"GREEK ORTHODOX" in the Recent Ontario Case of Scherbanuk V
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
742 "GREEK CATHOLIC" AND "GREEK ORTHODOX" In the recent Ontario case of Scherbanuk v. Skorodoumov,l Mr. Justice Macdonnell was called upon to decide which of two rival claimants was the lawful "Bishop of Canada" of the Russian Orthodox Church. The plaintiff relied on an appointment in 1926 by the late Archbishop Platon Rojdestvensky, who was said to have been himself appointed, in 1922, Administrator of North America and the Aleutian Islands, by the late Patriarch Tykhon. The defendant alleged that Platon owed his appoint- ment to the Synod of Karlovtsi (Jugoslavia), recognized as the governing body of the Russian Orthodox Church by most (though not by all) of the Russian émigrés, that he was dismissed in 1927 by the same Synod, and that the appointments that he had made fell with him. The defendant: claimed under an appoint- ment in 1930, by Archbishop Theophilus, whom the Synod purported to appoint in 1927, in the place of Platon. It was common ground that Platon had been regularly appointed and that his appointment of the plaintiff was at the 'time regular. The points at issue were.- (1) Was Platon appointed by the Synod? (2) Had the Synod power to depose him and appoint Theophilus in his stead? and (3) Assuming that power, had the Synod power to terminate the plaintiff's tenure as Bishop of Canada? Mr. Justice Macdonnell decided in favour of the plaintiff. A somewhat similar matter was the subject of litigation, some years ago, in the New York Courts, in a case of Kedrovsky v. Platon Rojdestvensky2 The defendant in that case was the same Platon, through whom the plaintiff in the Ontario case claimed, but the issue was different. The plaintiff Kedrovsky, relied on an appointment made by a so-called Sobor, which the judgments describe as an "Ecumenical Council of the Russian Church", held in Moscow in 1923, but which the defendant contended was a Council, not of the Russian Church, but merely of a schismatic body known as the "Living Church", at that time supported by the Bolshevist Government. In consequence, Kedrovsky was referred to in the press at the time, as the "Red Archbishop". The courts, nevertheless, eventually decided in his favour, but, in the Canadian case, his authoritywasrepudiated by both parties. '{19351 O.R. 342 . 2 Kedrovsky v. Roidestvensky et al. (1924), 204 N .Y. Sup. 442 ; (1924), 205 N.Y. Sup. 930; (1925), 214 N.Y. Appeals 433 ; (1926), 242 N.Y. 547. Dec. 1935] "Greek Catholic" and "Greek Orthodox" 743 The Massachusetts case of Russian Orthodox v, Kedrovsky,s was a three-cornered fight, between Platon,, Kedrovsky and Theophilus, in which the last named succeeded . In the reports of all of these decisions, the church which the various parties claimed to represent, is referred to through- out as "The Russian Greek Catholic Orthodox Church" . This name is quite incorrect. It is worse than, that. In the light of well settled terminology, it , is a palpable absurdity . In the East, the words "Catholic" and "Orthodox" and more particular- ly the phrases "Greek Catholic" and "Greek Orthodox" are contradictory terms and are never, therefore, used in combination . Had the church in question been an incorporated body, or had it been even a separate and independent church, it might, of course, have selected for itself any name that it saw fit, however incongruous. It appears from the reports, however; that the Russian Orthodox Church in the United States and Canada is not incorporated and that, moreover, it caims to be an integral part 'of the Russian Orthodox,Church in ,Europe, and the latter Church certainly does not' call itself "Greek Catholic Orthodox", a name involving, as it does, a contradiction in terms. A man may be either a "Greek Catholic" or a "Greek Orthodox" . ~ He cannot, at one and the, same time, be both. In a book entitled The Syrians in America by Philip K. Hitti, Ph.1J"4 at page 38, under the heading "Existing Faiths and Churches", the following passage occurs: THE GREEK CATHOLICS.-A great deal of confusion exists in the public mind and in current literature (i.e. in America) as to what these Christians are. Such queer and meaningless , phrases as "Orthodox Greek Catholics" and "Greek or Orthodox Catholics" have been freely coined and used indiscriminately. The Greek Catholics, or Melchites, are an offshoot of the Greek Orthodox and owe allegiance to the 'Pope. Like the Maronites, the Greek Catholics are erroneously , termed in the United States ROMAN CATHOLIC. In fact they are, a Uniat Eastern Church ; and strictly speaking there is no such thing as Roman Catholics among the Syrians . The few Roman Catholic congregations .founded by members from abroad, are known as the "Latin Church" . It may be explained that Dr. Hitti is a member of the faculty of Princeton University. He was formerly a professor at the American University (Protestant) of. Beirut,, Syria, and was, prior to that, a lecturer at Columbia University.- He is a Syrian but is not a Catholic. a Russian Orthodox etc. Church v. Kedrovsku, (1931), 156 Atlantic Rep, 688 . George Doran Company, New York, 1924. 744 The Canadian Bar Review [No. 10 I hasten to explain that this article is not intended to be in any sense controversial. It is merely a plea for the avoidance of confusion, by adhering to well settled terminology. I am not challenging the right of any Christian to consider himself a member of the Catholic Church of the Creed, as I presume all Christians do. Neither am I disputing the right of any organized body of Christians regularly and definitely to adopt as the name of their church, any designation that they may see fit, provided they do not thereby cause confusion, by depart- ing from a terminology that is well settled and universally accepted. Subject to that limitation, I am whole-heartedly in favour of calling every religious body what it calls itself. This need not imply an acceptance of the implication embodied in any word used. For instance, every Christian considers his belief to be orthodox, yet all unite in conceding that name to the Orthodox Eastern Church. The Russian Church is one of the twenty autocephalous independent bodies that, together, constitute the Orthodox Eastern Church, which, with a membership of one hundred and forty-four millions, is, next to the Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination. These twenty churches are separate and independent bodies, who, however, all profess the same faith, use the same liturgy (though in different liturgical languages) and are, with one or two exceptions, in communion with each other and with the Patriarch of Constantinople who, though he is their titular head, has no authority whatever over them.-, There is, in fact, no machinery in the Church for the settlement of the disputes' that are so characteristic of it'. The official name of this composite body is the "Orthodox Eastern Church". Abundance of authority might be cited in support of this. For instance, in Dr. Fortescue's book, The Orthodox Eastern Church,$ recognized as the standard English authority on the subject, it is said, "The body about which this book treats always calls itself the Orthodox Eastern Church." To the same effect are there ports of two commissioners appointed 6 THE ORTHODOX EASTERN CHURCH, by ADRIAN FORTESCUE,Ph .D ., D.D ., 3rd edition, London, The Catholic Truth Society, 1911, pp. 273, 284, 337 ; Report of the Commission appointed by the Government of Palestine to enquire into the affairs of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, by the Commissioners, Sir Anton Bertram, M.A., K.C., Chief Justice of Ceylon, sometime Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of Cyprus, and Harry Charles Luke, B. Litt., M.A., Assistant Governor of Jerusalem, Oxford University Press, 1921, pp. 51, 180. 6 BERTRAM & LUKE, op. cit., pp. 186, 220. 7 FORTESCUE, op. cit., p. 273, 274; BERTRAM & LUKE; op . cit., pp. 78 to 81, 235; HITTI, Op. Cit ., 106,.. 8 FORTESCUE, Op. Cit., p. v . Dec., 1935] . "Greek Catholic" and "Greek Orthodox" 745 by the Government of Palestine, to enquire into the affairs of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Bertram .and Luke report published in 1921,9 and the Bertram and Wright report published, in 1926. 19 Throughout both of these volumes, the church is invariably called the "Orthodox Eastern 'Church" . When one of the individual churches is referred to it is called, the "Church of Russia" or the "Church of Greece" or- as the case may be. In the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the Orthodox Eastern Church is called "The Holy Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Eastern Church". The chief objection to .that name is that it is not a name ever applied to their church, either by the Orthodox themselves or by others. The church is popularly known as the "Greek Orthodox Church" and to this there can, of course, be no possible objection.,. It is never, in Europe or the near East, referred to,as the "Greek Catholic Church" nor are its adherents ever called "Greek Catholics". In the United States and Canada, however, (and nowhere else) there is 'a wide-spread - popular impression that "Greek Catholic", means, or at all events includes, the Orthodox Eastern Church. It does note The phrase has a _very definite and well understood meaning. A ,"Greek Catholic" is a spiritual subject of the Pope, belonging to one of the Byzantine rites in, communion with Rome. This statement may, however, need some explanation. What is a rite? A rite, in its primary sense, may be briefly described, as the' manner of performing -all-of the various services of the church.