in Wilkes-
Barre, Pennsylvania, being broadcast as ‘““The Hour of
Orthodoxy” on stations WBUX and WCLH-FM.
1975 A delegation of the Church in Russia is received by
His Beatitude, Metropolitan Ireney, at his official
residence in Syosset, New York. A Divine Liturgy is
of concelebrated in the Resurrection Cathedral in Wilkes-
Barre, Pennsylvania, on February 23, 1975.
The Fourth All-American Council meets in Cleveland,
Ohio, November 10-13, 1975, to focus on “The
Church as Mission.” The Church plans its participation
in the United States Bicentennial Commemoration
with the sponsorship of an Orthodox Youth Rally to
be held on the grounds of St. Tikhon’s Monastery and
Seminary on July 14-17, 1975.
I9'76
 19
z9Q
eyL ATOR xopoyyOQ yoinyd ‘9 MeN ‘UIeWIg “SS—uUOD
[AQ pue ‘snipomja|
ogz uojurysep,
$3
“aay Aaswsojoyg “I0JDIDY‘YoNusyoury
*L ‘sseyuoK
‘N AJoH—*A ‘Ayu
gzf uozinqysy
‘say “AVY“Y “OFINT
2] AlOH xopoywg yoinyy ‘yotA ‘10399 uaydajyg ‘yoeyny ‘Jopeay:
sossassod
e Selig pooy JO uUayosqun
-OnS
uorssao wo} INO pioyT pue inoreg snsaf “sty JH ABinzry
st zey}y °8 sam AorL ‘(jaHTAIDNIeM)
‘N IS—A TSeY 942 1382ID “ASM “A
jo 4G sauref
jo waresnief poj}erAsiqqe
Aq “SS [iseg pue «‘wojsoskiyy
IaH Aysurqnoy
‘ et i ‘ZI ‘Iapeay
[eIuUOUIaIZD
SI }e4}JO 9} JUsIOUY ‘yoInyD Yysnoy}[jam poydepe
0} ulapour
‘seUIT} sys siequInujNoqe suo p2iIpuNnYy
PUL sAY-AJUIM}SUOTT]IUE
JO “SIIYD °6 ‘erydjapeyg
‘3s—eg ‘smaipuy
r0f ywonN WWI 53S “APY
‘suUeT} OYM die JapuNn9y4} “uoD
INOJ jusIOUY SojJeyoielijeg
JO 4} jseq pue ay} gurjuejs *AYZIVIG
AlOFT pouASyo ‘eIssnyY
UT 24} peu, sa}ze}G SapIsaq
24} ‘ueISSNYy-B1I1AG
sIqeIYypue uUeIAING ‘ABIZ[Q ssdym sowieu Aeul oq puno}y
ur oy} peurofqns or ‘enbnesejey AloyYJ—‘egfAqury,
“Ady “xaTy ‘AYSAC[OMIaNT
si0jay
“V
“SIT 9194} sie [eIVAVs HII ‘S}saTIgOYM 21e Jopun24} uvzodo1jaW
jO ‘ieseiey ‘lapeay :
‘susTIYV
ynq ‘oyMos rey se [edoosidy suor}e1}sIUIy,
o1e ‘pauisou0o
[[e2 uodn cir ‘Burpeoy 3GS—egjIseg sy} ‘yeoIQ)
2} xopoyyig doysiqyo1y
jo TRON “BOLIDWYy ‘ZI ‘oopyoy 3IS—"eg Ale
‘s
L 2 A[OW WO xXoOpoy YyoInNYyD sozlusode1
jnq UaAesS [eisuax) ‘s[iounoD)
pue
za[ryM BuIpjoy Ajaze[oIAUr
9yi joyIeDYUEse 4Y4SNe} UMOP0} 24} 2so[d “£1 ‘uoj}dayS
eg W— uyoloy}
Appendix I:

3sydeg
‘aay AjUoaT “AYsAoysApelA
JO 9y} YJUaAIS ‘[eIaUax) ays SI jou Ur uUoOIUN YIM 24} Yyiyy ‘syeyoietijeg

aS)
SEE
Sed
‘AjaweU
9y4} uewoy oyoy}yeD ‘yoinygy

MAE
“SI ‘a1ieg-sayIAA
eg ‘uoNeIINsay—
ule $G AtaQA aay ysatidyoiy

&
‘Vv ‘WOLD
“W “yoeyiog ‘Jopeay

0}
[[e
ay}

24S
OY4M

Ur
puey

oY}
94}

pue
pue
‘queq

oym
91

spjoySe
piQ ‘e310

st
3S—'eg [Pey "AVY“Y

BUIAO,T
“AYSAOJOUOTY

4Seq
JO
fo

eAdI[eq
AJOW{,

ay,

3NO 94}
40f

Ysap,
juataup

saz]
“ZI

3dao9e
‘uojuRIDG “SS—'egJ9}9q pue [neg

“por)
yun

IO POA
so1j0e1d

I3ayIEq4M
sakvsd
2] xXOpoyWO oSa00Iq
jo YON BdTIaUIY
pue UIINOTyY SPURS] ‘gr ‘pjoyAew ySo—eguyof ey} ‘isideg
‘aay Auasiy tyozjaojeyy
‘S)

41 ponutzuor
‘urudaiy9)
‘Iopeay

sainjdt39S
“61 ‘ayegeg 3S— shrew ‘JedeyD 29S) “pPreysey
Ced

“UOPUa{Stsy
‘oz ‘uosduIG IG—'eg[ISeg 947 ‘3eaI1D ‘aay “y ‘Aysavisn30g
“T HOM

AGNV
“lapeay

‘ad

jo
‘iz ‘queydd[Q 3G—eg ‘sejoydtn

‘Ada
‘aay “y fAysavjsn80g
“( ‘yoytusajoy

ADAAIS

pue
Aleutian Islands, 1906

LSOW
LHOLY “ATY ‘INZDONN]
doystg
jo “eyse[y “Iapeay

yIoN
LHOIY ‘AIY “IavHdvydoysig
jo ud;yYOo1g
pue peozy
Jo 94} uelAS youeig

SHHOANHD
‘NOHMIL

‘Spue[s]
XOpoyiGQ
YoINYD
Ul
"ROLIOWIW
Jo
24} ‘zz YN0G ‘ueeuRD 3—eg uoyAIL

eoiieury
Aiajseuop
pue sueydiQ) sowoyT

uejnoapy
AYAA “AaY ALIMGNVWIHOUY
NVIISV€dS ‘HOIAOVG@ JOJeI}SIUIUIpyY
JO 24} “Acy UOyAIL, “AYSAOYSOY

doysiqyoiy
“fz ‘oleyng
‘N “SS—'KJ3}9qg puke ‘[neg “Ady “YW “pourmeusA
UeIAIaS YOueIg JO 24} xOpoyiIQ yong? Ul ‘eolIoWYy

“bz ‘Binqsyig IS—eg ‘eeysW

AJaA “AeYy“[ ‘A¥xzZUjIzpanN“sotidyoay
f10}09y
‘f{ ‘uljouloy ‘Ioaptay

SI
MIN
yseq
4346
“Sz Auoysay
‘AUD eg “Aay—“AM

‘HOR
‘poipuexsty
{103994
“yw -ounydory
ysatidyo1y “Avy AlaA—‘suaaNayl {AyZ}AOJORY ‘Y Jepuexspy ‘gq ‘Ady

{39941G
“gq ‘Aay ‘fArejaioag ‘YoTAHIN “N “AWW ftoinseo1y, ‘yodog ‘AYSAV2IH ‘yorA “Iapeay
‘Aroyisodaq 34} JO JUapudzursadns
gz ‘Aoizjieyy 3yS—eguyof 24} ‘ysudeg“Aey “q SyluReyIoy
‘ooyL
‘oyxusyoued
‘Janeoy
‘SNVAd Tvane

“AUOLSISNOD
AOA “Ady UYyof ‘Ayz}UlszpaN jeiny jo uevaq ueIssny Ul SaydInyD UsJa}seq
“Ady “OoyT, ‘AysaoHYseg [einyg uesaq jo ueissny “Lz ‘puepagy 3IGS—‘o1yg ‘snisopoay,
“Aey “[ ‘ezpeueddey:toyey
“A
sa}e}G JO ‘feolisury
‘AYSAOURIQ

TIVOILSVISAIDO4
sayonyd UL UrTa}safA «fs9}8}1G “Aa *xoTy ‘AySAOoIpS jeinyg uveq jo fispeay
“A ‘YorrIseA sOSSeJoIg
FO 9y} AreuoIssI ‘JOOYIS
“gz ‘peoystqieyy “IGS—OIyQ
Ale,
:S “Ady
uvIssny “eYSe[yY Ul sayoinyD
Auoyjuy ‘YNYsoI0g
10}99y
*6z AT]ey ‘pues,“SS— isjag pue ‘neg 29S) CpeeystqieyW
‘of ‘Bingqsdyiyg
ys—eguyof oy} ‘ysydeg
-asy Ayoruueof ‘yoyssery
“Ady AIOA—'AUD HIOK MAN ‘IS YIL6 seq SI ‘[erpay}eD seloysiN 3G =!
“WW ‘Zo10Ww ‘lapeesy
‘ay “A'd ‘PUlAIT “M 'N ‘I “40 SYoynozy “q ‘Ady ‘uraqg ‘AYZWAOIOHE “We
“1f eBloIsQ ‘sI[I IS—eg ‘s,AreW 29S) ‘Bingsdiyiyd
Ceq
‘AHSA9IIN “E, “N {suoueg ‘(uooveq) Ppeurey “y “Ady ‘oyAry Ayoruueo
‘zt ‘uo}eg
eg ‘SS— jajag pue ‘neg 29S) ‘Bingsdiiyg
Ceg
‘Iopeay ‘ouyoey “[ oe ost
fur -e or ‘ASinjiy suraiq ‘skepung :adIAuTSG wor SUNOF AHL
Parish Listing of The Orthodox Diocese of North America and

Of'L [IBIA i 1u-[[y—sAepinjeg cm ‘d of€:2 ‘ysijsuq ur sisdsa~ “Ef ‘oBesyy

TI] AJOY—' ‘Ayursy,
‘avy“[ ‘yoinyooys410pOY
“J “AOIPM
‘sAepunsg uo Peon ouds IB S2AIVS I9Y4}O IOJ sInoy sy ‘wd ‘uooseaq
‘AxS

«HE ‘10}eaIG
|] [— sey‘sures“AVY “J “Auyoojog
“z yYINOG ‘JeATY ‘N apuQ—'f 24} JO aBieyd [e1pey3eD *AZI3[Q
“€ oesseq ‘(pleysey) ‘N ve14,—'{ fsjures ‘gq ‘Aey ‘yodog “SE ‘uostpep~y
II] IS— ‘s,AleW 29S) ((1038913S
“Fv “iodespig AjoY—}H—uu0D sjtuidg 6g ‘yoInyD I[]eH $3 *(queoeA) “of ‘stjodeauurpy ‘asy—uulpy
“Dd ‘yodog
“A ‘uizueg ‘iopeey
“y nyANY
‘ASAI] IOSSezTOIg
JO 2Y4} “AIBUIWIIG
“LE yyI0N ‘orurerg “(—uuryy‘zo1oWy ‘“ispeay 29S) Csyodesuuryy
sa1y[—‘uuOD ‘eruosuy “S ‘s}ureG 9 Jejsey {3S “APY ‘oat, ‘yoyyNg
“gt ‘uIsuossipA 3G—uurpy ‘Peysy,
‘yoyoyng surueysuoy ‘10;00y4 ‘Iapeoy

ag

ag
 yG—"s0ysaojAeg

‘JN[eeyY eB10ar) ‘Asy—'ssey ‘UO og ‘89

(‘paqoerye

‘sopeay

NVIEVAV-OUAS
‘BOO “[ fyoreasysey “A “AoY ‘{[neg pue Jejag "SS—Heyeysny “£6
‘fsniB1ag
fyoroeg

‘QPLIpPUeUIyIIY snijajeyy—'sseyT ‘soustmey “29

jadeyo
uRyuIY

2"Q)
“AeYy

‘Aey

‘uessnyy ‘{ !931035) 3G—'sseyy ‘19}S90I0MA “99

‘26
“yw
“q

‘NOISSIN
‘ysteydQ “q “Aey ‘fstpuoulojog “f “Aay

“Aay—eqoyueyy
(‘peyorje sjadeys omy) fpeydey doysrg “aay 3y {[e1pey3eD sejoysIN “IS—A “N ‘UAPfooig °S9
‘Japeay

(‘epeuey
‘goyjeg ‘sniqoojAqdury yuowo1sryy “Aey fssoig AlOYER—"}nUTYyOH]T °16

W—egowueyy,

{Aysutyoeg
Burwood

‘Zadiuur~A,
[eIdAaS
sjsatid
31a)
s10UI
‘u1og}1eNnN}G
‘jadeyo auQ—ouIoy “yoiQ ‘dq “Aoy {s,Arefl IS—"PeYNW 3S 06

‘exor10s
‘Iopeay
91e

3yS—‘eqoywURP
0}
‘JaeusI

“SS—elIoqiuIssy
{YorIQ “[ “AeYy ‘neg W—INeg 3G “68

‘UIOG}JIeEN}S
‘sopeoy ‘UIZIZyIOY

sNitjaWIaq“#9
“{
“(
“1apeay

3S—'eloqruissy
‘uoljeinsysuel{—
“£9
‘un[OS
‘yormnyIey, ‘poreasysoy “gq “Ady ‘931095 G—"pue[s[ S,2e31025 3S “88

G—nsazZursuy ‘zg
‘s}eOD

JO
sjedeyo 3431q)

isj9g
(peyoene

‘neg

‘yoydoig
HRS
pue
‘layovay, ‘yoreqnyy ‘gq fiepeey “Aysaoipey “xeTy ‘yesshy “N “AW

“19
‘s}e0D
{goreasysey “A “Ady SAXSAOIPSY “XeTV “Ady ‘uoIsuessy—eyseeuy, “4g

“6S sellq
‘uorsusssy—eiieqiy

“WSG—"eloqiuissyeS
924}
“09
Cpeyoeze sjadeyo ey)

Ale
paeyooi1y
‘Iapeay ‘UIOIEYS “] ‘ulead “M “APY ‘s,Alepl 3GS—'Heusoyy 98

gS «=
*s axe] *s
Cpeyseye sjadeyo uaaas)

‘1ou0y
‘royoeay, ‘yoirpuexsty “T ssi

Ale.
3S—'elloqiy
Suoovwaq ‘einpeyS “gq ‘fyshwep “A “Ady fuoTjoe1Inssy— yerpoy Sg

°4£S
‘uoJuouIpy

JsARPagG yqqey
‘eleqieg

“ITH
(‘peyoeyje sjtadeqo uaass)

-“£S “FS “Ss “9S

A[OF]—'eIJaqiy —"eyaqry
{UIXOIY “GY “Ady fuoHOo1INssy—‘Hsaoyatg ‘vg

“3SG—e}Ioqiy

‘yeeIQ
‘reyxhoq ‘MM ‘AysAouzIOg “[ “AeYy ‘s,Areyl “3G—'Aeusy £3

Ale
‘rgpeay

“IGS

‘S—eylaqiy
Jeavoqg
‘souef
*s
(‘peyoeyne sjedeyo sno)

‘aye
“IS—"POQIV

‘oipueysg
“1apeay
+ yUowo1sIy :uOoTJeInsysueLL_—'y2eydNN “ZB

“PIOFYM
{snipoyjy,

AIeW
‘yat103a15

PRYOTAL

-“zS
*s
‘YOYOHOS “AD ‘Hel0qos “[ “Asy ‘mMaipuy yYS—‘oousi[ry 1Z

“3C—"e}Ioqiy

“7OIsOM ‘OAajasryy
‘Iapesy

‘UIBIIA

“8h ‘6 *oS “1S

“ASY—eIEqIy

‘euraoyng
“Japeey

“SP[ONIIN'
‘qnurjyey “[ ‘yorAsysoiey Jepuexajy “Asy {sejoyoINN 3G—"neaunf ‘og

=
“ARSUIQIIS
64
‘uoryBIOUnUUY—'eHWS

payoriyy—yseM
‘Igyoeay, ‘yoreasysey “gq
Suooeaporoty ‘Ku0wUy swooeaporiaryy *qorAo[INULeS ihe igen SOT th Dl
sady Squaoouuy doysig “Aey FA HTespeyyeD S[eeyorl IS—"eymS BZ

AloFy—"yseAA
“We

‘puryi0og
‘VASVIV

‘UOSdHTTAA

‘21383IS
‘fsnruopriidg
payoeye

‘Ayrurry
‘21198395

yo—'ysemy
“VAGVNVO
‘YIIpOAso0A *S “AaY—'eg ‘Bingsygq “44

‘Apeoipuy

‘LP
soyffooay ‘Iapesy
0}
-uexaty

‘apq}VAG

«SH “OF

‘yop
‘IOFIQAIN YUowossFT Seaaeg ySG—‘]eD ‘uosyoef “94

0}

“Aey

‘SIPHYepuersy
“W
‘qd
*YDIAOURIO}S Jopuexs[y “AdXY ‘SeOySINN “IG—'eq ‘UOIEI01G “SZ

unuejsuoy
ddiytqg “Ady SselomoIN' 3G—"eg ‘Burprsuiyy “b2

-ueulyoIy
‘qotaouerpers

‘uojsaaten
“GSG—xay
“5
‘SAysfodomeaw‘yodog ‘Iapeay ACY “NO

‘auaeyT
“£2
fioyay
‘AySAORYSeg
‘yiodssayoypy
‘oa, “Ady
AjoFF—‘jeyfAyursy
WG—'eg
‘oosmouerq ‘bb ues
*IOJSON YUOUOIIIFT “ADY feAAeG

9311p
AIdA
“Ady

pue

[,
“fh
“UOdeIpOIsIFT uURIMIeEd ‘YOIAOAL|SOpey
qneg ‘Ady feyipuewiyory uelseqas ‘uoljdaI1InNsay— [J ‘oseoya “22
“NOISSIN NVIAdAS
“ULTYSeTIEA
SnioseIy “ADY
fsnipoyyyY pue jwAD
‘ourIOYs}IePY “‘SS—'puy ‘zh
*‘sSnjyxePL 281005 “‘Ady—‘epeuey ‘[eo1ju0pyY ‘12 OpeIOfOD) 0}
payoejje 3S—"oloOD fs,Arepl ‘uegqie) ‘1h
‘suUe_ ‘N “ADY—'GenN ‘Aeuseay 04 “Pouley “AOY “M
3G—ofoD fyeeqorY ‘orqeng ‘ov
69
‘2a1INyY
‘elieg-saytIM
‘AoY—
"WW
eg
“AVY “IH WeINYS
fuoyjeinZysuery~—ojoy ‘1aauaq ‘6£

£9
9

338
 ‘moovepolery ‘ouorp
| [eirHsoLoen vMMIALeN nunierg-sdmioenaxdy ‘LM Od “Gormeyaory “M “AVY “Bd “FEIN BGOCL
-uy pojoassa ‘uoun) ‘armnig TYyoL “ACY
‘|Aunoned Oy] jHSLHHONVHE § j4irNO yours AV IAL TIT Boreqnyy “df Aee TUL “PUL
"40119 ‘uveq ‘AqzzA0}0H “VY “A0A fkiapA “Teap
eqyep
jamerdy =jarexe Vy ‘AYgoo dM “OY WMH Is LoL ‘Yatrsyueg ydesor “avy “¥d ‘9zjouU¥e(* SRIOUIIN “IS [IS WILE VG GT “AND AOA MON
MV)
-| -goudon 4a aYorodeog ‘0 LNtH BONA off ‘4g m07dUL
‘OAV HOqty F2S ‘OMBS “Lf APY “YOUN “HOLI0C “M Ad ‘au0y ‘ureyisg MON
) (camamropod J] ) TLG “HO “d BINYDOTO “XATV “AVY “OW ‘OSO|8eq
-yseM OSE ‘Poe
“PN ‘HIBMON
‘QA using UBA 9Gz ‘ARsuTpoIOM “L
Ch AO d ‘yousray AyUUVOL “Aoy “Bq ‘BTBPUOPULA ‘eay oy10d
*yoaeLroly pue ‘Bg “WNT1aA
I
-er] 18 ‘Atpueyy ‘epeuey ‘Teo1}TOK,
AreyeW “AC
ane AQHIOL] — ‘ayHeMANIW 4S TrapT 0% ‘Yodo “AM “AeW AON “OTRBNT “A ‘OATH
$21 “Off ‘O ‘A ‘OMMApNY Uoyderg “AoY ‘T “A
I aqvou a7aam
‘OLL Xogy “Rg ‘vaopudry ‘yosstsog] “N “AOY “VL “APU
Aosi0r
FEL UO ‘d ‘BXURIOG MaIpUY “Aoy “BTV ‘ePIsyoolg 4g pusapy eel ‘Hugo ‘d “seu “£ 'N ‘AHO ued
l

“‘edLIHIMBAIOIdUONOIIIG O19 ‘IA 1 ad ‘HOIUD whey “aoy ‘waoy ‘Anq

Parish Listing of The Russian Orthodox Diocese of North America and

d| 206 “AO ‘d ‘ONMagorez “ooyT, “sey “Vd ‘HUT APA ‘N ‘PIPBIBD

(| BNWHLAUD YIHGILenaus axidH Kodo Tey ‘068 “AO ‘d ‘Ato0j0d “W ‘Ae TH “PIU ‘4g yossamung 9g ‘yodod “p “Aeu ‘f
“48 PIO4.
‘BINARH ‘SIV “AoY “Bq ‘“BIpRay
M
"68% “AO ‘d ‘AySABUIOYO “qd “AY “Bq “OSpuUquIY -yory gz ‘Aqsaorpey uyor “ACM “A N “qOrTATORe
‘qHoBUy HW AWeLeLIT OL 49 aay OG ‘Youtysany “A “AVY “Bd ‘Kuay so 1/¥ ‘4g
MOWRY OIL ‘Torsossptw “fF “AVY “ATO ‘KINGs
r07@ M
Aleutian Islands. American Orthodox Messenger, May 1911.

E
‘TI ‘49 PIBOH ITG ‘yotacysoy “N “40N “PA ‘mop BUT
O————_
‘VINVATASNNGd ‘AM dO LOIALSIA
TT ‘oAY [Ff ‘S09
‘yg Asseg, 99% “3019
‘AAT HOOK
jo uvag ‘yowoyng “OomL “Ae “KN
opApuvulyoly “AY AdaA “XO, ‘WOPOALBL) 49 Wousg LE ‘Aysaouvig “A ‘AVY “Bd ‘OT [TASpIBMP A -s1q
-A[YOoONL ‘gay BruBAlAsuued
‘Gg ‘O ‘d ‘UrqystyeA “ID “A9N “PLTO ‘gud0ys}iB A “(Rg’ oopyal 228) ‘eq ‘uoyddeys
i]
‘(enbneseyey 9G) “Bq “U0PSUTZRIS ost ‘peredeqg ugor ‘aey “A N ‘qI0X MON 88H
1 ‘yoyooqaay BUUL “ASW ‘O[O%) ‘aeyyRy 402119
‘aay UBZOT ROP ‘AHZHAOIOH “A “EY “Ol ‘IOAUA(T ‘4g atom O9T ‘AYSAoUR_ “Xo]V “AdY “Bq “UOJURADS apiug
‘AASAvpsnsog “V “A%e ‘anon ‘aode
“A9N “1D ‘ojqoud roea—v ‘aosduig UeH OGG
E91 “A 'O ‘d—ju
‘AY SUBAT %AZHOS ‘HORM “XPTV ‘4g ojedNy L
=

‘o1Q ‘puByy40d "BEE “AO 'd ‘TOURM “AD “ACY “Bd “ARID “9S “S8BIL ‘103s0q,
‘yoatosy *“fAGY ‘4g usoqiveqd g—9
~

“yseA ‘UOSOATTM, ‘IS PAG “OG TFS ‘Hoag “A “Avy “Bq ‘Surpuoy ‘OL0UTNI ET
4q TORE CTLZ ‘AAZI12S “O “ACU “PIN ‘OAV
1
Ul] -ay Mota ORV] GL ‘TPBeIpUY “WW APM “USE
‘214989S ‘T1Z Od ‘UUpeTy “XeTy “Aay “eq “Gueydsy()
“eq ‘mBypusy say
i 4g uee1n Oot ‘Aystodosyayy “N “A°H ‘ed ‘e310 PIO aOIIOSET ‘MUN “H Aerpuy “AY “TTD ‘etTo
‘qouuystqy Jo URA(T ‘6h XO O ‘d ‘ouyeT “pf Aey
I T
“AW AdaA ‘TRY ‘OostouRd URS “aNUIAY ‘WHOA AMZN JO LOLALSIA
‘AYSAOHYSRY “OOUL
‘AI 4qSeM OPP ‘AHSAVYSTO UYOL “AdY “Bq ‘JOUABD JUNOJY
‘LOIALSIG NUALSTM $a ‘Od -ynoujrndeag Yoog pus spoofs) YouNGH
‘4S UWL ON G2GT ‘AASUITTL IV “ACM BOuUlssva Jo yepuezutsedng ‘aruderegg ‘d Prtqep “AW
‘gq caoy ‘yotaoyangy, TT “Aoy AdoA “CUT ‘stpodr
auuty, “orrystq Jo uvag ‘AYSUIqIyg “JY “A9y “ed ‘ppoyAr yy ayy
og “f° APY “Pd “OOPWOW “aInsBel} ‘UTUNT, C UYOL “Acy
/ 4S ULE “M OSOT ‘UOzyRAH UYOL “ACH “IL ‘od Roly) ‘BET “AO ‘Ad ‘Yotaeyg
‘qganseel} ‘goredeqo f UYOL “Ay
tl ag qgtagery (N LITT Borpuexopy’ MAP TIL “OF ROtY,) $6 dO d ‘BONA MM AdY “Rd ‘Zador7y
“ed ‘plojsur’] ‘qrueqoy 1) 1030d “AY
1 "4S WIG OG ‘AYSUIYAG “K “APY “Vd “TOEPeYD ‘godog ‘f 1039d ‘A°Y
IW A0N “Pd ‘ayed 1800
1 PIL Od ‘ANS A AOM “Va “Bamaqsddryqd "ELE “AO “d “BMA
‘AAW stoutt[] TOF ML LOWS 49 9G IZOT ‘Yooz0jed “S “APY “Pd ‘enbneseyey) ‘qoraoyIMy, “ff WIpeue” “APY
4S Oleg “dO dd ‘epadey Auoyjuy “A0y “kd “UAULIO f* ‘ave ‘AWz11A0}0H
dapuvxeyy ysetmdyory “pAcy AlaA 2 819qQ MIT
IOI GSLL ‘AOAB[SOYORTA “XOTY “AY “OW ‘sinor]
“4S "49 WIR 16G WeIMNYS “HY “AY “Rd ‘odteEL SOHTUM ‘y
N
:AAOLSISNOO
_

‘oyunydayg agtd “AQY “Rd “YOM. ET “M

a 4S pee SF “WU “OAY pug Racal
GHL
4 lf TI TVOILSVIST1002 NVOIGANV HLAON
-stq] Jo Uva] ‘AYSAQUANY “XIV “AY “Rd ‘BANG84 ‘VINVATASNNGd ‘@ dO LOIALSIa

i |
“WOR
913l “A O d ‘yoraoynaogy SIXTY “AE “Bd
“Cag ‘angsddryyd 0G) “Bd “SU 81990
‘4G UIV]Y “OG 128 SSP “AOATY UP “KON ‘adqoorg “3g oglord OZ “A “N ‘aAT
"492148
|-yooug Jo “TAVHAVE dousig puctasey 3s OL,
Appendix II

48 ITN
1
TM PE ‘Ynysorog Auoyyy “Ay ed ‘osu MON aaRyRA GLL ‘AonpRuryoryy “fC “AL Vel ‘ery doped “AW FAOK MON ‘39013S TILE WEA ST BASCTV
“(OJ ‘STNOTT “FG 29S) “TIL “WOstpPIy
DAY OIG, QEL “ULARTOIT) “AVY “Rd ‘erydjope[ld
jo ‘YGANVXATV doysiq pucssacy 198IY OL
i
1| ‘(purer eS) *O ‘PRENEqLPIV 4Q ANOUTADS OF “WOLAOyANT, “fC “EL APU AN ‘s1ayuo X “AUD HIOX MEN “100035 WIL6 WPA ST
L| “RYOIOG “fF ‘AVY Vg {BIOPBIY ‘IAW WALT 0G ‘Yotrouvuayy “f -\9Y FA ‘pjaysutadg ‘NOLV1d doysiqrory pucresey 180 OTL ‘0081 STH
| “glUdAW "266 “LO a ‘ANSuIQny “1 (LN “AOATY YINOS Se

4,
IIYJEIMYIVIG FO ‘Kysaoyuasd'y “A “AVY “O ‘PUREA
R) “YQ JoySalOT FE ‘COYMaIBpMOg LAY “SSP ‘WlayTeS
, ) 49 uF ‘Aysaoqodoly SPU “ACY “LN ‘OlBssed ‘SGNV1SI
4Q eure FIZ ‘YoutuumaA “Xopy “Ae “Pd ‘O1ZIUAL
“CO ‘pREqeTGIVIY 29S) “O ‘PURIST shatloy
“Ww a3v710,) 9¢ 1 ‘ONAL ANLUUBOL “AVY “AN ‘uanqny NVILN3TV GNY VOIMSWY HLYON 40
9 -69z dO ‘d ‘ANSAOTRYATT “V ACU “Reh ‘ysnew
atlo, )
“(Bg ‘ayjouuvep 29) “Rd ‘UoyBZutsuay MIN
49 WPL A LEE ‘Bodog “d “Aey ‘AID WOK MON
“KUd}9WI,) PATO JUNOJY UO YIU) SSE “FS gso00I(] XOPO}IO UvIssny
L
rol
qMELGY YIHEeroodsdy] WIIoHeandeny
tqeroc aedjy yMonTandeny
 Appendix III: Parish Listing of The Orthodox Diocese of North America and Canada
4 from the American Orthodox Messenger. 1918.

THE ORTHODOX DIOCESE OF NORTH AMERICA AND CANADA.

Highest Administration of the Russian Orthodox Mr, Ivan Gorokhoff, Teacher of Church Music.
- Greek Catholic Church in Russia. Russian National Home of St. Vladimir
His Holiness, TIKHON (Bellavin), PATRIARCH of 231-233 East 17th St., New York, N. Y.
All Russia. Rev. L. Gherman (Temporary), Rector.
THE HOLY SYNOD OF RUSSIA. Mr. John J. Brow, Manager of Printing Office,
Russian St. Vladimir’s National Home Private
ADMINISTRATION OF NORTH AMERICA AND
Banking Unc. Association
CANADA,
231-233 East 17th St., New York, N. Y.
His Grace, Most Rev. EVDOKIM_ (Meschersky),
7, Alexander Chechila, President and Manager.
Archbishop of Aleutian Islands and North
*, Sergius Snegireff, Cashier.
America, 15 East 97th St., New York, N. Y.
. Peter Popoff, Secretary.
((At present on Church Eeecumeniecal Council
. Leonid Turkevich, Director.
in Moscow.)
. Peter Kohanik, Director.
His Eminenee, Rt. Rev. ALEXANDER (Nemolov-
The Monastery of St. Tikhon
sky), Bishop of Canada and temporary Head
So. Canaah, Pa.
of R. O. G. C. Church in North America.
,, (Hieromonk) Nikon Mikoulsky, Abbot.
15) 18, Stn Sin, Ncw Works Chine
St. Mary’s Nunnery
His Eminenee, Rt. Rev. PIILIPP (Stavitsky), Bish-
90 Park St., Springfield, Vt.
op of Alaska, Sitka, Alaska. (At present on
. Mother Paulina, in charge.
vacation in Russia.)
. (Hieromonk) Nicholas Strakhoff, Chaplain,
Ilis Eminence, Rt. Rev. STEPHAN (Dzubay), Bishop
St. Mary’s Orphanage,
Olmitisbure 2a Mastalifithe wteNew = ork.
90 Park St., Springfield, Vt.
North American Ecclesiastical Consistory.
Rev. Mother Paulina, in charge.
15h Je Oi Site Nie AMO DE NG
The Holy Cross Monastery
V. Rev. Leonid Turkevich, Member, 15 East 97th
Wostok, Alta., Canada.
St. New york, N.Y:
Rev. (Hieromonk) Gregory Sicheff, Monk in charge.
V. Rev. Peter Popoff, Member, 15 East 97th St., New
Y Obke Na Ws
CHURCH SOCIETIES AND ORGANIZATIONS.
Russian Orthodox Cataholic Mutual Aid Soc’y,
V. Rev. Sergius Snegireff, Treasurer, 15 East 97th
84 E. Market St., Wilkes-Barre, Pa.
Din wew orks N.Y.
The Most Rev. Archbishop Evdokim, Honorary
V. Rev. Michael Illinsky, Member, Tenafly, N. J.,
President.
V. Rev. Peter Kohanik, Member, 591 No. Main St.,
Rey. Peter Kohanik, President.
Wilkes-Barre, Pa.
Mr. John Repa, Treasurer.
Rev. Nicholas Mitropolsky, Act. Member, 15 East
Mr. John Pivivarnik, Secretary.
97th St., New York.
Women’s Russian Orthodox Catholic Mutual Aid
Rev. Vladimir Meschersky, Act. Secretary, 15 East
Society,
OTH eOte NeW cyOlk Ne oY
Coaldale, Pa.
INS CTPUDIONS, The Most. Rev. Archbishop Evdokim, Honorary
Russian Orthodox Theological Seminary, President.
Tenafly, N. J. Mrs. Anna Kolar, President.
V. Rev. Michael Illinsky, Rector and Teacher of Miss Katerine Pivovarnik, Treasurer.
Philosophy. Rev. John Miliasevich, Secretary.
Sacred Theology and Scriptures. Russian Christian Orthodox Immigrant Society,
V. Rev. Sergius Snegireff, Teacher of Chureh 347 East 14th St., New York, N. Y.
History and Lityrgica. The Most. Rev. Archbishop Evdokim, Honorary
Rev, John Kozitsky, Teacher of Natural History. President.
Mr. Charles Johnston, Teacher of English Language: V. Rev. Peter Popoff, President.
Mr. Andrew A. Rozdestvensky, Teacher of Russian Rev. John Kozitsky, Treasurer.
Language and Literature. Mr. Nicholas Beliachevsky, Secretary.

340
 «Amepmkanckifi Upapociapaniii BhcTHaKb» 5

League of the Russian Clergy of the Diocese 2-ND DISTRICT OF STATE OF NEW YORK
43 Reed Street, Pittsburgh, Pa. (BROOKLYN)
Presidium: Rey. A. Kukulevsky Rev. Basil Kuvshinoff, Superintendent.
Rev. J. Dankevich Rev. S. Bazilevich 1) ASTORIA, N. Y. Church of the Exaltation.
Association of the Citizen Clergy of the Rev. Maxim Dziomba, 89 Theodore St.
Eastern Holy Orthodox Catholic Church 2) BAY SIDE Sein... Yc.
of America, Inc. Rev. (Hieromonk) John Zlobin, Bell Ave. and
231 East 17th Street, New York, N. Y. Prince St.
Rev. N. Mitropolsky, Pres. 3) BROOKLYN, N. Y. St. Vladimir’s Church.
Rev. N. W. I. Irvine, See’y. Rev. Basil Kuvshinoff, 228 12th St.
Rev. J. Stefanko, Treasurer. Rev. Deacon Erost Volkodavy.
Russian Charity Society, 4) BROOKLYN, N. Y. (East New York), Church of
15 East 97th St., New York, N. Y. the Annunciation.
Rt. Rev. Bishop Alexander, Honorary President. Rev. John Kedrovsky, 189 Penn’a Ave.
Mrs. Anna O. Turkevich, President. Rev. Dr, Nafanael Irvine, Ass’t to Rector.
Mrs. Julia N. Popoff, Treasurer. 5) NEW YORK, Church of the Holy Resurrection,
Rev. Vladimir Meschersky, Secretary. Rev. J. Dzvonchik, 121 E. 7th St., N. Y.
Miss Natalia N. Mitropolsky, Secretary of English 6) SPRING VALLEY, N. Y. St. John Baptist’s
Department. Church,
Rev. (HMieromonk) Semeon Mikulnikoff,
RUSSIAN CLERGY.
Res. 231 East 17th St., New York, N. Y.
1ST DISTRICT OF STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW 1) WEITESTONE. Lt inex.
YORK). Dean of the Cathedral Superintendent. Rev. Michael Dziama, 30 East 14th St.
1) NEW YORK. St. Nicholas Catahedral, 15 East 3-RD DISTRICT OF STATE OF NEW YORK
97th Street. (AUBURN, N. Y.)
V. Rev. Leonid Turkevich, Dean. Rev. Basil Bikoff, Superintendent.
(at present in Russia.) 1) AUBURN, N. Y. St. Nicholas Church,
V. Rev. Peter Popoff. Rev. Basil Bikoff, 23 Cross St.
V. Rev. Sergius Snegireff. 2) COHOES, N. Y.
Rev. Nicholas Mitropolsky. Rev. Kosma Gorbacheff, 67 Saratoga St.
Rev. Vladimir Meschersky. 3) PITTSFIELD, MASS., St. Nicholas Church.
Rev. Archdeacon Vsevolod Andronoff. Rev. Nicholas Hubiak, 24 Lenox Ave.
Rev. Hierodeacon Theodore Golozuboff. 4) SYRACUSE, N. Y. St. Peter and Paul Church.
Mr. Ivan . Gorokhoff, Choir Master. Rev. Evdokim Polevoy, 735 Park Ave.
2) MASPETH, L. L., N. Y. St. Basil the Great. 0) YONKERS, N. Y. Holy Trinity Church.
(Chapel), Clergy of the Cathedral in charge. Rev. John Kushvara, 46 Seymour St.
MOUNT OLIVER CEMETARY. 6) WATERVLIET, N. Y. St. Basil’s Church.
3) TENAFLY, N. Y. St. Platon’s (Theological Rey. Anthony Diachenko, 38 Archibald St.
Seminary Chapel),
1-ST DISTRICT OF STATE OF NEW JERSEY
V. Rev. Michael Illinsky, Rector.
(SO. RIVER, N. J.)
4) NEW YORK. St. Vladimir’s Church (Russian
Rev. Ignatius Lachno, Superintendent.
National Home), 231-233 East 17th Street.
1) ALPHA,N.J. St. John Baptis’s Church
Rev. L. Gherman, Rector (Temporary).
Rev. Stephan Sipayda, P. O. B. 321
5) NEW YORK. Church of the Assumption,
2) BAYONNE CITY, N J. St. Nicholas Church
(Russian Immigrant Home)
Rev. J. Shakaley, 606 Boulevard Ave,
Rev. J. Kozitsky, 347 E. 14th St. N. Y.
3)| BAYONNE CITY, N. J. St. Peter and Paul
Church,
Meyataemoe Hue pacnpeatsenie Onaro4ynHin yTBep- (Vacant), 210 East 22nd St.
geno Ero MpeocsauenctBoms, MpeoceAuweHHbiwumd 4) GARFIELD, N. J. Three Saints’ Church,
Enuckonoms Anekcanapoms (pesonouia 17/30 ansapa Rev. B. Vasilieff, 12 Commerce St.
1918 rv. Rev. Deacon M. Shedko.
 6 «Amepnranckifi Ipapocrapani BSctankh»

5) NEWARK, N. J. St. Michael’s Church, 3) NEW BRITAIN, CONN. The Holy Trinity’s
Rey. Alexander Chechilla, 355 Walnut St. Church,
6) PASSAIC, N. J. St. Peter and Paul Church, Rev. Andrew Vaniush, 305 Washington St.
Rev. Joseph Stefanko, 201—4th St. 4) NORWICH, CONN. St. Nicholas Church,
7) PERTH AMBOY,N.J. St. Spiridon’s Church, Rev. Michael Yakubovsky, 261 Central Ave.
Rev. John Telep, 650 Charles St. 5) SPRINGFIELD, MASS. St. Nicholas Church,
8) RAHWAY, N. J. St. John Baptist’s Church, Rev. Michael Chervinsky, 124 Carew St.
Rev. Basil Gorsky, 30 Allen St. 6) TERRY VILLE, CONN, St. Cyrill and Methodius
9 SINGAC, N. J. St. John Baptiss’ Church, Church,
Rev. Victor Kozuboff, 483 Main St., Paterson, Rev. (Hieromonk) Anthony Repella, P. O. B.
N. J. 591.
10) SOUTH RIVER, N. J. St. Peter and Paul 7) WILLIMANTIC, CONN. The Holy Trinity’s
Church, Church,
Rev. Ignatius Lachno, P. O. B. 27. Rev. A. Bondarchuck, 226 Valley St.
11) ELIZABETH, N. J.
Rev. Joseph Varhol, 316—Ist Ave. 3-RD NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT (BOSTON,
12) MANVILLE, N. J. MASS.)
Rev. Stephan Podlussky, P. O. B. 321. Rev. Jacob Gregorieff, Superintendent.
13) JERSEY CITY, N. J. St. Pater and Paul Church 1) BOSTON, MASS. The Holy Trinity Church,
‘Rev. E, Kryzanovsky, 107 Grand St. Rev. Jacob Gregorieff, 80 Walnut Ave.
1-ST NEW ENGLAND
DISTRICT (BRIDGEPORT, 2)' FALL RIVER, MASS. Church of the Assumption
CONN.) Rev. Michael Czap, 70 Orange St.
V. Rev. Alexander Senianikoff, Superintendent. 3) TAUNTON, MASS. St. Vladimir’s Church,
1) ANSONIA, CONN. Three Saint’s Church, Rev. Michael Czap, in charge.
V. Rev. John Krohmalny, 152 Clifton Ave. 4) MANVILLE, R. I. Church of the Assumption,
2) BRIDGEPORT, CONN. Church of the Holy Rev. Constantine Leontovich, P. O. B. 161,
Ghost, 5) MAYNARD, MASS. Church of the Annunciation,
V. Rev. Alexander Veniaminoff, 590 Hallet St. Rev. Vladimir Lilikovich, P. O. B, 1234.
3) DANBURY, CONN. 6) PROCTOR, VT. St. John Baptist’s Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Joseph Menada, Rev. M. Kaymakan, P. O. B. 615.
-e, o. Mr. Meshayko. 7) SPRINGFIELD, VT. The Holy Trinity Church,
4) NEW HAVEN, CONN. Chureh of the Trans- +» Rev. (Hieromonk) Nicholas Strakhoff,
figuration, 90 Park St.
Rev. George Popoff, 305 Dixwell Ave.
5) STAMFORD, CONN. Church of the Assumption, 4-TH NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT (SALEM,
Rev. John, Handziuk, 30 Walnut St.
MASS.)
6) WATERBURY, CONN. Church of the Nativity Rev. Basil Oranovsky, Superintendent.
of the Holy Virgin,
1) BERLIN, N. H. Church of the Holy Resurrection,
Rev. Peter Dzubay, 53 Easton Ave.
Rev. John Dorosh, 147 High St.
2-ND NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT (HARTFORD, 2) CLAREMONT, N. H. Church of the Holy
CONN.) Resurrection,
Rev. Constantine Buketoff, Superintendent. Rey. (Hieromonk) Evthimius Nikitin, 16 High
1) HARTFORD, CONN. All Saints’ Church, Street.
Rev. Constantine Buketoff, 244 Windsor Ave. 3) LAWRENCE, MASS. St. John Baptis’s Church,
Rev. Bosil Amatoff, Ass’t Rector. Rev. Elisey Lilikovich, 63 Exchange St.
Rev. Deacon A. Gregorieff. 4) Manchester, N. H. St. Peter and Paul Church,
2) MERIDEN, CONN St. Peter and Paul Church, Rev. John Semanitsky, 211 Pine St.
Rev. (Hieromonk) Sebastian Karpenko, 5) SALEM, MASS. St. Nicholas Church ,
8 Prascat St. Rev. Basil Oranovsky, 64 Forrester St.

342
 «Amepmxanckii [pasocrapnni
1-ST PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (PHILADEL-
PHATE A")
Rev. John Adarniak, Superintendent.
1) BALTIMORE, MD. Church of the Holy Re-
surrection,
Rev. Constantine Seletsky, 1225 McEldery St.
2) COATESVILLE, PA. St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Gregory Matveychuck, P. O. B. 135;
435 Oak St.
3) CHESTER, PA.
Rev. Michael Sotak.
4) PENSGROVE, N. J.
Rev. (Hieromonk) Nicholas Godikoff, Carne s
Point, N. J.
5) PHILADELPHIA, PA. St. Andrew’s Church,
Rev. Illarion Kravtzoff, 706 No, Orkney St.
6) PHILADELPHIA PA. St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. John Adamiak, 528 No. Randolph St.
7) PHILADELPHIA, PA. Church of the Assumption
Rev. (Hieromonk) Benjamin Basalyga, 1927
Point Breeze Ave.
8) READING, PA. St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Nikifor Kapitanchuk, 238
So. 3rd Street.
9) TRENTON, N. J. St. Viadimir’s Church,
Rev. Alexander Alehin, 1206 Adeline Ave.
10) WILMINGTON, DEL. St. Michael’s Church.
Rev, Nikita Gress, 431 So. Claymont St.
2-ND PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (SCRANTON
PA.)
Rev. Polikarp Cherniavsky, Superintendent.
1) BINGHAMPTON, N. Y. Church of the Holy
Virgin,
Rey. Michael Kostik, 53 Boxter St.
2) ELMIRA, N. Y. Holy Trinity’s Church,
Rev. Gregory Mandzevaty, 159 Grand Centre St
3) ENDICOTT, N. Y. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Peter Halkovich, 210 Hill Ave.
4) JERMYN, PA. ‘St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Dimitry Yarema, P. O. B. 310.
5) HERKIMER, N. Y. Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. Constantine Suhostavsky, 104 E. Steele
Street.
6) LITTLE FALLS, N. Y.
Rev. Constantine Suhostavsky, in charge.
7) MAYFIELD, PA. St. John’s Church,
Rev. Joseph Fedoronko, P. O. B. 722.
8) OLD-FORGE, PA St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Theodore Chepeleff, 512 Church St.
9) SCRANTON, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church.
Rev. Polikarp Cherniavsky, 1820 Division St.
BécTHHKb» 7
3-RD PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (OLYPHANT,
PA.)
Rev. John Krashkevich, Superintendent.
1) ALDEN STATION, PA. Church of the Holy
Resurrection,
Rev. Semeon Milianich, P. O. B. 7.
2) EDWARDSVILLE, PA. St. John Baptist’s
Church,
Rev Isidor Salko, 93 Slocum St.
3) LOPEZ, PA. St. Vladimir’s Church,
Rev. George Seniavsky P. O. B. 247.
4) NANTYCOKE, PA. St. John’s Baptist’s Church,
Rev. Theo. Piinzenik, 106 Wells St.
5) OLYPHANT, PA. All Saints’ Church,
Rev. John Krashkevich, 210 Susquehanna Ave.
6) OLYPHANT, PA. St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Daniel Yachmeneff, 305 Gravity Ave.
7) SIMPSON, PA. St. Basil’s Church,
Rev. Nikita Borisoff, P. O. B. 121.
8) SOUTH CANAAN, PA., (Russian Monastery)
St. Tikhon’s Church,
and Church of the Assumption.
Rev. Nikon Mikulsky Abbot.
Rev. Dionisey Pirko (Hieromonk)
Rev. Pahomey Delliman (Hieromonk)
Rey. Elias Gavriliuk (Hieromonk)
(Russian Monastery not Subordinate to Superin-
tendent 3rd District).
9) WEST BERWICK, PA. Church of the Annun-
ciation,
Rev. Gregory Varhol, 1228 Second St.
10) WILKES BARRE, PA. Church of the Holy
Resurrection,
V. Rev. Peter Kohanik, 591 No. Main St.
(Not Subordinate to Superintendent 8rd District.)
4-TH PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (COALDALE,
PA.)
Rev. lona Miliasevich, Superintendent.
1) ALLENTOWN, PA. Rey. Andrew Shlipetzky,
738 Front Street.
2) CATASAUQUA, PA. Holy Trinity’s Church,
Rev. Basil Blonsky, 1021—5th Street.
3) COALDALE, PA. Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Iona Miliasevich, P. O. B. 512.
4) LYKENS, PA. Church of Ascention,
Rev. Stephan Lukach, P. O. B. 472.
5) SLATINGTON, PA. St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Vladimir Schnitzer,
P. O. B. 508.
 8 «Ameprranckii
6) PALMERTON, PA. St. George’s Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Vladimir Schnitzer,
in charge.
7) SOUTH BETHLEHEM, PA, St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Irodion Marshalkevich,
1041—4th Street.
5-TH PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (FRACK-
VILLE, PA.)
Rev. Basil Repella, Superintendent,
1) CENTRALIA, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Anthony Melnik, P. O. B. 905.
2) FRACKVILLE, PA. Church of the Ascention,
Rev. Basil Repella, P. O. B. 126.
3) MeADOO, PA. Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. Peter Dubrovsky, P. O. B. 541.
4) SHEPTON, PA. St John Baptist’s Church,
Rev. Peter Dubrovsky, in charge.
5) MINERSVILLE, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
V. Rev. Abbot Joannily Kraskoff, 558
Sunbury Street.
6) BUCK RUN, PA. St. Michael’s Church,
V. Rev. (Egoomen) lIoanniky Kraskoff,
charge.
7) MT. CARMEL, PA. St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Peter Karel, 131 No. Willow St.
8) SHENADOAH, PA. Church of the Holy Ghost,
Rev. Michael Lototzky, P. O. B. 33.
9) ST. CLAIR PA. Church of Assumption,
Rev. John Lampart, P. O. B. 338.
6-TH PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (VITNON-
DALE, PA.)
Rev. Philipp Pechinsky, Superintendent.
1) ALTONA, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Peter Honchak, 2029—13th Ave.
2) GANISTER, PA. Church of the Annunciation,
Rev. Peter Honchak, in charge,
3) BOSWELL, PA. Church of the Holy Ghost,
Rey. Basil Gamball, P. O. B. 17.
4) COLVER, PA. Church of the Ascention,
Rev. Theodore Kondratik, P. O. B. 252.
5) CONEMAUGH, PA. St. John Baptist’s Church,
Rev. Dimitry Kaminsky, 427—1th St.
6) DIXONVILLE, PA. St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Vladimir Pateychuck, P. O. B. 198.
7) JEROME, PA. Church of the Assumption,
Rev. George Alexy, P. O. B. 168.
344
Dpanocaapnnit BbcTHuKD»
ile
ES Ee
8) MADERA, PA. Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Kornly Tzvigun, P. O. B. 237.
9) IRVONA, PA. St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Kornily Tzvigun, in charge.
10) VINTONDALE, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Philipp Pechinsky, P. O. B. 121.
7-TH PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (OSCEOLA-
MILLS, PA.)
Rey, Alexy Borohovich, Superintendent.
1) BLACK LICK, PA. St. John Baptist’s Church,
Rev. Elias Barna, P. O. B.
2) OSCEOLA-MILLS, PA. Church of the Holy
Virgin,
Rev. Alexy Borohovich, P. O. B. 302
3) PHILIPSBURG, PA. St. John Baptist’s Church,
Rev. Alexy Borohovich, in charge.
4) MT. UNION, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev, Dimitry Krishka, P. O. B.
5) PATTON, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rey. John Kapistianchuk, P. O. B.
6) PINE: HILL, PA:
Rev. Basil Komar, R. F. D. 3, Berlin, Pa.
in 7) PORTAGE, PA. St. Michael’s Church,
Rey. Michael Yugas, P. O. B. 416.
8) UREY, PA. St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Basil Levdar, P. O. B. 4, Glen Cambel, Pa.
9.) WOOD (WOODVALLE), PA.
Rev. Basil Dziama, P. O. B.
8-TH PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (PITTSBURG,
PA:)
Rev. Sergy Bazilevich, Superintendent,
1) AMBRIDGE, PA., Church of the Holy Ghost,
Rev. Andrew Sura 148 Maplewood Ave.
2) BRADDOCK PA., Church of the Holy
Resurrection,
Rev. Lukian Zemba, 235 John St.
3) BUTLER, PA., St. Andrew’s Church,
Rev. Paul Limaroti P.O) By 630:
4) CARNEGIE, PA., Cuhrch of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Gregory Stigaylo, 214 Jane St.
5) CURTISVILLE, PA., St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Andrew Diedik, P. O. B. 224.
6) HOMESTEAD, PA., St. Gregory’s Church,
Rev. Dimitry Daryin, 237—4th St.
7) HERMINIE PA., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Theodore Geza, P. O. B.
8) EXPORT, PA., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Basil Sukhan, P. O. B. 285.
 «Amepmxancrifi
9) JEANNETTE, PA., St. Cyril and Methodius
Church.
Rev. Basil Fecula, 520 Scott St.
10) LYNDORA (BUTLER), PA., St. John Baptis’s
Church,
Rev. John Gratzon, P. O. B. 675.
11) MC KEES ROCKS, PA., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Peter Tkach, 315 Munson Ave.
12) MC KEESPORT, PA.,
Rev. Michael Grabar, 330 Spaw Ave.
13) NEW KENSINGTON, PA., St. John Baptist’s
Church,
Rev. Jacob Piatetsky, 1344—4th Ave.
14) PITTSBURG, PA., N.S. St. Alexander Nevsky’s
Church,
Rev. Michael Fecula, 50 Ketchum St.
15) PITTSBURG, PA., St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Basil Bazilevich, 43 Reed St.
16) PITTSBURG, PA., S. S., St. Peter and Paul
Church,
Rev. Alexy Nikolin, 111 So. 19th St.
17) WOODLAW, PA.,
Rev. Nicholas Lomakin, P. O. B. 280.
18) WHITMAN, W. VA.
Rev. Maxim Bakun,
19) DUQUENE, PA.,
Rev. Joseph Antonoff, P. O. B.
9-TH PENNSYLVANIA DISTRICT (NEW SALEM,
BA)
Rev. Yaroslaw Sechinsky, Superintendent,
1) BROWNSVILLE, PA.,
Rev. Michael Perhach, P. O. B. 7.
2) CHARLEROI, PA., St. John Baptist’s Church,
Rev. Gregory Gleboff, 500—10th St.
3) GREENSBURG, PA.,
Rev. Joseph Osipoff, P. O. B.
4) DONORA, PA.,
Rev. John Zeltonoga, 645 McKean St.
5) JACOBS CREEK, PA., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Michael Russinik, P. O. Box.
6) MASSONTOWN, PA., Church of the Holy Virgin
Rev. Nicholas Podlussky, P. O. Box.
7) MONESSEN, PA., St. Cyril and Methodius
Church,
Rev. Vladimir Levkanich, 41 McKeen Ave.
8) MONONGAHELA CITY, PA., Church of the
Holy Virgin,
Rev. Dimitry Ivanoyko, 912 Howard St.
9) MONONGAHELA CITY, PA.,
Rev. George Baran, 600 Coal St.
I[papocaasani BécTHARS»> 9
10) NEW SALEM, PA., St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Yaroslaw Sechinsky, P. O. B. 43.
11) PERRYAPOLIS, PA., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Basil Petretzky, P. O. B. 765.
1-ST OHIO DISTRICT (CLEVELAND, 0.)
Rev. Basil Lysenkovsky, Superintendent.
1) AKRON, O., Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Alexy Boguslavsky, 74 West South St.
2) AKRON (EAST AKRON) O.,
Rev. John Gordishinsky, 1253 Duane Ave.
3) BELLAIRE, O., St. Vladimir’s Church,
Rev. Michael Danilchik 4374 Jefferson St.
4) CLEVELAND, O., St. Theodosy’s Church
Rev. Basil Lysenkovsky, 2547 St. Tikhon St.
5) LAKEWOOD, O.,
(Vacant) 2022 Quail St.
6) LORAIN, O., St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev, John Olshevsky, 2520 East 29th St.
7) MARBLEHEAD, O., Church of the Assumption,
Rey. George Chovry, P.O. B. 216.
8) KELLEY’S ISLAND, O., Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. George Chovry, in charge,
9) MINGO JUNCTION, O.,
Rev. Andrew Solianka, P. O. B.
10) MOUNDSVILLE, W. VA., St. Peter and Paul
Church,
Rev. Paul Pianovich, 1105 Mourton Ave.
diy) NEW CASTLE, PA., Holy Trinity Church
Rev. Nicholas Koshevich, 701 So. Mills St.
12) ROBINS, 0. St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Andrew Ratzin, P. O. B. 144.
13) STEUBENVILLE, O., Church of the Transfigu-
ration,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Luke Cirkun, P. O. B. 186.
14) WOLF RUN, O., All Saints’ Church,
Rev. Peter Semko P. O. B. 87.
15) YOUNGSTOWN, O., Church of the Holy Resur-
rection.
Rev. Paul Lototzky, 525 Arlington St.
16) YOUNGSTOWN, O., St. John Baptis’t Church.
Rev, Theodosy Kulchitzky.
1-ST MICHIGAN DISTRICT (DETROIT MICH.)
Rev. Arkady Piotrovsky, Superintendent.
1) ALBION, MICH., Church of the Ascention,
Rev. Michael Vishegorodtzeff, P. QO. B.
22 Austin St.
2) DETROIT, MICH., All Saints’ Church,
Rev. Arkady Piotrovsky, 814 Hendrie St.
 10 «Amepukanckifi
3) DETROIT MICH., St. Peter and Paul Church,
Rev. Stephen Kudrikoff, 186 Gilbert Ave.
4) NORTH DETROIT, MICH., Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. Arkady Piotrovsky, in charge.
5) FLINT MICH., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Timothey Berky, 3618 John St.
6) GRAND RAPIDS, MICH., St. John Chrysostom
Church,
Rev. George Palamarchug, 1258 Pawers Ave.
1-ST ILLINOIS DISTRICT (CHICAGO, ILL.)
Rev. Alexander Kukulevsky, Superintendent.
Rev, Benjamin Kedrovsky, Temporary Super-
intendent.
1) CHICAGO, ILL., Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. Alexander Kukulevsky, 1121 No. Leavitt
Street.
(At present on Church Eecumenical Council
in Moseau)
Rev. (Hieromonk) Timon Mouliar, Temporary
Rector.
2) CHICAGO, ILL., St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Timon Mouliar, 4601 So.
Ashland Ave.
Rev. (Hieromonk) Paul Zaychenko,
Temporary Rector.
3) GARY, IND., Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Benjamin Kedrovsky, 1675 Fillmore St.
4) EAST HAMMOND, IND., St. Nicholas Church.
Rev. Isidor Kostuk, 529 Walter St.
5) JOLLIET, ILL., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Theodore Migdal, 406 Clay St.
6) DIMOND, IND.,
Rev. Basil Moshak.
7) SIOUX CIY, IOWA,
Rev. Lawrenty Zakrevsky, 1720 East 7th St.
2nd ILLINOIS DISTRICT (ST. LOUIS, MO.)
Rev. John Zitinsky, Superintendent.
1) BEND, ILL., Church of the Assumption,
Rev. Elias Barna, P. O. B. 309.
2) BUCKNER, ILL., Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. (Vacant), P. O. B. 314.
3) DESLOGE, MO., Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Basil Kolesnikoff, P. O. B. 104.
4) KANSAS CITY, KAN., Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Seraphim Oblivantzeff,
23 So. Park Ave.
5) MADISON, ILL.,
Rev. John Okal, P. O. B.
6) LIVINGSTON, ILL.,
Rev. John Okal, in charge.
346
[papociapank BbcTHuKh»
7) ROYLTON, ILL., Church of the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Alexy Dankevich, P. O. B: 265,
8) ST. LOUIS, MO.,
Rev. John Zitinsky,'1225 Hickory St..
1-ST MINNESOTA DISTRICT (MINNEAPOLIS,
MINN.)
V. Rev. Archimandrit Adam Philippovsky, Super-
intendent.
1) CLAYTON, WIS., St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Nikifor Bezsmertniuk, P. O. B.
2) CORNUCOPIA, WIS., Church of the Holy Virgin
Rev. Nikifor Bezsmretniuk, in charge,
3) LUBLIN, WIS., St. Dimitrius Church,
Rey. Nikifor Bezsmretniuk, in charge.
4) CHISHOLM, MINN., St. Nicholas Church,
Rev. Theodosy Kiriliuk, P. O. B. 513.
5) HOLDINGFORD, MINN.,
Rev. Paul Tkach, P. O. B.
6) MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., Church of the Holy
Virgin,
V. Rev. Adam Philippovsky, 1625 5th St. N. E.
Rev. Deacon B, Pavloff.
7) ST. PAUL, MINN., Holy Trinity Church,
Rev. Alexy Gugnin, 976 Forest St.
8) WILTON, N. D.
Rey. Basil Golinsky, P. O. B. 406.
1-ST TEXAS DISTRICT (GALVESTON, TEX.)
Rev. Michael Andreade, Superintendent.
1) BROOKSIDE, ALA., St. Michael’s Church,
Rey. (Hieromonk) Jacob Yankulich, P. O. B.
2) CALHAN, COLO., Church of the Assumption,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Inna Kibikoff, P. O. B. 56.
3) DENVER, COLO., Church of the Transfiguration
Rev, Alexander Lupinovich, 349—47th Ave.
349—A7th Ave.
4) GALVESTON, TEX., St. Constantine and Helen
Church,
Rev. Michael Andreade, 4109 Ave L.
5) HARTSHORNE, OKLA., St. Cyril and Methodius
Church,
Rev. Alexy Gromtzeff, P. O. B. 503.
6) PUEBLO, COLO., St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Alexander Varlashkin, 812 East B St.
Continued
of Districts CALIFORNIA, ALASKA and CANADA
next number.
 «AMEPURAHCKIML TPABOCAABHDIN BBCTHUNT»
PS at IEE ES SI DOES, LET AE BEE SD TN EE ODL SELL, LEE AEST TES,
SS

THE ORTHODOX DIOCESE OF NORTH AMERICA AND CANADA.

(Continuation from January issue).

1-ST CALIFORNIA DISTRICT (SEATTLE, 3) CLE-ELUM, WASIL., Chureh of the Holy Resur-
WASII.) rection,
Rey. Alexander Vyacheslavoff, Superintendent. Rev. Alexander Vyacheslavoff, in charge.
1) LOS ANGELES, CAML. Church,
4) WILKESON, WASH., Holy Trinity
Rev. (ieromonk) TIoanniky Keyko, 365 No.
Main Street. 4 Rev. Alexander Vyacheslavoff, in charge.
2) SEATTLE, WASIL, St. Spiridon’s Church.
5) SAN FRANCISCO, CAL, Holy Trinity Church,
Rev, Alexander Vyacheslavoff, 75:3 Lake View
Avenue, Rev, Vladimir Sokovieh, 1520 Green St.

CLERGY OF ALASKA.
His Eminence, Rt. Rev. PHILIP (Stavitsky), Bishop
of Alaska, Sitka, Alsaka. (At present on
vacation in Russia.)
DISMRIGCAW Ols Slik. 5) ST. PAUL ISLAND, ALASKA, St. Paul’s Church
V. Rev. Alexander Panteleef, Superintendent, Rev. (Vacant)
1) JUNEAU, ALASKA, St. Nicholas Chureh, 6) GHORGE ISLAND, ALASKA, St, George’s
V. Rev. Andrew Washevaroff, Church,
2) DOUGLAS, ALASKA, Rev. Peter Kashevaroff.
V. Rev. Andrew Kashevaroff, in charee, 7) NUSITAGAG, ALASKA, St. Peter and Paul
3) KILLISNOO, ALASKA, St. Andrew's Church. Church (ifteen chapels attached),
Rey. ? ? ? 2 tev. (Vacant).
4) SITKA, ALASKA, St. Michael’s Cathedral, Rev. D. Hotovitzky, in charge.
V. Rev. Alexander Panteleef, Archpriest. 8) UNALASKA, ALASKA, Church of the Ascension
DN UOC eNOS Ie Giiech on the elranshien= Rev. Dimitry Hotovitzky, Unalaska, Alaska.
ration (Four chapels attached), Z 9) UNGA, ALASKA, Church of the Holy Virgin,
(Vacant), tev. (Vacant)
DISERICT Om UNATSICA, DISTRICT OF ST. MICHAEL,
tev. Dimitry Totovitsky, Superintendent, V. Rev. Archimandrite Amfilokhy, Superin-
1) AFOGNAK, ALASKA Chureh of the Holy Virgin tendent.
(Kieht chapels attached) 1) IKOGMUT (VILLAGE) ON UKON RIVER,
Rev. (IMeromonk) CGerasim Selmaltz. Church of the Holy Cross.
2) BELKOVSKY, ALASKA, Church of the Tloly V. Rev. Archimandrite Amfilokhy.
Church,
2) KUSKOQUIM, ALASKA, St. Sergius Church,
Nev. (Vaeant)
(One chapel attached)
3) KODIAK, ALASKA, Chureh of the Iloly resur-
tey. Mathew Berezkin.
rection (Seven chapels attached.)
Rey. Nicholas Nashevaroft. 3) SAINT MICHAEL, ALASKA, St. Michael’s
4) KENAT, ALASKA, Church of the Assumption, Church (One chapel attached).
(Seven chapels attached.) Rev. (Vacant)
Rev. Paul Shadura. V. Rev. Archimandrite Amfilokhy,
Clergy’s which are usigned on account of illnes.
Rey. Peter Semoska.
tev John Semoska.
Rev. John Gulyanich.
Rev. (Mieromonk) Arseney Gavula.
Rey. (Hieromonk) Andrey Schurko,
 «AMEPHRAHCKIY TPABOCAABHDIN BLCTHIThTD»
eS pea em EN I, SIRE, LT ET LR

THE CHURCHES AND CLERGY OF GANADA

His Eminence, Rt. Reverend Alexander
(Nemolovsky), Bishop of Canada, Temporary.
Head of the Russian Orth. G C. Churches in
North America.
15 East 97th Street, New York City.
ONTARIO DISTRICT.

V. Rev. Joseph Dankevich, Superintendent.
1) BUFFALO, N. Y. St. Peter and Paul Church
V. Rev. Joseph Dankevich, Rector, 44 Ben-
zinger St.
Rev. Maxmilian Antonisin, Ass., 44 Benzin-
ger St.
Rev. John Zaroschinsky, Ass., Benzinger St. 17) CREIGTON
Rev. Anthony Ludohovsky, Protodeacon,
Benzinger St.
HAMILTON, ONT. St. George’s Church.
Rev. Joseph Novak (Hieromonk) 186 Sher-
man Ave.
LASHINE LOCK, Que., St. Nicholas Church.
Rey. Joseph Oleynik, 161 Dominion Park,
oth Avenue.
LONDON, ONT., Church of the Transfiguration,
Rev. Nicholas Seniavsky, 654 Nelson St.
MONTREAL, Que., Chureh of the Assumption,
Rev. Mitrophan Poplavsky, 450 Cartier St.
MONTREAL, Que., Church of the Holy Virgin.
Rev. Paul Chubaroff.
OSHAWA, ONT., Church of the Navity of the 3) DROBBOT, SASK., St. Nicholas Church.
Holy Virgin.
Rev. Theodore Grishan, Cedar Dale, P. O.
Dale, P10:
8) OTTAWA, ONT., Holy Trinity Church.
Rev. Paul Lisok, 128 Pine St.
| Rev. Andrew Kokolsky, 1007 Iroquois St.
9) TORONTO, ONT., Church of the Holy
Resurrection.
Rey. Pantelimon Bozik, 225 Franklin Ave,
10) SYDNEY, N.S. St. George’s Church.
Rev; Joho Tirtichny,-P.O. 8,308.
11) FORT WILLIAM, ONT., St. Nicholas Church.
Rev. Nikita Kobzareff, 707 Pacific Ave.
12) WELLAND, ONT., Holy Trinity Church.
Rev, Lew Chumak, P. O. B. 1524.
13) WINDSOR, ONT., St. Nicholas Church.
Rev. Daniel Gilevich, P. O. B. 803, Ford
City, Ont.
14) HAMILTON, ONT., (Serbian) St. Nicholas
Church,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Daniel Kozomara, 21
Depew St.
15) TORONTO, ONT., (Bowlgarian) St. Cyrill &
Methodins Church,
V, Rev. Arehiandrite Feofilakt, P.O. B. 25.
16) HAMILTON, ONT., (Rownmanian) St. Nicholas
Church.
Rey. Basil Bolfoon, 65 Vellace Ave.
MINE, ONT., (Roumanian St.
(Vacant),
18) MONTREAL; QUE., (Rumanian.)
Rey. Dosifey Constantinesko,
SASKATCHEWAN DISTRICT.
Rev. Paul Razskazoff, Superintendentent.
Gardenton, Man.
BURGIS, SASK., Monostery of Assumption of
the Holy Virgin,
Rey. (hermonk) Ignatius Falovskcy.
CROOCUDLAKE (Attached to Burgis.)
CONORA, SASK., Church of the Assumption of
the Holy Virgin.
Rev. A. Chernushin,
STENEN, SASK., ((Attached to Conora.)
Rev. Matphew Stepahin,
BOUENTAN, SASK., (Attached to Drobbot).
MOOSE JAW, SASK., Church of the Assump-
tion of the Holy Virgin,
REGINA, SASK., St. Nicholas Church.
Rey. Vladimir Kozorezoff,
SASKATOON, SASK., Church of the Holy
Virgin,
Rev. Alexander Kiziun, P. O. B. 1381.
7) SUEHO, SASK., Church of the Assumption of
the Holy Virgin,
Rev. Peter Peroff,
GOODIMA, SASK., St. Peter and Paul
(Attached to Sheho),
GLY W, SASK., (Attached to Sheo.)
INSENGER, SASK., Church of the Nativity’
of the Holy Virgin,
(Attached to Shcho.)

348
 28 «AMEPHRABCRIM TPABOC.AABHbIM BECTHUE'b»
|SRE STR IO ON PRIETO IE DD SPS PE BEA GELS PNG IT INTEC IR,PEP IE AI IE AS,

8) WAKAW, SASK., St. Michael’s Church 11) WASTAO, ALTA.,

Rev. Theodosy Gniliakevich Rev. Joseph Yaraschuk
9) CALDER, SASK., Church of the Assumption MANITOBA DISTRICT.
of the Holy Virgin Rev, Paul Razskazoff, Superintendent
Rev. John Khrustavka 1) WINNIPEG, MAN., Holy Trinity Church
10) WROKSTON, SASK., St. Elias’ Church Rev. Paul Razskazoff, 643 Manitoba Ave.
Rev. Sergey Brootzky, P, O. B. 334 Rev. Artemy Dudko
11) SAMBURGH, SASK., St. Nicholas Church 2) NAROL, MAN. St. Nicholas Church
Rev. John Fedina (Attached to Winnipeg, Man.)
12) GOODEVE, SASK.., 3) GIMLI, MAN., St. Michael’s Church
Rev. Alexy Shavcheniuk (Attached to Winnipeg, Man.)
13) RAYVILLE, SASK., (Roumanian) 4) STUARTBURN, MAN., St. Dimitrius Church
Rev. Simeon Ivanoff Rev. Panteleimon Bozik, P. O. Gardenton,
14) REGINA, SASK., (Serbian) Holy Trinity Man,
Church (Not Suburdinate Manitoba District.)
Rev. Daniel Kolodiuk, 1774 Ottawa St. 5) ARBAKKA, MAN., St. Nicholas Church
ALBERTA DISTRICT. Rev. Stephan Burdiko
Rev. Stahey Borichevsky (Rabbit Ilill, Alta.) SUNDAN, MAN., St. Elias’ Church
Temporay Superintenedent. (Attached to Arbakka, Man.)
1) WOSTOK, AITA., Monastery of the Holy CARRIBOW, MINN. U. S., St. Nicholas
Trinity (Attached to Arbakka, Man.)
Rev, (Hieromonk) Gregory Syeheff 6) SIFTON, MAN., Church of the Assumption of
Rev. (Hieromonk) Pallaady Kostiuk the Holy Virgin
Rev. (Hieromonk) Lazar Kirichenko Rev. Joseph Gunehak
2) ANDREW, ALTA., Monastery ARABELLA, SASK. Chapel, attached to Sifton,
Rev. (Hieromonk) Athanasy Markovich Man.
3) BIOANY, ALTA., BELLEHAPTON, MAN., Chapel, attached to Sifton,
Rev. Gregory Soroka Man.
4) STAR, ALTA., Church of the Transfiguratior ETITELBERT, MAN., Chapel, attached to Sifton,
Rev, Peter Davcheyko Man.
5) EDMONTON, ALTA., St. Barbara Church FORT VELLE, MAN., Chapel, attached to Sifton,
(Vacant) Temporary attahced to Rabbit Man.
Hill, Alta. SCLATER, MAN., Chapel, attached to Sifton, Man.
6) RABBIT HILL, ALTA., Church of the Nativity PINE RIVER, MAN., Chapel, attached to Sifton,
of the Holy Virgin Man.
Rev. Sthey Borichevsky 7) VALLEY RIVER, MAN., Holy Trinity Church
7) MONDAR, ALTA., St. Jacob’s Church (Vacant)
Rev. John Zazuliak “ 8) DRIFTING RIVER, MAN., St. John Baptist’s
8) SHANDRO, ALTA., Church of the Assumption Church
of the Holy Virgin (Vacant)
Rev. Paul Gritzay 9) SANDY LAKE, MAN., St. Nicholas Church
9) SMOKE LAKE, ALTA., Holy Trinity Church Rey. Daniel Kregel
Rev. John Puhalsky 10) CHATFIELD, MAN., St. Nicholas Church and
10) COLGARY, ALTA., Manastery
(Vacant) 531 6th Ave., East (Vacant)

ALBANIAN ORTHODOX CHURCHES AND CLERGY.

BOSTON, MASS. St. George Church. ST. LOUIS, MO.
Rev. F. S. Noli, 53 Clarendon St. Rev. N. Czere, 820 No. 12th St,
Rev. Joseph Kondidi, Ass’t of Rector. WORCHESTER, MASS. Churches of the As-
PHILADELPHIA, PA. St, Peter and Paule Church susmption of Holy Virgin.
Rev. George Sakelarius, Rev. Pantelimon Sinica, P. 0. Box 668,

349
 «AMEPHRAHCKIM TIPABOC.TABHbIM BBRCTHUK'b»
SE ETT TDS SEE IS
His Eminence Rt. Reverend Eftimios Bishop of
Brooklyn, N. Y, 305 Pacific St., Brooklyn, N. Y.
BROOKLYN, N. Y. St. Nicholas Cathedral,
Pacific St.
Rt. Rev. Bishop Eftimios (305 Pacific St.,
Brooklyn, N. Y.)
V. Rev. Basil Kerbawy, 124 Pacifie St.
Rev. Silwanos Coury, Missionary-priest.
GENEVA, N. Y. St. Michael’s Church,
Rev. Daniel Georgy, 51 Geneva St.
LOS-ANGELES, CAL. St. George’s Church.
Rev. Sophronios Bishara 1220 S. Padro St.
MICHIGAN CITY, IND. St. George’s Church.
Rev, Anthony Bohilm, 1016 Holiday St.
CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA. St. George’s Church
Rev. Joseph Kacere, 1709 So. 9th St.
BOSTON, MASS. St. George’s Church.
Rev. George Maloof, 32 Hudson St.
BOSTON, MASS. St. John of Damascus Church.
Rev. Solomon Fernene, 17 Nassau St.
SPRINGFIELD, MASS., St. George’s Church.
Rev. Moses Abihider, 17 Patton St.
AKRON, OHIO, St. George’s Church.
Rev. George Kattouf, 380 Kling St.
ALLENTOWN, PA., St. George’s Church,
Rev. Theodore Yanni, 952 Front St.
THE SERBIAN
V. Rev. Archimandrite Mardary Ouskokvich,
ministrator Chicago, Ill, P. O. B. 233
JACKSON, CAL., St. Savvas Church
Rev. Savva Vukoevich, P. O. B. 582
CHICAGO, ILL., Church of the Holy Resurrection
V. Rev. Savva Voyvodich, 1905 Fowler St.
GARY, IND., St. Savva’s Church
Rev. Philipp Sredanovich, Superintendent
801 Vermont St.
INDIANA HARBOR, IND., St. George’s Church
Rev. Mathew Stiachich, 3514 Deodar St.
5) KANSAS CITY, KAN., St. George’s Church
Rev. George Milesavlievich, 500 No. 5th St.
DETROIT, MICH.,
(Vacant)
CHISHOLM, MINN., St. Basil Church
Rev. Stephan Vozichkoff, P. O. B. 724
BUTTE, MON., Holy Trinity Church
Rev. Mathew Komnenich, P. O. B. 134
ST. LOUIS, MO., Holy Trinity Church
Rey. I. Vukshich, 722 Berry St.
OO
29
T ERIS |ESEL R SEE EI A ST SE SS ES,
JOHNSTOWN, PA., St. Mary’s Church,
Rev. Michael Saba, 307 Chestnut St.
MONESSEN, PA., St. Michael’s Church,
305
Rev. ELIA HAMATI, 1111 Schoomaker Ave.
NEW KENSINGTON, PA. St. George’s Church,
Rev. Solomon Merhige, 1226 Victoria Ave.
PHILADELPHIA, PA., St. Elias’ Church,
Rev John Hakim, 1171 So. 10th St.
PITSSBURGH, PA., St. George’s Church,
Rev. Solomon Boulos, 1104 Bedford Ave.
WILKES-BARRE, PA., St. Mary’s Church,
Rev. Abdalla Khoury, 18 McCarragher St.
WILKES-BARRE, PA., St. George’s Church,
Rey. Joseph Elia, 378 So. Main St.
CENTRAL FALLS, R. I., St. George’s Church,
Rev Abraham Zaine, 269 Hunt St.
GRAND RAPIDS, MICH., St. George’s Church,
Rev. Philippous Abou-Assalley, 207 Elsworth
Ave., 8S. W.
LAWRENCE, MASS.,
Rev. George Mahfouz, 348 Elm St.
CHARLESTOWN, W. VA. St. George’s Church,
| Rev. Constantine Doumani, P, O. B. 142
WASHINGTON, D. C., St. George’s Church,
Rev. Job Salloom, 622 Florence St., N. E.
MONTREAL, CANADA,
V. Rev. Archimandrit Emmanuel Abo-Hatab.
CHURCHES AND CLERGY
Ad- 10)°OMAHA, NEB., St. Nicholas Church
Rev, Peter Stayachich, 2218 ‘‘M’’ St.
BARBERTON, OHIO, Rev. Nicholas Stoyankovich
618 Corner St.
JOHNSTOWN, PA., Rev. John Kraynovich
907 Broad St.
MCKEESPORT, PA., St. Savva’s Church
Rev, John Smilianich, 509 Hazel St.
STEELTON, PA., St. Nicholas Church
Rev. George Popovich, 767 So. 2nd St.
15) WILMERDING, PA., St. Nicholas Chureh
Rev, Nestor Vukichevich, 112 State St.
YOUNGWOOD, PA., Church of the Holy Ascention
Rey. Ieronim Vukshich, P. O. B. 870
MINGO JUNCTION, PA., Chureh of the Holy
Ressurection
Rev. Daniel Bukorovich
PITTSBURG, PA., St. George’s Church
Rev. Alexy Savich, 103 So. 16th St.
19) MILWAUKEE, WIS., St, Savva’s Church
Rey. Paul Velkoff, 339 Greensburg St,
 Select Bibliography
Bolshakoff, Serge, The Foreign Missions of the Russian Orthodox Church, London: S.P.C.K., 1943.

Burgess, Thomas, Greeks in America: An Account of their Coming, Progress, Customs, Living and Aspirations, Boston:
Sherman, French and Co., 1913. (Reprinted by Arno Press and the New York Times, 1970.)

Chevigny, Hector, Russian America: The Great Alaskan Venture: 1741-1867, New York: Viking Press, 1965.

Doumouras, Alexander, “Greek Orthodox Communities in America before World War I,” St. Viadimir’s Seminary
Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1967, pp. 172-191.

Grigorieff, Dmitry, ““The Orthodox Church in America from the Alaska Mission to Autocephaly,” St. Vladimir’s Semi-
nary Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 4, 1970, pp. 196-219.

Haskell, Peter Carl, “American Civil Religion and the Greek Immigration: Religious Confrontation before the First
World War,” St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 4, 1974, pp. 166-193.

Kishkovsky, Leonid, “Archbishop Tikhon in America,” St. Viadimir’s Seminary Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 1, 1975,
pp. 9-32.

Lantis, Margaret (ed.), Ethnohistory in Southwestern Alaska and the Southern Yukon: Method and Content, Lexington,
Ky.: The University of Kentucky Press, 1970.

Michael, Henry N. (ed.), Liewtenant Zagoskin’s Travels in Russian America: 1842-1844, Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1967.

Miller, Polly, and Leon Gordon, Lost Heritage of Alaska: The Adventures and Art of the Alaskan Coastal Indians,
New York: Bonanza Books, 1967.

Panagopoulos, E. P., New Smyrna: An Eighteenth Century Greek Odyssey, Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida Press,
1966.

Rocheau, Vsevolod, “Innocent Veniaminov and the Russian Mission to Alaska: 1820-1840,” St. Vladimir’s Seminary
Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 3, 1971, pp. 105-121.

Rocheau, Vsevolod, “Saint Herman of Alaska and the Defense of Alaskan Native Peoples,” St. Vladimir’s Seminary
Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1972, pp. 17-40.

Russin, Keith, ‘““Father Alexis G. Toth and the Wilkes-Barre Litigations,” St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly, Vol. 16,
NOES, 172s pp. 128-150.

Saloutos, Theodore, The Greeks in America, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964.

Smirnoff, Eugene, Russian Orthodox Missions, London: Rivingtons, 1903.

Surrency, Serafim, The Quest for Orthodox Church Unity in America, New York: Sts. Boris and Gleb Press, 1973.

Ushimaru, Proclus Y., Bishop Innocent: Founder of American Orthodoxy, Bridgeport, Conn.: Metropolitan Council
Publications Committee, 1964.

Zoustis, Basil T., Hellenism in America and Its Activities: The History of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South
America (in Greek), New York: D. C. Divry, 1954.
 CONTRIDUTORS

Archbishop Sylvester Reverend John Matusiak

Bishop Dmitri Reverend John Meyendorff
Bishop Gregory Reverend Alexander Schmemann
Bishop Theodosius Reverend John Tkachuk
Reverend David Abramtsev Andrew Clements
Reverend Vladimir Berzonsky Alexander Doumouras
Reverend Vladimir Borichevsky John Erickson
Reverend George Gladky Ralph Herr
Reverend Dimitry Grigorieff Michael Johnson
Reverend Vasile Hategan Elias Jones
Reverend Theodore Heckman Constantine Kallaur
Reverend Thomas Hopko Vasily Lickwar
Reverend Leonid Kishkovsky Peter Mikuliak
Reverend Paul Lazor Keith Russin
Reverend David Lesko Michael Stankovich
Reverend Arthur Liolin Constance Tarasar

Special appreciation is extended to the parishes and other individuals who contributed information, articles, documents,
photographs and financial support towards the publication ofthis book.

392
 THIS BOOK MAY BE. KEPT
FOURTEEN DAYS
A FINE WILL BE CHARGED FOR EACH
DAY THE BOOK IS KEPT OVERTIME.

an 19
A

DEMCO 38-293
 CINCINNAT! BIBLE COLLEGE & SEM. LIBRARY
281.973 1177 main

THAN MT
3 4320 00007 8354

281.973
T1770 _ 32757
_ Orthodox America, 1794-1976

Ere vate oil

THE CINCINNATI B:gLe

SEMINARY LIBRARY
Ay Nc. 7 OT ok ce
Di DieNieKee
lat 18-4
Ei fd edfeeae
 ; we bt inbshibapere eee

Pip
piles iat
Ae

PLER kee ;
Pitnmasht ‘brie DEST GOT Wal
Pri esae tons9p
Bred
APPP.)
et $f wieiad egIa

Boba
saint Mahar teed
tats

te!
Spey ah
hpieie:
eS ies bak
eee ron
ii isprteena
phadicice
regs oie ere
po
:
“ey
AF Seniors
“ ee
we

He
of
ria Pas
arseeg ESB pia v she.
4 ey any

Sore
ay
ee
HN dl
tarash