Note.

THE SEARCH FOR A BISHOP

A critical period in the history of the Romanian Orthodox Epis­copate of America which led to the election of a new Bishop in 1951.

This year rmuks the 25th anniversary 0/ the leadership o{ our Diocese by His Grace Bishop Valerian D. Tri!a, llis Qcoompfishnwnl$ duril/g this period are welllinown and ale /lot the subjn'( o/this writillg. Less kllown is the crilicaJ period in Ihe history 0/ our Dux:t!st! which kd to the calling' ' ,I

of a young Romanian immigrant to the helm 0/ our Church. As Q cOn/rl- : bution to the history of our Episcopate we are publishillg the following :: ~

• preliminary srudy focusing on that periVli. .

Hist.wical Background

Immigration of larger Romanian groups to the United States began about 1900. It is estimated that approximately 350,000 Romanians made their homes in the United States and Canada. The greal majority of them were Orthodox Christians.

As a nalural result of their common beliefs and interests, they organ- , ized religious communities, which they called Romanian Orthodox , Parishes.

Notable is the faci thai the parishes were fOlUlded by laymen on own initiative, without any immediaTe help or counsel from the Orthodox Church in Romania.

For many years, the only tie the American Romanian Parishes had with the Mother Church in Romania was the request to to America ordained priests to serve their spiritual needs. Some P"!"'~ came from Romania sent by their respective Bishops but during Ihe I twenty-five years of their exislence quite a few parishes had 10 rely some cantors who were ordained as priests, mostly by Russian Bishops the United Siaies and Canada.

Administratively , the Romanian Orthodox parishes operated as '"?: profit corporations, collecting monies and ' . They their own priests. As a resull, they functioned i of other, enjoying full autonomy. The only connection among •• ",J> .. was the common origin and the sameness of faith and Iraditions.

AHempts were made to organize the parishes al least into a"',",,, Bul those efforts did nol bring the desired resuJls. However, the need generally felt both by Ihe clergy and the parishes. On February 24, 13 priests and 57 parish lay delegates met in Youngstown, Ohio and mously decided to place the Romanian Orthodox parishes in

90

under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Primate in Bucharest , Romania, thus realizing a unifled Church here . There was no follow-up to this Memo. randum. On April 25. 1922, the clergy met .gain in Youngstown , Ohio and sent another Memocandum to the Holy Synod asking for the establish· ment of. Romanian Orthodox Episcopate in America, and another group of clergy met In Cleveland, Ohio, In April , 1923, trying to found an Episcopate even withuut the help or approval from Romania.

Only on May 29, 1928,dld the Holy Synod of Romania decide to send The Rev. Father Tnndatir Scorobetz and Dr. loan Mateiu to study the situation of the parishes in America. Father Scorohetz fou nd the desire to establish an Episcopate very much llIiYC and consequently, a general Church Congress was called for April 25, 1929. Twenty priests, together with lay delegates from the parishe3, came to the Congress and after days of discussions, consulluions and dellberations decided unanimously to establish an Autonomous Missionary Episcopate under the jurisdiction of the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church.

TIle Holy Synod approved and ratified the establishment of the Diocese by Decree No. 102 19 of November 1930 and an Ad·lnterim Committee under the presidency of TIle Rev. Fr. John Truta of Cleveland, Ohio was appointed to gove rn the Episcopate un til a Bishop could be found. Under this Committee a Constitution ~nd By·Laws were compiled and approved by the 1932 CtMlgress held In ClcYl:land , Ohio.

Regarding the election uf the Bishop the By·laws uf the EpiSl:upnte provided In Article VII, thac

AI Ihe Iwad 0/ lite Ramal/iall Orthod/JX H{Jiswpate 0/ 'he United Stales/md Onwa sland$ iu 1Jj$IIUP, will) is all ex-u/ficiu member uf fhe Jlufy Synod of l ite Runutnitm Orthodux Autvl!f!lllwimu Church and uf Ihe Natil)lwl olUr"', OJIIgreu, al/d sllall be de('ICIi by tllf! OIurch Congn'$f of INJrisilf!J belonging tv tills Hpiswpate, called thiny day~' in advQmx, (md Wesid('I1 by a srx:cia/ delegate of t/~ IIQly Synod; the Biuwp-ch'C1 ulalf receive, if /1{' "wets all tlU! cat/on· it'al f't'l{uirements, lite call1Jll iro/ illl'f.!slilure from l/is {folilwJS the Palriardl of the Romaniall Ortlltx/ox Church, III uccurda/lce with Iradil/OIIY of tlw Orthodox Church.

Considering the special circumStltnccs in this cuunl ry and the distanoe from the Mother OlUu:h, the newly formed Diocese received and enjoycd from the very start an autonomous status. 1bc highest administrat ive authority of the Diocese was invested in the Church Congress. coosisting of delegates of the parishes in the proportion of 1/3 clergy and 2/3 laity . The Partriarchatc in Bucharest had only spiritual jurisdicliun. However. the extension and the limits of th is ;urisdiction were not specifically deli· neated.

Six years after the establishing of the Diocese, in 1935, the Ad·lnterim Committee and the Patr iarchate .greed on a person to serve as Bishop in America. He was the Very Revccend Archimandrite Poliearp P. Morusca,

91

the abbot of a monastery in Transylvania. Archimandrite Morusea was ordamed on March 24, 1935, as Bishop Policarp, and arrived in America in June of that same year. He was enthusiastically accepted by the Episco· pate's parishes and was enthroned as Bishop at the Church Congress held on July 4,1935 in Detroit, Michigan. .;

Bishop Policarp was salaried by the Patriarchate in Romania as a missionary Bishop and led the Diocese for four years. During this time the . relations between the Romanian Orthodox parishes in America and the ' Mother Church in Romania were most cordial and beneficial to everyone. ;; The many activities of Bishop Policarp are the subject of another study . • For this chapter suffice to say that regarding the election of a Bishop for the Diocese, Bishop Policarp had his own opinion. At the Church Congress ' held in July, 1936, in Youngstown, Ohio, he requested the adoption of a ~~ new Constitution and By-laws, including the following Article dealing ~: with the election of a Bishop. It says:

At the head of the Romanian Orthodox Missionary Episcopate stands its Bishop. The Bishop will be elected by the Holy Synod, from amongst titled and well·prepared men, who fulfill the con· ditions of the laws and statute of organization o{ the Romanl4n Orthodox Church. He may participate at the sessions of the Holy Synod and of other religious corporations with deliberati~e rote in all matters concerning his jurisdiction.

A Special reguilltkm, prepared by the Holy Synod, will determine the circuit of activity and competence o{ his Episcopacy. The missionary Bishop reCt!i~s the Metropolitan Grammata and the canonical jn~stiture from His Grace, the Most Blessed Ptztriarch 0/ the ROmllnian Orthodox Church, so thllt he am be installed on the Diocesan throne by the delegate of the Metropolitan of Ungro· VlahiJI. (Article 6)

" ,

,

,

-:

"

Reservations and even opposition were voiced regarding this change in ~ the By·Laws but Bishop Policarp was categorically in favor of the amend." t ment and he even conditioned his further remaining as Bishop of the ; Diocese on the acceptance of that new Constitution and By·Laws. It was ;' accepted. . .;

I , The Episcopate Without A Bishop

In August, 1939, Bishop Policarp left for a visit to Romania and be- ' cause of the war in EUrope he could not return to his See in America. The i Diocese remained without a Bishop for many years. ,~,

During this time the administrative responsibility fell on the showders ~ of the Church Congress and Its Executive Board known as the Episcopate -~ C~unc!1. Presiden., of the Episcop.ate Council was the Rev: Fr. Simeon ~\ Mihalt1an of Indiana Harbor, IndIana. Under the leadership of Father j Miha1tian the Council dealt with current matters, particularly with the .~ Vatra Romaneasca administration, and tried to solve parish problems as _.: they arose. }

92 : ,

With the exception of 1943, Olurch Congresses were called yearly to solve major problems and to establish policies. ContKts with Bishop Polio carp were practically impossible, especially due to the fact that Romania wu in a state of war with the Allied Powel'1,

At the end of the war major political changes occurred in Romania i!Self. Under political and military pressures from the Soviet Union, Romania became a Satelite with a Communistic regime. In 1947 and 1948 new laws were promulgated giving the Communist Government full con· trol over the Churches. Althougll the Communists did not engage in • violent persecution against the Orthodox Chu.rch, they succeeded to make it ,ubservient to the regime. This was accomplished by putting old Bishops into forced retirement and by the "election" of new ones more inclined to collaborate with the State.

One of the first Bishops to f.1I yictim of the new political system wu Policatp. He WI! not permitted to return to his See in America and through • governmental Decree (published In the Oeneid Monitor No. 136), he wu placed ex-officlo in retirement. No reuoo was giYen for hIs re tirement.

Such a decision was neyer communicated to the American Diocese, where hopes were stiU running high. that the canonical Bishop would reo tucn to his flock .

Those hopes proved to be incalistic bccaUJC in February, 1947, the following official letter from the Romanlan Legation in Washington, D.C. was received by the Episcopate Council.

Rev. Simien MiJuJitiJur, President Council 0/ the RomaniJur Orthodox Episcoptlte 1614 Elm Stlret East Chialgo, Indiana

Mr, President:

17 FebnllUy 1947

We Mile the honor to in/orm you tluzt upon the ncommcndation 0/ His Grace NiC'Odim, the Patriarch 0/ Romania, the Minisfl'}' 0/ CUlts has approved the appointment 0/ Bishop Dr. Anttm NiCtJ as Bishop u/the Orthodox Church of AmeriCtJ. Please (ake mellSUN!J for the reccpl/Qn 0/ His Gra,'t!, whose a"ivai will be announccd at the proper lime.

Please accept, Mr. President, the ilSSUltlnCCS 0/ high regard. (signed) Parnfil Riposanu, Councilor 0/ the Legation.

'The members or the Episcopate Council saw in this an encroachment upon the aulonomy of the American Diocese and an undesired meddling on Ihe part of Ihe Romanian gowmment in Ihe religious lire of American cilizcnl.

The Episcopate's Council was called by Fr. Mihaltian in special session on February 21 , 1947. At this meeting the Council unanimously adopted the following resolution:

93

The Council 0/ the Episcopate, meeting in speciol seWon, lOT the COtWderution 01 tin offidal addrefJ 01 the Romanitln Legation in Washington, through which \oW \oWre inlanned about the coming 01 8WJop Antim Nica, categorically remonstrates the sending here 01 tlIty bi$hops or priem umolk:ited by U$. Ow decision /s based upon the rights provided in the Statute 01 our Ep/$COpate tmd in the ronscioumeu 01 OUT duty toward the vilal interests olour Oturch in America, and in OUT rights as American citizens. We beg you not 10 diuegard our request $0 that ineptUable consequen/YJ and regie/luI results will ~ avoided.

(Minutes 01 the Romanilln Orthodox Episcopate CoWlcil). •

Considering the magnitude of the problem, a special session of the . Church Congress was caned and held on March 2g, 1947. in Detroit. Michigan. The Congress was presided by Fr. Mihaltian with the Rev. Fr. Andrei Moldovan acting as recording secretary. "

By unanimous vote the Congress: a) rejected the interference of the Romanian Legation in the Romanian

Orthodox Church affairs; b) refused to accept Bishop Antim Nica; c) requested the return of Bishop Policarp to his post; d) declared the complete administrative autonomy of the Romanian

Orthodox Episcopate of America in all of its relationships with the .; Holy Synod of Romania; I

e) ratified the decisions of the Episcopate Council to put into effect " the original Constitution and By·Laws adopted by the 1932 Church Congress;

f) appointed a commission to write and propose new By·laws for the , Episcopate. I

The Holy Synod of Romania was informed of the decision of the "l Church Congress through an offidal communication sent by the secretary ~

of the Congress on May J I, 1947. t Patriarch Nicodim of Romania did not in$l5t further on sending a ,

Bishop from Romania. In addition , news reached the Episcopate Council j that Bishop Antim Nica wiU be denied entry visa into the United States. ~

~ In Search for a Bishop -

In spite of the fact that the Church Congress had requested the re turn of 8i3hop Policarp and that he did not resign his Office, there were .tOme ' members of the Episcopate Council who doubted that he would ever come back and, consequently. initiated the search for a new Bishop.

Among the clergy serving at that time under the jurisdiction of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America, there were some priests who , met at least one canonical requirement for a candidate to the Bishopric. They were unmarried. widowed or belonged 10 the monastic order" It was, . however, clear that many of them lacked other qualifications and trying to ;

94

select one of them for candidacy would OpeD the pandora box of jeal­ousies and intema] differences.

Following this line of thOUght, the Episcopate Council, without pre­liminary consultations with the clergy or parish delegates, contacted the Very Reverend Archimandrite Teom lonescu, a Romanian priest serving the parish in Paris, France. Archimandrite lonescu declared himself willing to move 10 the United States and to accept the election as Bishop at the following Church Congress scheduled for July 4 , 1947.

Many of the delegates to the Congress were surprised by this move since they felt that the Congress still owed aUegiance to Bishop Policarp. To complicate matters, the discovery was made that between the candidate­to·be and the leadership of the Council a secret deal was made in the sense that, if elected, Archimandrite lonescu will un<Xlndilionally maintain the same persons as members of the Council and that he will appoint as hi. Vicar the Rev. Fe. Stefan Opreanu from [)etroit, Michigan. After a heated debate during which other wrong-doings by the members of the Council came to the surface, the Congress dismissed the old Council and excluded from the agenda the election of a new Bishop. In a mood of compromise, Archimandrite Teom lonescu was, however, e~ted chairman of an Ad· Interim Commission charged to administrate the Diocese for a period of one year. The Commission included some former members of the Council and some new ones.

This Commission had a short nfe . A few months after the Congress, Archimandrite Ionescu resigned from the oroce of Chairman of the Com­minion and moved to Detroit, Michigan as parish priest of St. Simion Oturch. A new Chairman was selected in the person of Father John Trutta of Oeveland, Ohio.

Under the leadership of Fr. Trutza the Ad·lnterlm Commission took the attitude that Bishop Policarp Is still the canonical head of the Diocese, and the only thing to do at this time is to increase the efforts to have him back from Romania. Repeated interventions were made in thaI direction but without results.

In view of this and feeling that another attempt mighl be made from Bucharest to impose a bishop unwanted by the Diocese, the Commission sped the work on the new By·Laws and distributed a project to be con· sidered at the Clurch Congress of July 4 and 5, 1948. The Congress was held under the presidency of Fr. Trutza and had as the mlln item on the agenda the adoption of amendments to the 1936 By-Laws.

On the subject of the Bishop, the Church Congress voted unanimously the following article :

At the head of the Episcopate is the Bishop as the spiritllill canon­ical leader. The Bishop is elected by secret ballot by the Church Congress of the parishe$ in a special electoral semon called specifi· cally for such a purpolll!, 10 days before the meetills date.

95

Omdld4tes for the position of Bishop must bt only male pent»U

more tluln 21 yem1 of age, possessing mmked spiritual traits, with high trainlns and theolotlCGIlChooliltg, and who win fulf1llthe con­ditions required by tM Orthodox Owrch ClIMIIJ con«ming BU­hopI, and persons who Iuwe led an UJUt4iMd, uemplmy, mmd life, and who Iuwe dutinguiJhed themselves through a rich religious and cuJlUrtIlactivity in the lmIice of the OIurch,

The Position of Bishop Policup

Directly and indirectly Bishop Policarp, who wu still in Romania, ~amed about the developments in the American Oioceae_ 'Hi! teactioo b expressed In • ltutortd Letter addressed to all the faithful and In another one addressed to Father Trutta.

No.2JIJ947 Dear Reverend Fathen, HollOTed lPirilwll childNn and my dear Brothers;

Postoral Letter

O'alva, July 30,1947

From the "Amtri«" newspaper 1 ldiiied aboot the delJbmztJoIIJ of the OIurch Con,tnu held althe ¥atrQ Rom.!M.ucI be'1Wft!'I! July . 3 and .5 of thu yur. SOUA. the newsptIpU founded by' me, II not . recellled here and thotA! who he.1d posseuion of the INdenhlp in our Epl$copale, since my departure from there (lnd until the calling of lhl! Con,tn$$, did not see fit to keep the Bbhop Informed, j

God in His goodneu tau, C4re that InIth and Justice will nol be ~ put 10 Jhiune, even ifforQJhorttimethey mlght bedegrtMied. From ~\ personal lelten senl to me by priem and laymen 1 ~ infonned about the lurppeningt at the O:mgreJf and even btfore the Co/'ClTU1

From flll my hurt 1 am grateful to the brother printl and my good Jplrltuoi children, present or not at the CotWe$$, ihat they , have nol forgotlen their spiritual father, but they have even removed _" from of/lce those that have done the utmost JO IhIlt 1 CIUInOt rerum ", to my mlsJion Ihere and I am lurppy 1hi1t you have not given elY­

denu to the recommendation coming from here, encroaching upon , the rights of the head of the Romanian Episcopale In Amerlar. '

I am rwprised IhiI, t/rOtA! who were at the leadership of the EpiJ. _: copote did not repnrt to the Congress what 1 wrote to them, nor did ,j they convey my appetll to the CongreJ$, 1/ they would have done 10, j maybe' the discuuioll$ would have been Morter and the JituQtlon 1 would have been clarified JOOner, 1

However, now, in my capacily of titular Bishop, I am ,iIIlng my . bJeulil& to the Ad-Interim CommisJion elected by the CoIW't'Jf to . function and wt»"k with Cdnonictli authority for the good of the • OIutrh, for the progreu of tM EpiJcopate and for the benefil of flll ~

96

faithful and of all parldles, until thot time when the politicol con­ditions and the circumstances will permit the OW/op to return to his See and when the Episcopate Ccuncil could be lega.lly.re-constituted,

I did not know about the list of "condidlltes" to the Office of Bimop In America sent to you by His Holiness the PolriJuch (n $pite of the vote of confidence given me by the Church Ccngress of MlUCh 28th of this year, as though I were no longer alive. It is true thot I proposed to the Holy Synod to consult the Church Congress regard· il'lg the Bishop for America and if the Congress would be against my returning there, the Congress be called to elect a Bishop from among the "condid4tes." I do not insist to be spiritual father by force! $ut I do nQt accept, without protelt, to be removed from my Office except by the Ep/$COpate Congress which accepted me in 1935 and gove me a vote of confidence in 1947. I thank again all those whc did not lose faith in me even now and who hove removed from the agenda of the Congress the election of a B/mop.

I do hope tlult steps will be taken and that Ihe obstacles prevent· ing my return will be renwved $0 that as soon os possible I wi# ,be back there where I \WS entrusted to the leadership, by the Grace of God and wilh the acceptance of all those concerned, surrounded and supported by the love of all the good priests and laymen in Americo.

Until thot time I would like to expreJS my joy for the efforts made for the unification of all and for the zeal to 'draw together the Episcopate and the Union and League. I had tried a reconciliation· , between the tWQ organizations through their respective representa­tives immediately after my arrival there in 1935. But a reconcililltiOn' was not possible between those who engaged in Court actwns ogainsl each olher . .•. Now I congratulate Mr. N. IJragomir, the vice pre"·' dent of the Union and League, who expreJSed at the Ccngress words ' of brotherhood and luumonious cooperation. The same thing to Mr:' RiJdi Nan who accepted to be a member of the Ad·Interim COm­mission. I am hlJppy to see that Fr. loan Trutza has returned to the leadenhip of the Episcopate, and regordil'lg the Very Rev. Archi· mandrite Teo/ll, by virtue of his nwnastic vows, I hope that he will be loyal so that a solution could be reached, before a year, on the subject of the BiJhop.

In JPite of the geographical distance and of the obstacles prevent· ing my retum, until a definite pronQuncement of the OIurch Con·' gress I comider myself the Bw/op of the Romanian Orthodox ,of America and invite the Ad:/nterim Commission to moke connections, with the BWiop and to inform me of aU Its activities, $0 that I maY' give hierlUChica1 approval when needed $0 that nQthing illeglZJ or' anticanonicallwppens damaging the prestige and the progress of thi! OIurch. '. , My falherly advice is that you unite yourselves in good under· standing for good deeds because the Romanian Communities in

97

AmericQ con :rill help OUT Mother Country and the R011'Ulnilln people who ptme: through di/fiallt triIJb flnd bitter .q[eringr tIS a consequence of the unfortunflte war in which we (JfI11lclpoted tmd whole mere/1m C01Ut!qUMM we June to eltllun ptltierrtly ana with nsipation. J $Old my bJe#i1t8 to all those thflt ~ taken tM initlatille to colkct contribution: for thole in need among their brothen hen. Mfl)1 God OUT Lord compt!nSllte them with His huvm· /y Grace and with Hi: eorthly gifts.

YOUll', with best wiJher and hierarChal b1elSingS, .... .,.p-of tM Romtllliflm in.A.merlctL.

Six mootlu later. at the beginning of December, Bishop Policup wrote another letter, this time addressed to Ft . John Truw, the new pre&ident i or the Ad·Interim Conun1ss.ion .

Very Reverend Father Dean, Df!fIT Father '])utza:

Oa/IIIl, Dectmber 8, 1947

Orrly now-fl{ter J ncelMi recently SOUA No. 28, 19, 10 and 12 (not 11 ~J flm «lifted flbollt the events that happt!nN flt tM OrUTCh ~ held on July 4th of thiJ yeor.

J thank you {rom my heart and J am grateful for your intmtno tion which decided the Qttirurk of the Con,ve1S QM gave IIltiiftlCtion to the Bishop who Cfl1lfl(}t be blomed for flnythi", ehe except IhIlt he left, in 1919, to SIU his family flnd to ptUticiptlte at the meeting3 of the Holy Synod. He could fU)t return to his Su bem/Ie of the war and 1I()W berm/., of other ntBQfU beyond my control.

After numy delay:, fl(}W the Eplicoptlu in Amuiat htu been deleted from the State budget, effectille &ptmrber l It of this y eor, UJlclly (lj it happend with Romanifln cluuche: outlilk ROIflllllIa­with the eXcqJtion of thOle in Pari: and Sofia. This Is eqUflI with the dlsw/ving of the Episcopate from the point of view of the Romanilm State, and Its tltuliu Bishop will be pul in ntlTemmt-pensJoned­tICCOTtling to theprovWon: Induded in Law No. 166/1947.

I prote,ted and, at my nquest, the Holy Synod intm>ened for tM continuation of a budget for OUT Episcoptlte. I CilIInol fome tM n$Uitl. But there fIR fU)t m4IIY hopei colUideriJtg the:1rtliMd flllQll· cl4l situation of the State T7ea:sury. And I am without a mJmy ~ Aprii- J received only one·half a month ', SQItuy tlIId we fIR in December. Ellen if I could get pennwion to leave, J halle 11() means to cover the fraPeJ experues. not even from here to Bucluuest. J 11m

confined hen in D'aiva l4'Oiting for the situation to duutge. Bul for the time being I am not SIlying good-bye, as J wrote to the

Ad·lnterim Commission and the OtrlCiJJl ~trtr sent to Father Seen· tary Stanl14. J iIITI happy to lum that both of you ~ returned to

98

,

I

, , , ,

,

,

, ,

: , • ,

the leadership o{ the Episcopate. If you would /unJe remained {rom the be,;nning, o{ter my departu«, many mistakes, lhameful public ,pectade, and dtlmllging activities could have been avoided. But maybe thinp could be straightened out. I{ I would return or not, you should remain ot leodmhip, taking care that the Episcopate will never be agtJin In the IuInd, o{ those uncalled {or.

Otherwise, I {eel good, heallhwise, thanks God. I am eight yean older but strong enough to be ready {or the olJerseaJ trip when tilL road will be opened {or me.

Alter I served throughout the country, where sent by His Holi­ness Ihe PatrUuch, 10m now residing at Craiva with my "ster, a war widow with a chiid studying in Aiud at the high rchaol; there I have also a brother. And I am IIlnguishillg here . ...

I wish all of you good health and send hierarchical blessing to all in the{amily.

With brolherly embrace.

Bishop Policarp

A 1000Iattempt to find a Bishop

The official posilion of tlte Ad-Interim CommiMion, presided by Father John Trutza, reprding Bishop Policarp was generally endorsed and sup­ported both by the clergy and lay people. As a matter of fact, at the annual Church Congress held between July 2 &; 3, 1949, al the Vatra Romineasca, the matter of the election of a Bishop was not included in the agenda excepl for a 'men lion made in the Report to the Congress. However, the idea to wait for the return of Bishop Policarp was nol pleasing to everyone. A small group of clergy and laymen headed by a priest from Delrqit, Michigan, the Reverend Falher Glicherie Moraru, unhappy that they were ousted from the leadership of the Episcopate at Ihe annual Congress of July, 1947, and fearful thai Bishop Policarp might look unfavorably upon their activities during his absence, decided to act immediately to find a solution '~without Policarp."

They gathered around another priest from Detroit, Michigan, the Reverend Father Stefan Opreanu, the dean of St. George Cathedral, an intellectually gifted individual, convincing hin1 to consider becoming a Bishop. To insure the eventusl ordination into the bishopric of Father Opreanu and to give a semblance of canonicity to their move, they con­tacted the Most Reverend Melropolltan Visarlon Pulu from France.

Metropolitan Visalion was a high ranking men;lber of the Holy Synod of Romania, fonner Metropolitan of Bukovina and during Ihe war Exarch of Transnistria. In August 1944 Metropolitan . Visarion found himself in official mission to Croatia, exactly at the time that Romania turned from the Gennan camp to the Allies and when the Russian troops were advanc­ing deep into its territory. Metropolitan Visarion decided not to return to Romania and establish.ed his residence rust in Vienna, Austria, then in

99

Iialy and Ialer in France. Although he had no special mandale or jurisdic­tion he tried to establish some kind of a Romanian Church organization in Western Europe. He dreamed of a diocese to encompass aU Romanian Orthodox throughout the world. Unfortunately for his plans, there were not too many Romanian Orthodox parishes existing at that time in Europe and he had to settle for a diocese that existed moslly on paper.

Contacted by the group of Detroit, Michigan, Metropolitan Visarion availed himself of the opportunity to take hold in America and, without consu1tation with the Ad-Interim Commission, appointed the Reverend Father Stefan At. Opreanu as his " Vicar for America." At his tum, Father Opreanu, also without the knowledge or approval of the leadership of the Diocese in America, took monastic vows and let himself be elevated to the rank of archimandrite, as the first step toward the bishopric.

Although Father Opreanu did not formally claim the Office of a Bishop for the American Diocese, his actions met with strong opposition at the annual Church Congress held on July 2 & 3,1950 in Philadelphia, Penn· sylvania foUowing which he fonnally asked forgiveness and declared that

"" a) will not accept the title of Vicar to Metropolitan Visalion; b) will not use the title ofarchimandrite; c) and will never lay claim to the Office of Bishop. The Church Congress further expressed iu displeasure with the interfer­

ence of Metropolitan Visarion in the affairs of the American Diocese and charged the Office of the Episcopate ·with the mission 10 convey this to him.

Regarding Bishop Policarp the Congress decided that:

This Congress unanimously considers His Grace Bishop Policorp MorufCQ as titulor head o[ our Episcopate and to help his return, the Episcopate Council and the Office 0/ the Episcopate shall immedi­ately make the intercessions with the competent ci)lil and religious authorities. If. during the period of one year, thus until the next Congress to be held In 1951, the retum 0/ His Grace will propc definitely impossible. the Congress shall be called to decide this matter In con{onnity with the needs and interests 0/ OUT Episcopate. "

Considering the possibility that the election of a new Bishop might be ' necessary, the Congress also decided that if the Office of the Bishop would become vacant , no one of the clergy serving at that time the parishes of . the Episcopate in America shall be admitted 10 the candidacy.

Unexpected IOlution from Romania

The parish delegates returned home from the 1950 Congress in Phil· adelphia relieved and happy that the tension provoked by Fathet Opreanu's case had been mollified, that the situation of Bishop Policarp had been clarified and that the problem of vacancy in the Bishop's Office might be solved at the next Congress.

100

, 1 •

Little did they know that far away, in Bucharest, Romania someone else had already found a replacement for Bishop Policarp. Their Diocese and the appointment of a new Bishop for the Romanian Orthodox in America was in fact on the planning board of high level political and church authorities in Romania. 1he old Patriarch, Nicodim, who looked with understanding and benevolence upon the refusal of the American Diocese to accept an appointed Bishop, had died in the Spring of 1948. The monarchy had been abolished and the Romanian Peoples Republic was proclaimed on December 30,1947, resulting in the instauration and the consolidation of the Communistic regime. How these events effected the Orthodox Church in Romania is accurately described by the news· paper UNIVERSUL from Bucharest in its issue or August 28, 1948.

The guidance of the country ~ destiny hoving been taken up by the honds of the WC!rking class and of democratic organizatwru, special attention is being gillen to the renewal of the high cadres of the Church. This was evidenced by the elections which took place in November 1947, when three people:S- hkrarclu entered the Synod. This concern of the working class for the destiny of the OIurch culminated on May 24, 1948, when the new Patriarch of the Romanian People's Republic was elected in the person of Hi! Holi­ness Justinian.

The new Patriarch, Justinian Marina, was a young man. His rise was spectacular. Up to the instauration of the new political regime he was a parish priest at the Saint George Church in the city of Rimnicul Valcea. On August 12, 1945 he was raised to the rank of Bishop. In November 1947 he became Metropolitan of Moldavia and on June 6, 1948 he was enthroned Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church.

Patriarch Justinian came to the leadership of the Church at a cruciaJ moment. TIw Romanian Orthodox Church has long been a unifying force in the life of Romania and identified itself with the State. Historically it has been a center of resistance to foreign aggressors. The Communistic regime, true to its ideological position, could not tolerate the existence of a powerful Church but at the same time it realized that it would be impractical to persecute the Church wruch numbered more than 70% of the population. Political strategy dictated an attitude of temporary toler­ance and co~xistence between the State and the Orthodox Church, with one condition: that the (hurch would not oppose the new regime and that it would do its share to help the State in the implementation of its poliCieS.

Patriarch Justinian Marina was the person indicated to carry out this objective. He was instrumental in the formulation of the new legislation regarding the Religious Cults in Romania, promulgated through the Decree of August 4, 1948, and he edited the new Statute of the Romanian Ortho­dox Church, accepted by the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in October, 1948 and approved by the State effectiVe February 23, 1949.

101

These new Statutes brought about a radical change in the legislation regard­ing the Orthodox Church of Romania. It gave the State full control over the ClIurch and the Patrlarch powers that he never had before. The Church preserved an internal autonomy but externally it became a politi­cal instrument of an atheistic regime.

The first official act of Patriarch JustinJan concerning the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America was to place the legal titular Bishop of the Episcopate, Policarp Mo~, in forced retirement and not to answer the repeated requesta-made by the leaders of the American Episcopate for the return of the Bishop Policarp to hia post here.

Once the vacancy was created in the post of BJshop in America, the Patriarch thought he had sufficient cause and legal justification for the direct intervention in the affairs of the American Episcopate. His thoughts, his plans and his motivations had been clearly stated in the Official Bulle· tin of the Romanian Patriarchate "Biserica Ortodoxa Romin'" No. 3-6 of 195 1, page 238:

In the water mode turbulent by all kinds of passions, inl7/gues and personal interest, have started to /1M the capitalistic exploitm and the mongers for a new war. They have tried to catch the ROo rrumians of America into the nets of theit nefarious political propa. ganda and to milke use of them against the regime of populor democ­/'(ley ruling presently in the Rorruznian Popu/m Republic. They wanted to make out of these IOIU of our nation some kind ofmer­cenaries employed in the service 0/ their imperialistic interests and then to rruzneuver them to act against the legitimate interests of the Romankm Nation.

,

! , i

But Patrlluch Justinian, who is gifted with a sparkling intuition and a power of penetration 10 highly characteristic o{ him, upon ascending the ptltriaTchal throne, immediately saw all the distJstrous reality jn which the Orthodox Romanians of Amerjca had found themrll'es to be; he studied ihe possibilities for setting this situation right and for the elimination of the causes o{ these things, which were gral'ely threatening the religious unity and the harmonjous living of these far-away brothers o{ oun. And the solution W(l,\' found by our Rorruznian brothers {rom across the Ocean themsell'eJ. On the day of Febluary 2, 1950. the Orthodox Priem of America, together with the hly delegates of the parishes, hallf! rewlved to renew their connections (tiesj with the Romanian Orthodox Oiurch of the Romanian Popultu Republic. The Church Congress, held on May 17, 1950. at Detroit, Michigan, elected the widowed archpriest Andrei Moldollfln, of Akron, Ohio, to flflthe )lQCQnt chair of Bishop for the Autonomous Episcopate of the Orthodox RorruznialU of America.

,

I

The intentions of Patriarch Justinian are thus clearly expressed and it is just as clear that he had succeeded in finding some individuals in the ' United Slates willing to help him carry out his plan. The only important

102

fact that wu not made clear by the Official Bulletin of the Patriarchate is that the "solution" was not found nor offered to the Patriarch by the "Romanians in America" throuah t.heir Ieplly constituted church orpnj. zations or through meetings attended by lawfully elected representativn of the parishes.

The simple truth is that no Church Congress of the Romanian 0rtho­dox Episcopate of America met on May 17, 1950 either in Detroit, Michl· gan or in any other place. What really happened was that ttuee Detroit, Midtipn area priests who no longer were in good standina with the Epis­copate, together with a few laymen met in Detroit on February 2, 1950 and decided to aeek revenlf' against the leadership of ihe American Dlo­cae by requesting the Patriarchate in Romania to appoint a biship of their choice. The penon selected for this was the R,e..erend Father Andrei Mol· dovan, a widowed priest who at the time wu Krving at the "l'ruentaliQII or our Lord" parish in Akron, OhIo. He had the advantage that he wu wI1llng to do what he was told and that he wu an American dtlzen.

Mter the meeting in Detroit, and the arrangement. with Fr. Andrei Moldovan, COIltacU were estabUshed with Bucharest exactly at a time when the new Patriarch Justinian was considering what action to take legardlng the ArnI!rlcan Dicx:ese.

The Patriarchate wu more than wilting to help but, in compliance with the tradition or the Romanian Orthodox Quuch and eYen with the new legislation, the appointment and ordination of a bishop Is coodiUoned on the nomination and his election by his dioocle. Such a nomination was not available from the canonically constituted diocete in America.

To circumYent this requirement. seClet mock ''Church Congress" was arran&ed for May 17, 1950 in Detroit, Michigan .

Participants were a few laymen and, accordina 10 Fr. Andrei Mol· dovan', witness in Court, three priests: Fathers Glichetie Momu, Stefan At. OpJeanu and Peter Mop. Need1ess to IIY that no parbh throughout the Diocese was repretented.

Once the formality of the "election" wu accomplished. another step wu taktn I(f Insure the success of this mow: . On June Sth, 1950,. new religious corporadon was organized under and by virtue of the Laws of the State of Michigan bearing the name "The Romanian Orthodox Auto­nomous EpiscoPite of North and South America" and havtll3 u its official address: 1799 East State Fair AYenue, Detroit, Michigan . The slgnatort for the Act of IncOlpOrition were three (3) priests and six (6) laymen all residents of Detroit, Michigan.

In the meantime, the Jegular Church Congress of the Episcopate in America had been called for July 2 & 3, 1950 in Philadelphia, Penn· sll, anla. Father Andrei Moldovan was present at the Congress representing his parish in Akron, Ohio, but he did not speak about his "election" u a bishop nor did he tell anyone that a new Romanian Orthodox Episcopate had been incorporated. Thus, the QlUtch Congress in Philadelphia dis­cussed and decided the need for a bishop in the tente mentioned before.

103

Two weeks later, on July 17, 1950, the president of the Congress in Philadelphia and of the Episcopate Council, Father John Truw, recelYed the fonowing telegram:

WESJ'ERN UNION July 17, 1950

BuooreM Vill Maclc4y July 14 1500 Parintelui Ion 'n'utza Epi$CQpiIl OrtodOXil Rorrurna Din Americtl

(6201 Detroit AlI'f1Jue) Vatra Romtl1U!asca Gnm Lake Michigan Cleveland Ohio

77te Holy Synod has approl1ed the Autonomy of the Episcopate of the RoJfUl1lians of North and· &uth America. Stop. II Iuu approved Ihe election of the Father Archpriest Andrei Moldovan to the vaoont chair 0/ Bishop he having to preunt himself as lOOn (1$ pouible in Bucharest in order to be ortWned into a Hiefarch. STOP. We calion all priests to unite llI'Ound the new Bishop stopping any separation.

14/7/1950,

Justinian 1he Palriluch 0/ the Romanian Orthodox OIurch and President o/the Holy Synod, Hr. 5J1.

, , , ';

•

, •

The surprise provoked by this telegram is understandable. Father . Truw and the members of the EpiscOpate Council, not informed about i what happened in [)etroit, did not kDow how to interpret it. Assuming .j that the Patriarchate might ttave been mislead about the decillon at the i Congress in Philadelphia, the secretary of the Congress and the Episcopate ' Council wrote the fonowing letter: t

To: Hil Eminence Justinian, The Patriarch 0/ the RoJfUl1lilm Orthodox OIurch and President 0/ the Holy Synod, Bucharest. Ronurnia Your Holiness:

August 18, 1950

Answering the telegram 0/ Your Holiness, No. 5Jl 0/ July 14, 1950, addre$$ed to the Council 0/ The Romanian Orthodox Epi.sco· pate of Amerioo, in which You halle communiooted to us the approval, granted by the Holy Synod, for the autonomy 0/ The Episcopate of The ROmllllians 0/ Norlh and South Americd, and also (Le. tlie approval) for the "election 0/ Fr. Andrei Moldovan to the vacant chllir 0/ Bislwp, " with due respect we art making it known to you thllt the OIurch Congreu 0/ OUT Epi$CQpate, up to the present date, Iuu not d~kued IU I'QCflJIt the office 0/ Its titubu Bislwp and conuquently 1uu not elected another person to flU this post, and $0

Iuu not elected Fr. Andrei MoldoWUlIU Bishop. 104

., I l

i · ,

· I , •

The person or penonl who have reported to Your Holineu $UCh a thing have tried, probably with Intention, to miIin[onnyou.

The (Jrurch Chn,en'u o[ our EpUcopate, in itl xulon of July 3, 1950, held in the city of PhiltZdelphitZ, by urumlmoUl vote o[ tM delegtJtes o[ the ptJrishes, mi1de tIgtlin tlIId anew the decltZmtion that it 1Ii11 considen HII Groce PolietUp MofU$CiI, who iI now ill RomlUlitZ, as the CQIIoniclJl BWwp of our Episcopate, and has ex­pressed ill lincere wish to Iuwe Hil Groce PolietUp M01Ufal, at the earliest possible time, in their midst, here.

The undersigned, on the basil of thil decilion (1'tSOlution) of the Con,en'u, and fruiting in the fNlI'enttZl care-taking and the weU­Intentioned interelt which Your Holineu has for the Rowurnian Orthodox Church and her faithful membe1'l, relpect{uUy beg$ of you to be kind enough and talee disposition (give order) for the return of Hil Grace Bishop PolletUp to the leadership of our Episcopate o[ America, graciowly intetl¥!ning with the.rlght[uJ (proper}authorlties to have them facilitate the departure of Hil Grace (folietUp) for hil post in the shortest possible time.

I remain, Your Hollness'I, kissing your right hand:

(signed) Rev. John StmiJa . General Secretary of the Chngreu

and of the Council of 1M Rom. Orth. Episcopate of 1-merlaz.

No response was received to this communication. Father Andrei Mol­dovan being uked by Father John Trutza about his involvement in this matter responded that he does not know anything about it. Requested to put this in writing he sent a teatgram saying:

I have taken no option tlIId do not Intend to. (signed) Archpriest Moldovm.

What followed next has the semblance of a mystery chapter by Sher­kx:k Holmes.

A 8isbop is ordained in Rommia

About the middle of October, 1950, Father Andrei Moldovan presented to the parish council of his chwch in Akron, Ohio the following medical certificate.

HOPKINS CLINIC Oeveland, Ohio

October lO, 1950 To Whom It May Concern:

Rev. Andrew Moldovan s/tQuid have a three weeks resl for treat­ment! o[ tlTlhritis.

Very truly YOUI'!, HOPKINS CLINIC, INC. R. D. Gardner, M.D. MedkaJ Dim:lor

lOS

From the pulpit he informed his parishioners that he has to take a sick leave and will go to Hot Springs, Arkansas for a cure. On the afternoon of Sunday, October 29, 1950 he left Akron, Ohio. A few days later in November 3, 1950 the president of the parish council received a postal card handwritten by Father Andrei Moldovan dated and post marked in Hot Springs, Arkansas in which he was writing:

Thank you very much {or your kindne$&. I will see you all. God bless your family.

Similar postal cards continued to be received at regular intervals by . other parishionen and friends in Akron, Ohio. ' I

In fact Father Andrei Moldovan was not in Hot Springs. Arkansas. 1 After leaving Akron he went to Windsor, Ontario, Canada where he " boarded an aJrplane for Montreal, Quebec, Canada and (rom there to "I Romania where he arriyed on November 2, 1950. At the airport he was received by a high ranking delegation from the Patriarchate and was taken ~ immediately on a grand tour of Romanian Church institutions and moo- . asterles.

On Sunday. November 5th, he made his monastic vows in the oldest . Romanian monastery- in Neamtz, Moldavia, from where he was taken to 1 the Metropolitanate of Jassy and to some other monasteries in the area.

On November 12, 1950 he was ordained as Bishop in the Cathedral of Sibiu by Metropolitan Nicolae Balan. assisted by many Bishops and priests. ; After a few more days of visits to other institutions he arrived in Bucharest on November 19th and was officially invested as Bbhop of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America. At this last solemnity beside the Patriarch, Metropolitans and other Church dignitaries. the Romanian Government was represented by high officials led by Prime Minister Petru Groza himself. ,

The ordination of Father Andrd Moldovan was well publicized in the , entire COWltry and interpreted as a symbol of good relations between the . Romanians in America and their Mother Country. (Nothing was said at -that time that no other Romanian in America was able to get an entry visa . to Romania to visit his family).

During the time that Father Andrei Moldovan was in Romania for ordination, the Office of the Holy Synod in Bucharest was busy ·with ' telegraphic orders to the United States.

On November 11, 1950 Father Simion Mihaltian of Indiana Harbor, : Indiana received the following telegram:

November 11, 1950 10:11 AM.

To Father Simion Mihaltian the Vicar of the Orthodox Miuto­nory Episcopate in AmeriC1J, 1614 Elm Street, Indiana Harbor, lmilaM

The Eparchial Council headed by Archpriest ThJtZa, elected in 1947 does not Mve our approPOI as lAcum Tenens of our Suffragan

106

,

Romsnlan Orthodox MlnloTlllT)' Episcoptlte In AmeriQl, /ollowin6 the ~til'emMI 10 'penrion of 8i1hop Morusca Stop For their lChem· ing qainst the CQNJnictJlletJdenhlp of the Episcopate the Arr:hprien »una and the Priest SttUliJa, Iurving faUM under the ItlfIClioru of the 34th Canon of the 6th Ecumenl(:4i Synod fun.ot: been ordered stopped from performing tilly priestly functions until they have tumed over to you and to the EpQrchl4l Council elected on Septem­ber 2, 1945 the archives tmd ail mobile and immoble assets of the Ep&copate Stop.

In C4re that they refute, you wiY record this in lhe usual minutes and will wire us 10 we QVI take lepl Sltllfctions /IIfIfnst 1M guilty ones by unfrocking which is provided in the Holy Canons Stop. You will put the re$ldence at the Yaw in order for the reception of the BUhop.

Juatinian Locum Tenens of the Romtllll/Jn Orthodox Missionary EplJco{Xlte In AmeriQl, Mel1Opollttlll of Ungro Vlachia lUfd Patrliuch of RommrJa,

Simultaneously Father John Trutza. 'the President of the Episcopate CowtcU received a telegram with instructions 10 turn oYer the assets of the Espicopate to Father Simlon Mlhahian.

In addition, this telegram (officially marked document No. 781 of lhe Patriarchal Cabinet), stated that "Bishop Morus<:a hu already retired to pension three years ago" and further

J4(e repeat our appetli addre~d to you aw in Ihe telegram sent to you before. tlult you ,Ive /uU obedience lJIId pt'Oper re~ct to tM n~ Bbhop Hu GrtICt Andrei MoldoWIII, and nol to place UJ Into the disliked position to be fOreN 10 apply sgainst you tM SltllfctionJ pt'Ol>lded in the Holy Canons.

We are reminding you that the new Bishop Is one of the Romani· alU there, who has worked and has fought , with the conscience of a Romanian and of QII Orthodox Christian, from the very foundilti()n of the RomsnilJn Orthodox Episcopate of Amerlco, for the preser· Wltlon of her inlllct dignity in relation to other ~llgious confeuions in those ptUts and aUo for the nuJintaining of canonlcol ties with the Mother Orthodox Orurch of the Father/Qnd.

We hope thai all of you wiii understand your duty of listenq and gMng obedience to the new Bishop and that QII of you In unity and brotherly cooperation wlii seek to rev/~e and to bring to bloom· ing and to shining the Orthodox MiJ.siolllUY EpiJeO/XIte of AmerlaJ.

With Palrilucluzl bleuinp. Justinian, m.p. (signed) Locum Tenens of the Romanian

107

Orthodox MWiollfU')l Episcoptlte in Americtl, Metropolitan 0/ the See 0/ Ungro-J'lachla and PtJtriIIrch 0/ Romilllia.

The Episcopate Council wu called into emergency session for Novem· ber 16. 1950 in Cleveland, Ohio to consider the mltter.

With Father Sirmon Mihaltian present and consenting, the Council unanimously resolved

a) to diSCQndder the order from the ROmillllan PalriarchlJte to Father SimkJn Mih4Jff4n;

b) 10 protnt the inter/ereT/« from lJuchiueIt in the af/ain of the Romanian Episcopate 0/ AmeriCfl;

c) to refuse rewgnition to any bUhop that WIJI not elected by the Orurch Congreu 0/ the Diocese in America;

d) to take immediate action lor the protection and the stl/e keeping of aU the asse/S 0/ the Episcopate and to administrate them In con/onnity with the decisionJ 0/ the Olf,uch CongreSJ of the DIoc<u.

• •

• • • I

A few days after the Council mccting in Oeveland the newly ordained ; Bishop Ili ioed in Wmcisor, Ontario, Canada. On Wednesday. November 21, I 1950 he took residence in Detroit. Michigan from where he initiated the i action to take over the leadership of the American Diocne.

He sent Father John Trutza, the President of the Episcopate Council the foHowing telegram:

Punuant to authority )lwed in me by the Holy Synod 0/ our church on November 12. 1950, as canonical and Iqa/ SUC«JItN to His Grace 8iJhop Polletup Morup and according to the by-laws 0/ the Rom4ldan Orthodox Mi.Jsionsry EpiscopQre In Americu, denwnd is hereby mtme fOT posseuion 0/ all property, real and per$OnaJ. belo1lflng to OUT EpiJCOpote in Amerim, including archipes, boolu, records, cash on hand and In the bonk, and Yatra.

Ancbei Canonical and LegaIBlsJwp 0/ the Romanian Orthodox MWioNU)l Episcoptlte 0/ A merico.

The Episcopate rejected the demJllds. Priests and parishel throughout the country sent decluations of solidarity and support for the stand taken by the Episcopate Council. Father Simian MlhaJUan himself declared solemnly at the meeting of the COWlcil:

I shlJlI not answer the telegram J receil'ed from the Patriluch of RomonliJ. I shall net>tr recognize as BiJhop lor OUT Church in Americo except the poson who u elected by the d~/eptes 0/ the

108

,

•

, >

•

..

parWrN (JJSembkd in Congress. 1 recognize af kgal the present Coun­cil of the Episcoptlte, hoving been elected by the CongreS! of the Episcopate. (From the Minutes of the Episcopate Couru:1l session held on November 16, 1950 in Cleveland).

However, the Patriarchate in Bucharest was insisting. Another letter was received by Father Simion Mihaltian, this time with instructions to seek. tile transfer of the assets of the Episcopate through action in the Civil Courts.

(SEAL) The Palrtarch of Romanio (Stamp)

m·

BucJuuest, November 19, 1950

Father Vicar Simion MilUlltilm and 10 the DioceJtln Council of the Romanion Orthodox Episcopate of the Tho AmerlctlS.

As a consequence of the retirement of His Grace, Bishop Poliaup M01UJCtI three yean ago, the seat of the Romanian Orthodox epis­copate of the Tho Americru has been lItlCOIft.

Since this Episcopate, in conformity with Article 5 for the organ­ization of the Rornanion Orthodox Church In America, voted by the Ozureh Congreu held in Detroll on July 5, 1935, is a suffragan of the Un,gro-V1achio Metropolio, according to the Holy Canons, the direction of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America has righlfully been entrusteeJ to me in the capacity of Patriarch of all Romanion Orthodox and Metropolitan of Ull8To-Vlachio.

On the basis of the a{olementioned, noting the desile of the Diocesan Meeting of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate contained in Letter No.2 of the said Episcopate office u of June 12, 1950, tlUlt Very- Reverend Archpriest Andrei MoidOlJ(ln be your bishop, 1 Mve submitted this petition 10 OUI Permanent Synod, which, in its meeting of July 12, 1950, approved this petition, which decision we have cabled to you as well u by our letter, No. 16.035 as of July 26, 1950, calling into our country Alchpriesl Andlei Moldol'fln 10 be elected and comef:Nted.

Having submiued to the full meeting of the Holy Synod of the Romanuln Orthodox Church the request of the Diocesan Meeting and Ihe favorabk C(ln$tnt of the Permanent Synod, lhe Holy Synod, in its meeting of October 4, 1950, In conformity with Article 6 of the Statutes of the Episcopate, voted on July 5, 1935, 01 the Con­gnu held In Detroit, Michigan, elected Father AlChpriest Andrei Moldovtm to fill the seat of Bishop of the Ro"uUlkm Orthodox Episcopate of AmelictJ, hoving con/emd upon him the rank of BWwp.

As a result of this canonical election, Father Alchpriest Andrei

109

Moldovan hDs heeded our caU and came to Romtlnill, where, after being tonsured in the montutic orden with the name of Andrei, he wtlJ consecrated a Bishop in the Cathedral of the 7h1tuylRUfian Metropolia at Sibiu on NOl1f!mbn' 12, 1950, while on November 19, 1950, he wtlJ ctmOnictdly invested (t.f Bislwp of the Ronwnian Ortho­dox Epucopate of America in the Synodlcal Hall and through the Patril:lrchal Decree No. 26/023/950, he was co,qlmled in his seat, thereby having the necel3llry CllflQniClI/ mandlJte from me Q3 Metro­polillln of Ungro- V/Qchia, PatriJuch of all Romanian Orthodox and President of the Holy Synod to canonically and legally conduct the affairs of thu Episcopate. Therefore, Hu Grace, BiJhop A1!dni Mol· dovan iJ the only tpiritual and auwniCtlI leader of the Romanian Orthodox in the 1Wo AmeriCtls, being recognized by me and the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Oturch under whose spiri­tual authority I am.

Coming to his Diocese, NiJ Grace BisJwp Andrei Moldovan hDs the duty entrusted him by the Holy Synod to establish his episcopal se4t at the VolTa ROmilnQ, Grau Lake. Therefore, we II$k Father Vlav S. MihIltilm and the D/oce$QII ColDfciJ of the Romlllliml Ortho­dox Episcopate of America to take om' all the real and per301IQI

property and Jll'chives from Archpriest Joan nutza and to prepare the episcopal re$idence at the VolTa R011Ul1la, which is the property of the Episcopate, as the residence. of the /JUhop, who iJ under the authority of the Holy Synod of the Romanilln Orthodox Church, to receive Bishop Andtei Moldovan upon his arriml in AmericD.

UJcnvise we tuk that all measures be taken for the installation of HI! Groce, to be mode in the Holy Trinity Owrch of Detroit bef~ the priests, members of the DIoce$QII Council and of the NationlJl Co",U!U, with all the digTJity of such occasions.

As Metropolitan of Ungro- VlachiIJ, Patriarch of all Romonllm Orthodox and president of the Holy Synod of the Romanian Ortho­dox Church, we acknowledge as helld of the Episcopate in the absence of the Bishop, Father ViCl'll' Simion Mihaltilln and the Dio­ce$QII Council elected on September 2, 1945. We do not acknowl· edge the DioceIltUJ Council headed by ArchtNiest loan nutza elected in 1947 by conspiracy againJJ the CllnonicaJ /eadenhip of the Epuco­pate.

Father Archpriest Joan nutza and his Dioce$QII CouncU do not have our approval to htQd our suffragan Diocese of the Romonian Orthodox (Jlfuch in Amuica and therefore by CIIble No. 777 In of November II, 1950, Included in ourcommuniCtltion no. 781 tu of November 11, 1950, which we attach in copy. sent to Father Arch­priest John nutuz and Father Archpriest John Stanlla we have with­drawn oUr delegation to them as priest and archpriests, until they give over the file" real and penDlUll property of the Episcoptlte to Father Simian Mihaltian, our viau and to the Dioce&an GJuncil

110

,

< kgaUy elected on September 2. 1945. and recognized by us. Qrhey should insist, they shall be defroclwi,

We hoff! lent thne stmIe insttucW1l$ to our Vicar, Stmion Mih4/.­tian by cable No. 776, contllined in our letter No. 780 flJ of Norem­bel' 11,1950, a/which we enclo~acopy.

Therefore, we tuk of Father Simion Mihilitian, our VICiU. as well as of the Diocaan Council elected on September 2, 1945, to take the legal «dons to ttnlMdiately rake O~ the /lle" rem tuId personal property o{ the Romanian Orthodox EpiJcopQte of America from Father John '])una and Father John Sl81Iiliz. flJ well tI$ the organ of the Epucopate, the SOW publit:Qtion, and to ready the VA17U ROMANA at Grass lAke tu the episcopfll relkknct to recti~ Hil Grace Bishop Andrei Moldovan.

In ctUe that Fathen John '/hltzQ and John Sranila would refuse to give them over to the Vim turd the [)ioceSIUJ Council recOgnized by UI, Father Vlav Simian Mihaltian and the Dioce$llll councU elected on September 2,1945, are empowered by us to appe4l to the legal juridical authorities to take poumion a/them.

Theil' rerulll' to submit ther",el~s to OUT CanonicrU /uriJdlcllon will be communicated to us $0 lhat they mqv be puniJhed by win ron/onnity with the Holy Canons.

We hope that the rMntWnM priests, I. Trurza and I. Stlmllo, together with tho$e who have joined their intrigue, contrary to csnonlca1 letJdershfp of our su/lrt1g4n Romanian Orthodox Episco­pate of America will heed our adpice tmd we will not be forced to proceed with their ctUWnlazl sanction as shown in our letter No. 780/950, atttl£hed hereto in copy.

Therefore, Wt' repeat our plea which Wt' $ent in letter No. 780/9S0 to adl'i# you from our parental care, to heed OUT call to csnonlazl ortier, to obey and give all honor due to the new BUhop Andrei MoldoWlll, which obligation Is included in his Document of Installation, $0 that eperyone in unity and brotherly cooperation will be able to revipe and carry to full blomm and glory the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of ArMrica, whose dignity must be presen>ed intact in relation to all other rellgiow ron/eulons in those parts of the world.

Awaiting only favorable news, Wt' impart our PatrUuchtll Blessings.

(Hand Seal)

The cue before the Ciril Courts

JUSTINIAN (Signature) Metropolitan o[ Ungro- Vlochia and Patriarch ~I Romania

In compliance with instructions received from the Pat'rlarchate in Romania, Bishop Andrei Moldovan filed a complaint in the United States

III

District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, Case No, 27916 on December 19, 1950.

To justify his action Bishop Moldovan claimed to be "the duly quali. fled, elected, appolnted and ordained Bishop of the Romanian Orthodox Missionary Episcopate of North and South America including the United States of America." As defendanb in the case Bishop Molodvan named: The Very Reverend John Trutza, President of the Episcopate Council; Mr. James V. Suciu, the treasurer of the Episcopate and Mr. Viore! D. Trlfa, the editor of the SOLiA newspaper, the omeia1 publication of the Episco­pate. All three were Cleveland relidents which explains why the case came • before the Federal Court in Cleveland.

The Petitioner Bishop Moldovan "as trustee and on behalf of the Ro­manian Orthodox Missionary Episcopate" petitioned the Court to issue a preliminary injunction restraining and_ enjoining the defendants from using the SOUA newspaper in any fonn and from disbuning the funds belong· ~ ing to the Romanian Orthodox Missionary Episcopate.

The hearing for preliminary injunction took place on January 10, 1951. ~ The defendants argued that Bishop Andrei Moldovan may have been or- ~ dained as a Bishop, but he Is not the Bishop of the Romanian Orthodox . Diocese in America since he was neither appointed, nor nominated, nor i elected by the Diocese. ~

The contention that Bishop Moldovan was elected during a so-caUed • Oturch Congress of the Diocese, presumably held in Detroit on May 17, j 1950, couJd not stand to Court. Bishop Moldovan couJd not produce any ~ Minutes of such a Congress nor couJd he name the clergy or parish dele- "

i gates who allcgedly elected him as Bishop. Caught to this rather embarrass- I ins situation, the lawyers for the Plaintiff requested and received a Leave \ to File an amended complaint. The petition for a preliminary injunction ~gainst the officers of the Episcopate was thus dismissed. J

While the motions, claims and counter-claims were flied with the Court, 1 , Bishop Moldovan was trying to assert his leadership of the Diocese outside . i the court actions. ~

He started by writing to aU the clergy and parishes circulars. pamphlets and pefSOnalletters requesting that he be recognized as the Bishop.

The leaders of the Episcopate, particulady Father John Trutza, were : branded as "rebels" -against the authority of the OIurch and accused of ' personal ambitions and interests. .

To carty out the publicity in his favor, Bishop Moldovan started pub­llshing to Detroit a newspaper using the same SOLiA title as the existing newspaper.of the Episcopate. He furthe r claimed to be already to posses­sion of the Vatra, the estate owned by the Episcopate in Grass Lakt, Michigan. In fact, Vatra was not the headquarters of the Episcopate at that time. The estate, consisting of 200 acres of fann land and an old mansion, was used for fanning pUq)()scs. A farmer was paid 10 work the land and take care of some livestock and a caretaker was ktpl by the Episcopate on the grounds to oversee the mansion. .

112

00 December 12,1950 Bbhop Moldovan paid. visit to the VatIa and after gaining entry into the mansion as a gue&t, he declared hinuclf the owner. He wrote in the guest book with his own hand ". took roll: !!IOI'I of the Vaua Romaneasca today, December 12, 1950" His secretary, Rnerend Peter Moga, wrote "1 accompanied His Grace Bishop Andrei to take poaession of the Vatra in confonnity with the Act of PowH'oo" and one of Bishop Moldovan's COuncilloR, the late N. M. Martin, con­cluded the inSCription by writing "I wu a witness to all of this." Ho'\Yever, Bi.shop Moldovan did not take actual residence at the Vatra. He was living in Detroit, but fOood it convenient to show the parishea that he has taken possession of the asaelS of the Epilcopate.

In vkw of these happeninp, the leaden of the Episcopate appeared before the Court with a petition to ~train Bishop Moldovan from pub­lishing a newspaper by the name of SOUA and from possession of the Vatra. During the hearing on this Petition, on Aprl1 24, 1951, Bishop Moldovan', lawyers argued that he is without relidence and requested from the Court for him to use one-half of the mansion at the Vatra u personal residence. The Court lifted to this and issued an Order

a) enjoining BHbop Moldovan from ·publishing a newspaper by the name of SOLIA;

b) pennitting him to UJC onc-half of the mansion at the Vatn.; c) enjoining BHbop Moldovan from taking possenlon of the other one­

half of the mansion, or the fann or any other property real or personal belonging to the Episcopate; .

d) enjoining the Episcopate from publishing in SOUA comments about the Plaintiff within the cue pending in Court.

In spite of the Court Order, Bishop Moldovan changed the locks at the Vatra mansion, hired a watchman and prevented the Epbcopate'slawyen and agents to enter the mansion. Further, he took over the farm and instead of SOLIA he started publish.ing another paper under the headline of EPISCOPIA_

The Episcopate Council reacted by filing a motion for Citation of Con­tempt of Court. The hearing on this motiOfl took plaoe on JWle 4, 1951, and Bishop Moldovan wu found gwlty ''with judgment reserved until the case is heard on its merits." (At the conclusion of the case, one yeu liter, Bishop Moldovan was punished for contempt and fined $200.00).

Needless to say that during this long period of Court proceedings the tension among the faithful was high. The absolute majority of the people remained loyal to the constituted Episcopate and supported the Episco­pate Council in its actiQns. BUhop Moldovan had to rely on some trusted friends in Detroit and three parishes in the t)"nited States: The Holy Trin­ity of Detroit; Sts. Peter and Paw, Dearborn, Michigan and, later, St. George the New of Indiana Harbor, Indiana.

The Court litigation continued through another hearing held on June 23, 1952. At this hearing Bishop Moldovan changed completely iUs argu­ments. While at the first hearing he was claiming thlt he was elected IS a

113

Bishop by the Congress of the Episcopate, this time he claimed that an election is not neccs,!ry because he was appointed through the authority of the Palriarchate in Bucharest.

On Tue!day. July 8, 1952, Honorable Emetica 8. Frud, Judge of the Federa1 Court in Cleveland rendered the following opinion:

IN THE DlSTRlCT COURT OF 11fE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRlC1' OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

THE ROMANIAN ORTHODOX MISSIONAR Y EPISCOPA TE OF AMERICA, ETC., Plaintiff.

,

". No.27,9/6 I lOAN TRU7ZA. et al.,

De/endJmts

OPINION OF HON. EMERICH B. FREED, JUDGE OF SAID COURT,

RENDERED ON TUESDAY, JULY 8,1952, 10:00 O.CLOCK A.M.

Freed, J.: The Pltiinli/[ in this action, tiS bishop o{ Ihe ROmmUon Ortho­dox MiuioniIIY EpiJCOptZte of America, seeks to obtain undisturbed poues­sion and tXJntrQl of certain rem and personal property and to obtain oon· frol of the official church publication known tl$ the So/ia and Solid Calen­dar, which he alleges the Defendmtl$ have wrongfully withheld from him. He predicates his right to possession and control of this property on the contention that he is the duly ordoined and consecrated bishop of the Episcopate. He further aw relief against these Defendonts in the nil/un of . an injunction to prevent them from interfering with his actMties as bishop of the Episcopate and to restrain the defendonts from perpetrating any acts which would in any wise injure him in his good name, fame and credit . as the bishop of the Episcopate.

The Defenclimu deny that the Plizintiff. Andrei Moldovan, 1$ the duly consecrated bishop of the Romanian Orthodox Missionary Episcopate of America, and deny further that he has any right to possession and control of the property in question. They further deny that he has the power and authority to exercise the rights and prillileges of the bishop. It is the contention of the Defendonts that if the Plaintiff, Andrei Moldovan, WOI,

in fact, consecrated a bishop by the Holy Synod at Bucharest, Romania, he WIls consecrated as such bishop of a new and wholly separate Episco· pate.

The Defendants by WIly of counter<laim seek domages from the Plain· tiff sustained as a result of the possession and control by the Plaintiff of

114

1 • , ! , I ,

certain proptilY located in the State 0/ Michigan, IJIId because of the publiCQlion by the Plalntif{ of certain unfounded cluuges IuumfullJlld detrimenlftl to the Epl$oopate, 0/ which the De/endants cillim tMt they an the duly elected officers.

In the course 0/ the trial voluminous testimony was presented to SUI­

Min the respective contentions of the ptUties. However, the issues which require the determiluztion 0/ this Court may be simplified and mmowed.

The Defendants contend and claim tMt the ROmatlilm Orthodox EpiJ­copate 0/ Americo is governed by certain by·/itwsadopted or/gilUllly by the church Congreu 0/ 1912 and as amended in 1947, 19481J11d thereafter.

It is asserted tMI, among other things, those by-lam contained pr0-

visions whereby the Congress 0/ the Episcopate )!VS empowered to elect il$ own bishop.

According to the DefendJuits, Bishop Policarp Morup came to the United Slates in 1915. either at the instance 0/ the Holy Synod of the Romanilln Orthodox C7turch 0/ Romania or its patrlluch, or both. It is further contended by the Defendanl$ tMt in 1936, upon the suggestion 0/ Bishop Po/ietup, the church Congress approved new by-laws which pr0-

vided for the election of the bishop by the Holy Synod and consecration by Ihe patriarch, and further provided tlult the Episcoptlte in the United States was to be administered, administratively, ctIItOnically, and spiritual. ly, under the direction of the bishop with the approval 0/ the Holy Synod at Buclulrest.

Bishop Policxup returned to BuchareJt in 1919 and never retumed to the United States. From thaI time until the events in question here there was IIQ bishop in the United State$.

The Defendants claim tMt in J947, becoweo/fearo/inter/erenceand meddling by the Romanian authorities with church aI/a.in in the United States, the Episcopate Council decided to create an autonomous Episco­pate and to return to the by·lIlws of J912 until proper amendments could be prepared to con{onn to the new autonomous character 0/ the organi· zation.

De/endants contend tlult on March 28, J 947, a special Episcopate Con· gress assembled at Detroit, ptl$3ed a resolution restoring complete admin· istrative autOllQmy to the Episcopate and declaring the right 0/ the Con· gress henceforth to elect;l$ own bishop. New amended by-laws con{'uming in all respecl$ to the resolution of the special Congren 0/ 1947 were fimtlly adopted by the Congre$$ of 1948 and a new autonomous Episco­pate was thus created.

It is also cillimed by the De/endJuits that the Pillintif/. Andrei Mol· dOlifllf, not only partook 0/ the deliberation which culmiluzted in the new assertion 0/ autonomy 0/ the Episcopate, but that in his copadty as secre­tory 0/ the Council he addressed a letter to the Patrlluch informing him 0/ the Council's refusol to accept one Nico as bishop of the Episcopate.

It is further contended by the De/endJuits IMt in J951, by proper action, the episcopate severed its ties with the mother church in Buchsrest,

115

Rol11Jlnia, not only in n$peCt 0/ administrative motters but aJg:J In respect 0/ spiritual and canonical affairs.

The sole question for the determination 0/ this Court, therefore, iJ whether or nor the Romanill.n Orthodox Minioruuy Episcopate or the Romanllzn Orthodox Episcopote of Amerlco IuD achieved Q degree of autonomy which is suffICient to permit it to elect its own bishop. If such l

autonomy rests in the Episcopate here. the selection and consecration of a , , bislwp by the Holy Synod cannot empower such bishop to obtain posses- ~ siDn of the property in quation, nor can he obtain relief such as is sought -I by the Plaintiff here, to exercise the privileges and prerogatives of bis.hop , over his Episcopate in Ihe United States. .

The elIidence clearly establishes that mch autonomy did exist by the ~ by·laws 0/ J 932 and that such autonomy was recreated by action 0/ the . 1 proper officials in 1947 and 1948. ~

I repeat, all that this Court must determine is whelMr or not lhe I Episcopate in the United States possessed administrative autonomy to , elecl its own bishop.

The evidence is olJetWhelming tMt the by-liIws in effect and dUly l _ adopted at the time the PIIlintiff claims to Mve ascended to office required _ the bishop to be elected by the Episcoptlte Congress.

Although Andrei Moldovan, at the time of the hearing for preliminary ~'. injunction, not only asserted but insisted over and oW!r again that he was­elected by the chw-ch Congress in the United Stales, at this hearirlg he specifically disclaimed any definite knowledge of his election by any group in the United States, and the Court concludes from the testimony that no doubt can pouibly arise that he was TU)t elected by the chlUCh Congress.

Not only was he not elected biUrop by the church Con,gn'u, but he sun-eptitiously and with a clear intent 10 conceal his activities went to Bucharest to be there consecrated a bishop.

The contentions of the DefendlUlts, which I have recited, haW! been clearly established. The elJidence is conclush>e that the Epi!COpate enjoyed an autonomous existence in $Q for as election of in bishop is concerned.

The PII1intiff is not entitled to the relief which he seeb In this Court. The complaint will be dismissed at the cost of the Plaintif!.

Because of the evidence which I have just recited, it is clear that the injunctive relief sought in the Defenelllnt's amended crosscll1im Urould be granted in all respects. Therefore, the Plaintiff. Andrei Moidollflll, will be pemutnently enjoined from representing himself as a priest or bishop of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America and from using the same Solla as the title to any publication and/rom occupying or using the fIlnd, " buildings and penonal property located on the VatTO Farm, commonly referred to as the Vatra, Grass lAke, Michigan, except such personal effects and penoNli property owneci by the Plaintiff Andrei Moldo\fQn Individually and brought by him on the proPerty subsequent to April I, ' 1951. '

De/endimu' evidence fails completely to establish their right to recowr ".

116

damages against this Plaintiff Therefore, the crou-clilim and the amended cross-clilim will be dismissed in w far as they seek to recoJJe1' damage! {rom the Plaintiff. Andrei Moldovan.

In accordance with the rules of this Court the Defendants will draw and submit to this Court findings of fact and conclusions of law in conformity with the findings of this Court.

Now, in respect of the contempt of which the PUzintiff Moldovan \\.W

found guilty by this Court, I am willing to hear either from him or from counsel representing him in respect of the punishment or penalty thllt Is to be inflicted for the violiltion of the Court's order.

(Discuuion had.) THE COURT: It is. the judgment of this Court thll! a rille of $200 be

imposed. I do want to inquire whether he is in a position to pay thisfirre at this time.

MR. VIN17LLA: Your Honor, he does not haW! it with him at this time.

THE COURT: When will he have it? MR. VINTlLLA: We will get it in afew dJIys. I will contact Detroit. THE COURT: A motter of a few day, isn't specific, Mr. Vintilla. [will

give you until the 15th to pay thefirre, a week from today. MR. VINTILLA: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: By 12:00 o'clock noon. MR. VINTILLA: Yes, your Honor, the 15th of this month. 11IE COURT: I will permit him to lealle the court withoot furnishing

bond, but I am going to rely on counsel-MR. VINTILLA: That the fine is paid? 11IE COURT: That the fine is paid or tflilt he will be here G: week {rom

todJly. if you don 't wish to assume responsibility, J am afraid I can't do It. MR. VINTILLA: I will assume that responsibility. The rme of $200 will

be paid by 12:00 o 'clock noon on the 15th of this month. THE COURT: All right.

(Adjournment.)

CERTIFICATE

f, A. V. Jllfl1eill, Official Court Reporter for the U.S. District Court, Nor· them District of Ohio, Eastern Division, do hereby certify tfllltthe abolle and foregoing Is a true and accurate transcript of the abolle proceedings.

($) A. V. Jarvelo Official Court Reporter.

The case was appealed by Bishop Moldovan at the United Siaies Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, Ohio.

On May 29, 1953, and July 3,1953 the following decision was issued by three judges of the Court or Appeals:

117

DECISION of the United Stales Court of Appetlls, Sixth Qrcuit,

May 29, 1953, As Amended July 3,1953.

Alleged bishop of Romanion religious organization In United SlIltes and Qmado brought action to compel surrender to him of possesrion and control of ChUTCh property and to enjoin defendants {rom using or ex- "j

pending church funds, publishing church newspaper, and representing thot " they were acting in beholf of religious organization" The United States ~ District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, F1eed, 1 J. , entered judgment adverse to alleged bishop, and he appeakd. The Cowt of Appeals, Alkn, Circuit Judge. held thot evidence wtlJ' insuffICient to t establish that aUeged bishop W4I elected bishop either by clwrch congress or religious organization or by holy synod in Romanio. or by any eccJesI-

1 astiCllI body of the church. " Judgment affirmed. • • • 1 Where ROmDnian religious organiuJtion In United States and CaMda

had authority accordin8 to it! by-lawJ of 1932 to elect Its own lnshop, but 1 organizlltion by by-lIIws of J936 accepted authority of holy synod In Romanio to appoint bishop, and in J947 orgtUlization discorered thilt it . lMlS dealing, not with the Holy Synod and the Patrii1rch, but with"com- . munistic gow:mmenr of Romania, which was dictlJting appointment of its ~ bishop. organization was entitled to r8\1Oke 1936 by·laws and re~tablish ~ 1932 by-/4w$ and elect its own bishop. !

••• In «tion by lliJeged bishop of Romanilln religious orgmtzation in

United States and CaMda to compel surrender to him of possessicn and control of church property and to enjoin defendants {rom using or. ex· pending church funds, publUhing church newspaper, and representing thilt they were acting in behillf of religious organizlltion, alleged bishop had bulden of proving lhil, he had been ekcted or consecrated as bishop of lhe religious OIftlnizalion.

In action by aUeged bishop of Romanian religious orgllnization In United Stales and Can0d4 to compel surrender to him of possessicn and control of church property lind to enjoin defend4ltts from wing or ex· pending church funds, publishing church newspaper, and representing thllt they were lJcting in behalf ofreligioUJ organization, evidence was insuffici­ent to establish thilt IIlleged bishop hild been elected either by church congress of religioUJ organization or by Holy Synod in Romania, or by any

,

1 j

1

ecciedastical body 0/ the church. 1 John R. Vintilla, aeveland, Ohio, Andrew W. Kops, Cincinnati, Ohio t

(Owen c. Neff. C1eveland, Ohio, on the brie/), for appellant. ii'

William P. Strrln,gwtll"d, Ciew:land, Ohio (Strrlngward, Lloyd d: Cameron, Qeveland. Ohio, on the brief),/orappelleel"

118

Before SIMONS, Ottef Judge, and ALLEN and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

ALLEN. Circuit Judge.

Th& an appeal from a ludgmen~ of the DIstrict Court dismWing a complaint p1flJ'ing for iniunclion and equitable relief sought by plaintiff MoldoVQn, c14iming to be bishop of the Romanian Orthodox Missionary Episcopate of America, hereafter caiJM the Episcopate. (T1Ii! partin will be denominated as in the court below.)

Since 1929 the adlrerents of this church, a branch of the &lstem Ortho­dox Church, have bun building a religious organization in the United States and in Dlnada and have tu:quiml MUin real property at the "Valnl'," Grtm Lake, Michigan, which is uJed tu hetldquarten of the Epis­copate. A joumal called "Solfa" is published IU the Episcopate's official organ. T1Ii! amended complaint /lied by MoldoWIII In his aileged offlcilll capacity on behalf of the Episcopate tuIc! for surrender to pWntif! Mol­dollQJl of possession and control of the real property and for an order mlnl'ining defendants from wing or expending any {unth owned by the Episcopate, from publishing the newspaper, and from re~Jetlting thttt they are acdng on behaJ{ of the Episcopate.

The defendants deny that the pl4lnd/l Moldovan Iuu been elected or consecrated tU bishop of the Episcopate and that he has any right to possenion and oontrol of the property.

The action pwports to be instituted by the Episcopate throllgh the pIointiff Moldovan, but It clearly appears thllt the established episcopate u resisting this action, for it /lIed an answer and a CTO#-claim Including a d6im for damages not 11fllterial here which was dismined by the District Court. 17Ie defendants are influential memben of the Episcopate, the defendimt 'J)utza being president of the Council. As such they are In possessWn and control of the headquarten and of the So/la, and dur~ this period haW! C1ITrled on the ecclesiaJtlCfl/ business of the organization. While the Episcopate has been known by at/east six different nomes, until 1950 there WIU but one organization denominated by these names, nomely, that formed in 1929, now luwtng many parishes in the United States and Canada. This is the organization controlled by the defendants. Each party contends that It Is the authentic Episcopate group and that the opposing group are schismatics or dissidents. It if conceded, however, thllt the group supporting Moldovan was lately formed, having met rust in MIly, 1950, and luwing signed Articles of Association as an ecclesiastical c0r­poration in the Slate of Michigan in June of that year. This is not the body which Moldovtln claims 10 represent in thil case. He d6imslo repre­sent the body formed in 1929.

The controversy arises out of the followiltg facts which, for the mOSt part, are not in dupute. Jtlhen the Episcopale was founded il had the power to elect ils own bishop. This was customary at the time in the EtUtern Orthodox OIurrh al waJ Mown by unconl7OW!rted teuimony with reference to the practice in Ttunsylvtlnia, where the bishop \lG'S elected by

119

the delegates to the OIurcll Congress and then appro~ed by tile Metropoli­tan. The SQme statute exists today. This right was recogniwd in the Episco­pate by-laws of 1932. These prollided tllat tile Romaniall Orthodox amrch in tile United States and Conada '1orms an autonomom mission· ary episcopate maintaining spiritual and canonical unity willi tile Holy Synod with the Rotnanilln Orthodox Church and organic alliilnce with the RanI/mum Orthodox Patriarchate." Article VII provided that the bishop sJwuld "be elected by the Churcll Congress of Parishes belonging to the Episcopate called 30 days in advance, and presided by a special delegate of the Holy Synod; the elected one- shall receillC, if he meets all the canoni­all requirements, the canonical investiture from His Holiness the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, in accordal/ce with the tradition of the Orthodox OlUlch. "

The Holy Synod is a body of bishops of the Romaniiln Orthodox Olurch resident in RomalJiiI and the Holy Patriarch, the supreme exc(u-1iI'C, also resides in Romaniil. When Bishop Morup was sent to America by the Holy Synod ill 193.5 he came at the request of the Episcopate. The Holy Synod thus recognized the autonomy of the group and its right to take action with reference 10 appointment of a bishop.

A OIurch Congress was held in 1936 at which Moldol'Qn states that 8isJIOp Morusca "imposed" a new statute on the Episcopate and secun'd the adoption of new by·laws. These by-laws provided {or the ele,·tioll of the Bishop by the Holy Synod in Bucharest and for COllsecratiOIl by the Patriarch. They also prollwed that "The Holy Synod of tht! Romanian Orthodox Church is the most supreme authority pertaining to spiritual alui CtlfIoniaIl malters, and supreme {arum concernillg religious matters of wJ/IltellCr nature they may be ••• "

From 1939 when Bishop MOn/sea returned to Bucl/llrest, Romania, until this controversy, no bishop of the Episcopate has resided jn the United States unless the plaintiff Moldovall is a duly eJected and conse· CTtIled bishop.

In /947 the legation of the Romanian government informed the Epis,"(J­pate that one Nica had beell appoillted Bi$lJop of the i:.piSCOINJte afld ifl effect ordered the Episcopate Iv accept him. nle officials of till! Epis­copate thereupon called a speciillOlurch Congress at /)etroit which passed a resolution to restore authority tl) the Episcopate and to reenact ill sub· stance the by·laws of /932, including tire right of the Churcll Col/gress to elect a bishop. In J 948 new by-laws framed ill conformity to this resolution were submitted to a Church Congress alld llnanimou!iy passed.

Plaintiff Moldovan, who claims /lOW to be bishop, took part in monyof these deliberations as secretary of the tpiscopate alld wrote tlw Patriarch in Romania informing him of the action of the Episcopate ill re-£Slablish­ing autonomy.

While the testimony of Moldovan is eva!ive and confusing, it appears that some time in May, 19.50, a secnnd group, including priests of the Romanian Orthodox Church, nomu/Ilted plaintiff MoltJolIQlI as bisilop.

120

Moldoval/ asserts that he was elected by the /loly Synod in Romania a/ld consecrated by the Patriarch. At the trial MoldollOu prcsellted a te/{-gram dated July 14, 1950, whidl purported to state "n'e Holy Synod has approlli!d the election of Father Archpriest Andrei Moldolltlu to the IlQcallt seat of bishop . ..

The District Court he/d that but one questioll was presented, /lamely, whether the Romauian Orthodox MiStiol/ary Episcopate had (lcl/ielled a degree of autOIlQmy sufficient to permit it to clect its own bishop. The court held that sllch aUft)lIomy did exist under tlte by-laws of 1932 and _s recreated by action of the proper officials ill 1947 alld /948. Sinct the by-laws of 1912 required the biS/lOp to be t'lected by the OlUrch Congress, the District Court denied the injunctillC f(!lief sought by plaintiff MuidollQn and permfmently enjoined him from representing himSl.:lf as a priest or bis/WI' of the Romanilln Orthodox Episcopate of America, from using the name "Solill" as the title to any publication, and frum (JCcupying ur using the land, buildings and personal property located 011 tilt' Va"a farm, Crass LIlke, Michigan.

Plaintiff urges that this hoMing was clearly erroneous. It is colltellded Ihat Ihe £piu.:Opt1le is parI of a t-efltrai organized clwrdl al/d Ihat the Huly Synod and Ihe Patrillrch ',all(! the exc/usillC l1()wcr of elecling, cOl/secrating and inllesling a bishop. II is asserted that MoldulIOn was dilly elected and coIISecraled alld that pioiflliff organization atld pioillliff Moldovan as biS/lUp hold title jointly to "Vatra." It is further colltclICled tllIlllhe ekc­lion, consecration and inrestitute of Mo/do l'(JlI aJllstitutl'!i a decish.m by the Holy Synod on a mailer of inlemat clwrcll gOll'Cmment alld as SIIch af(! binding 0 11 tile cillif courts (If this COl/lIlry. nit! ,Jlaillliff cites Wlleral stale decisiotlS in support of the$t! proposilions and relies princil)Qlfy upon WalW" v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679, 20 L.Ed. 666, and Kedruffll. SI. Nicholas Co.tlledral of tile RUSSial1 Orthodox Olllf(!h ill North America, 344 U.S. 94,72 S.Ct. 143.

While the died holdings state the general law upon the subj,'ct, IIIt'do not discuss them ill cietail becau$t! we think they do Ilot gOll('m Ihe pr('S('1It colltroW!rsy. In the Kcclrofl case, supra, wI/h.:" was al/lKmtIC:ed after IIIC illStant case was decided ill the District COllrt, the SIIP"'nIC Court held that legislalion whieh determines ill a hierarchiCtlI dlUrch tile et'Clesiastical administration (Jr appoilllment 01 the clergy, or Iranslt'rs CO/llro{ of churches from one group 10 ano ther, interferes with tht! free exc'rdses of religion COlllrary to the Co,utitution. Heft' no ordinance, staWte or am­gressionai enactment is ill)l(){llCd. n'is is 1I0t a CtlJe of it-gislation claim(u to be Iliolated of the First Amendment to Ihe CcJllstitutiU/I of III/! Unitt'li States. It is a controllersy be/ween the American and Co./ladian d lUrdl group and the Communistic gOIlen/ment ill Romania -wvrking throllgh the hierarchy.

V'c colllfOllersy arose after the adoption of the by-laws of 1936 through the appoimment of a bishop by the gollCrllmell/ of Romania. This is conceded by MoIdOlJQI/, wllo stated that the president j1l the regular

121

meeling of February 21, 1947, read "an official letter received from the Romanian Legation, Washington, D.C., which says thatlhe bishop for the American Romanians was named in the person of Dr. A. Niea and notifies us to receive him . .. A protest agm.-nSf this action was sent by cablegram to the Patriarch and also to Ihe Mini8ler of Cults of Ihe government of Romania. On the same day the council voted to suspend the 1936 statutes and to put into force the statutes of 1932, restoring autonomy and the right of the Episcopate to elect its bishop.

Moldovan, who was secretary of the council, explained this action to the Patriarch Nicodemus at Bucharest. Romania, in a letter dated April 30, 1947. After protesting the loyalty of the Episcopate, Moldovan continues:

"By virtue of this loyalty. we have been opposed not to the Holy Synod, not to your Beatitude neither to His Grace Bishop Nica,-of whose integrity and Arch·pn·estly (hierarchical) worthiness we have no doubt,­but against the meddling of the political power in the affairs of Ihe Church. That is why our Church Congress, held on March 28. 1947, resolved to abrogate the statute, which was imposed upon us by His Grace the Bishop of The Western Un-Orthodox Countries (i.e .• Policarp), which (Statute) hod made us a section of an Episcopate created outside the boundaries of the United States,-and (decided) to return to the original Statute which had been approved by the Holy Synod in November 1929. In confonnity with the provisions (dispositions) of this Statute and with those of the High Decree No. 10,219 of November lst, 1930. we have been granted autonomy and Ihe right 10 elect the Bishop, a right enjoyed by other Episcopates too, without harming by this, in any maJSure, the canonical tie w;th the Mother Church.

"As eloquent proof of our wish, the very same Church Congress re­quests, unanimously, with all the humbleness of your Beatitude, who are our Metropolitan, to kindly consent and commWlicate to us a list of candidates who are worthy of your high trust, without the meddling o/Ihe Government. and who possess pronounced qualities of a real (true) Parent, so that we can /ill the vacant bishopaJ chair, in the Congress which is convening for this purpose on the 4th of July, 1947, at the Romanian Vatra. "

It does not appear that such a list was submitted. In conformity with the resolution of 1947 the duly elected Church

Congress of 1948 ufUlnimously passed extensive by-laws which contained the following statement:

"Art. 2. Character. - By the will and through the unanimous decision of the Congress of the parishes. this Episcopate is and shall remain auto­nomous having the right to regulate (legislate), to administer and conduct. through its legally constituted (elected and instituted) OIgans. all its relig­ious, cultural and financial affairs, in conformity (accordance) with the Canons and Laws of the Orthodox Church. in general. and in accordance with the dispositions 0/ this Statute and with the decisions of the Episco­pate's Oiurch Congresses, in speciai,-respecting in its entirety the Con-

122

stitution of the Countries in which this Episcopate has (exercises) church (religious) Jurisdiction.

"In regolds to spiritual, canonicol and dOgmlltic aspects the Episcopate preserves its unily with the Ecumenical OIurch of the &Ut,- in general,­and, in speciiJl, with the Au/acephalous Orthodox Church of Romanill."

It -s after this action that the group supporting MoldollQn split off from the Episcopate, !Jet up its Ichismotic body and nominated MoldoJlOll as bishop. The council of the Episcopate then determined to take /ego/ action to protect the Episcopate, both in its properly and in its cof/()nicoi pri"ileges and in its meeting of NOl'f!mber 16, 1950, unanimowly decided that ellery member of the council should sixn "a Declaration of loyalty to the Episcopate, rejecting an)' foreign meddling: ••• in the spiritual and administrative aUain."

The final action -s taken at a special Chwch Congress of the Episco­pate held at Chicago on July 1,2,3, and 4 of 195J, in which wuious resolutiom were adopted reasserting the autonomy of the Romanian Or· thodox Missionary Episcopate of America and changing its name to "The Ronumktn Orthodox Episcopate of America." Among the resolutions adopted were the following:

"1. Whereas the ROmiUlian Orthodox Parishes and The Ronumian Orthodox Episcopate of America Iun>e all been organized, supported and maintained by the faithful members of the Romanian Orthodox Faith, citizens or residents of the United States and of The Dominion of Can­ada,-

"2. Whereas, in order to twUre the cQllOnical contirwily and the Apostolic succession of The Holy Eastern Orthodox Church, The Roman­ian Orthodox Episcopate of America, at the time of its organization had asked to become a component part of the Orthodox Olwch of Romania, and, at the same time, had reserved for hene/f the right to administer and to conduct her own affain autonomously, through properly constituted OIurch Congresses, compo!Jed of the delegates of the parishes and also the exclusille right to nominate and elect its own BisJwp.-

"3. Whereas, following the installation in Romania of a Communist, dictatorial, anti-christian and anti.<Jemocratic gOllemment, - the Orthodox OlUrch of Romania:

"(aJ is no longer free to preach the Word of God nor to propagate the true teachings of the Holy Eastern Orthodox Church and her Faith,

"(b) with complete dirngard for the organizational Statutes of our Episcopate continues to meddle in problems, the solution of which is the exclusive right of the members of our Episcopate,

"(e) through her present leadership, completely enslal/led by the political rulers propagates among our faithful peoples here, ideals which are contrary to the free life conceptions and ideals held and respt:cted by the American citizens,

"Now, therefore, BE IT RESOL VED that: .. The Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America be and the same is

123

hereby decl4nd to be completely QUtonomous not only in itl administrs· ~ but also in {If ctmOnJcoI tpbituaJ ajfain. and l/w, f~ from all rules. rqu/lltiotU, olden, decree,. etc., nnmwtin8 from the Puflfgrdr or {rom the Holy Synod of Romlllli4."

I. We think Ihilt thell/! fac'I pnxnt a IitlUlrion not covered by sny decision cited by the ,plaintiff. The original group utablished in 1929, although autonomora, wa.t willing to accept the authority 0/ 1M Holy Synod and .to expreued llUl! In the 1!y-hzwl 0/ /936. but in 1947 It ' dUcoW!red llull it WIll dealing, not with the Holy Synod and the Patriorch, but with the Communistic govvnmmt of Roman"', which WIU diclIIling i

1M appoflltment olitl bUlrop in the United StillU 0/ Amnkrl and Canado. It discolitled ,hIl, the conlTOlJing and principtJ/ ptITty to the 4&ltement o{ I

1935-6 WO.I totally different {rom the one with whic1r il thought it Iwd • been detlling. WI!' agree with 1M District Cowl llull under these ciTcum· lIlli'l«l the de/end4ntl wen entitled to rel'O,u their pn)liow by-law, and to re~"abUsh the by-law, 0/1932. We also think IhIlt this conclusion II in l accord with the Jpirlt, if not with the letter, O/ lhe Kedro[{ Ctlse, which 1 decliuel Ihllt "Freedom to JelecllM clergy, where no improper methods of choice are proven·· • muJt now be:said to Nn>e federuJ constitutional protection tu a {XITt of the flu exercise of religion qWul state inter- .. feren« .. Situ:e this is true as to protection against the inter/erena of an .~ indMdUld Amedarn state, we think it should be eqUldIy ~ tu to protec-tion against the domination and inlerfmmce of aforeign slate. {

II. The decision mlUt in any CQIe pe.affumed upon thegrowuf thllt the \ plaintiff Moldovan has not borne the bun/en of proof in mowing Ihllt he ~ has been elected or consecrated as biJhop of the Episcopate. .\

The only evidence as to the election of MoidoWln tu bWrop, by the 1 Holy Synod iJ his own inconsistent, contradictory testimony and certllin i IlIWUthmtiarted papers which he prtJe1lIf to supfJ<l't his story. One of tbest docummtJ hils the lIIlme "Jwtinilm" at the top and beau a signature } purporting to be thot o[ the Patriarch Justinian locum tenel1s il1 Bucha- ~ Fest. Typewritten extracn of speecheJ which MoldoWln !totes he made in • Bucluue!l 01 the time of his claimed election art alJO included. The " cllrimed speeches are entirely Itlf-serving. .;

A deCt!ption which he practiCl!d upon his parUhionen in Akron, Ohio, ,; a/$O Jerioudy affecn his credibility. In 1950, MoldoWI/I announced to hiJ :j pariJh in Akron, Ohio, that he -s going to Hot SpringJ, Ark., for hiJ { health. He arranged to mail poJt cords signtd by himMlf from Hot Spring$, i Ark., to members of hI! parish in Akron. 'Three of these post cards I included in the record art dated No~mber J, 1950; but MoldOWI/I'Jpau- 1 port for IraYeI to Romania, abo in evidenCl!, WQS issued August 22, 1950, , and valid for three months up to November 21,1950. On November 10, 1950, the passport WI1f extended for a period of one month by the Arneri- 'j' ean Legption at Bucharat. Moldovan claims IMt he was in Romania 01 about the time that he -.t sending post cards from Hot Springs, Ark., to j his parishionen in Akron. The possibility of error or fraud in Je/{-serving i

124 ~

or htmwy sl4temenn fJUJ'POrting to comtitute evidence of o/fleW actJ perfonned in II country thoWlltfds ofmi/es dutllllt IUId sepdITlted {rom 1M United Slates by tM Iron Curtain is lel{-evident.

The reconJ is replete with MoJdowms incolUistent and contTtldictOTy Matemena and repeated ewui~ an.nw; s.

III The Dhtrlct Court commented upon Moldowm's el'tlliveneu and the duup clumges of {ront mlllli{efted In his testimony. The faetuol con­clwlons of the DIstrict Court are strongly supported by the recotd. A drastic remedy like injunction should not be issued upon such flimsy proof. As Moldowmlw not shown hlmJel{ to be a bishop elected either by the Church Congreu, by the Holy Synod or by any eccleJlastictJJ body of the RotnlllJlan Orthodox MtuJonillJl Epi$copate he is not entitled to the relief $Ought.

The judgment of the District Court u ai/firmed. A Petition for certiorari filed with the Supreme Court of the United

States was denied on October 10, 1953, cue no. 422, October term.

LookinJ for. poaltiYe solution

For the leadership of the Episcopate, the year 19Si started with an overload of conoerns and problems. The offioen of the Episcopate were summoned in the Civil Courts; the Patriarchate in Rom.anis wu using hlgh. geared pressures to have Bishop Andrei Moldovan accepted and recognized by the Diocese In America; the budget of the Episcopate was so limited that most of the time there was not enough cash to pay postal expenses, without mentioning that lawyer fees had to be paid. '

At the same time there was no definite word from Bishop Policarp that he might be permitted to return to his Su. On the contrary, Bishop Moldovan', publications (pseudo-SOUA calendar of 1951) aUeged that Bishop Policarp considered himself in retirement and fully ''supported'' the appointment of Bishop Moldovan for the Diocese in America.

To seek advice and to fonnulate a common strategy for the future, I:'ather John Trutzi, the President of the Episcopate Council met on Jan­uary 6, 1951 with the President of the Romanian National Committee, Mr. Rum Nan, with the Very Reverend John Spatarlu, the leader of the Ameri· can Romanian Catholics of America, and the Very ReYerend Father John Stanila, Secretary of the Council.

Analyzing the situation, they concurred that what happens with the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate is of concern to all Romanian-American communities and pledged to work together to prevent any interference from Romania in their affaiu. As a practical approach to the immediate problems of the Episcopate they agreed that it is not enough to fight back encroachment from Buchuest but that it is necessary to work toward a constructive solution by electing a bishop for the Diocese to serve III Vicar until such time that Bishop Policarp could clarify his position.

The question discussed for many hours was: who should be considered

125

as a candidate. The Episcopate Congress held in July in Philadelphia had already resolved that no one of the priests serving at that time under the jurisdiction of the Episcopate could be considered as a qualified candidate. TIley concluded that the editor of SOLIA. a graduate of theology. Mr. Viorel D. Trifa. might be the person to look to.

That same day they approached Mr. Trifa with the question if he would consent to accept a candidacy through the Episcopate Council. The response from Mr. Trifa was in the negative. However, he agreed thai the presence of a Bishop at the head of the Diocese could have a positive effect in the struggle to uphold the integrity of the Romanian Episcopate. He suggested as a candidate the Very Reycrend Archimandrite Stefan Lucadu, who was known 10 him from Romania and who was living as a refugee in Paris, France, hoping that he might be able to emigrate to the United States.

Contact was immediately established with Archimandrite Lucadu and arrangements were made to publish in SOLIA some articles by Archi­mandrite Lutaciu so that he could become known among the fait hful in America.

nle Episcopate Council mee tings of March 16 and May 26, 195 1 dis· cussed the subject of election of a bishop at the coming Congres! very thoroughly. The prospective candidacy of Archimandrite Lucaciu was wel­comed but the general consensus was that the Congren should not be faced with only one candidate, without an al ternative. Therefore, the de· cision was taken to offiCially invite both Archimandrite Lucaciu and Mr. Trifa to accept the candidacy.

Following the meeting of the Council Mr. Trifa received from the Epis­copate Council the following letter :

Qevelirnd, Olllo June 4, 1951 My dear Mr. Tri/a:

Concerned with the problem of filfillg the office of bishop of Ollf

RO""lIIi1Jn Orthodox Episcopate of America, the Council of this Episcopate, ill it& two meetings-March 16 alld May 26, / 95/ - Iras decided to moke the necessary preparations for the electiol/ of a Vicar Bi&l/Op, with the right of sliccession to the col/onical head of the Episcopate, and, until the clarification of tIll! status of His Grtu."e Bishop Po/icarp, the titular head of this Episcopate. alld that the (]Jureh Congress of tire Episcopate which will be held ill O ll'cago on July 2, /951, be called as a speciIJl electoral Congress.

From the transcripts and diplomas which are available tv the Episcopate Coullcil, it WQS verified with joy alld 5IJtisfactioll that yOIl have the proper theological training and priestly qllalifications re­quired of a Ctlndidate to the Bishopric of our Orthodox OIurch. alld on the basis :J/ this, the Collncll decided with the unanimous IIO fe of its memben, to nominate you as a candidate to the office of Vicar­Bishop of ollr Episcopate. The undersigned 1U1$ been empowered to

126

notify you of this fact, which I do with great pleasure and spiritual satisfaction, and to ask you at the same time, after you have received this official notification and considered the candidacy and have made your rewille in this matter, to be so kind to let us know your decision so that we could act accordingly.

With sincerest congratulations on the occasion of this 'Well­merited candidacy and with the sincere!! best wishes for good health, we await your response and ask that you accept my assur­ance of respect and 101le.

(Episcopate Seal) (ss) John Trutza President of the Council

A simiJar letter was addressed to Archimandrite Stefan Lucaciu in Paris. With the understanding that his candidacy is forwarded by the Episco­

pate Council to the Congress mainly to give the clergy and parish delegates a chOice, Mr. Trifa responded to the invitation through the following letter:

Ocvefand, Ohio June 14, 1951 The Very Rev. Father Archpriest John Trutza President of the Episcopate Council of the Romtllfian Orthodox Episcopate 6201 Detroit Allenue Oeveiand, Ohio

Very Reverend Father President, Honorable Epj.fCOpatc Council,

I confirm the receipt of your letter in which you bring to my attention the decision of tllc Honorable Episcopate QlUncilto put forth my candidacy for the office of Bishop- Vieor of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America.

Naturally I feel /lattered for the honor accorded me and pray to God that He will guide me with His heavenly power, in the moment in which I must answer if I accept or not the offer made to me.

I COII/cSS I cannot hide thc inner conflict which overwhelms me whcn I think that the future of the Holy Romanian Orthodox Epis­tvpate could sollie day weigh upon my shoulders.

Therefore, in my meditations, I alUllyzed the needs of the Episco­pate, which destiny allowed me to know closely during this past year and the possibilities of a bishop to meet them.

The conclusion I have reached is that to reSolve the current and future problems of our Episcopate, the election and enthronement of a bishop is not suJfident, if he is not assured of the basic con­ditions wuler which he con work.

Among o thers, I consider as first and absolutely necessary the following:

I. Administrative and canonical independence of the Episcopate

127

{rom the pruent leadenhip of the Holy Synod and the PDtri­tUchllte in Bucharest. for only In thn way can we Qperate un­hindered as a free institution in this free AmericJm 1IInd, 2. The increase of membership in OUT parishes and Epi$()()pate. by granting eqUill rights and obligations to all persons confessing OUT faith-nutn and women-who have reached the age of 18,{or only in this way can our youth become more IlWOlved in the tJdministrtrtion, leadership and the future of the Church of OUT Forefathen. 3. The indissolubOity of the relations between parishes and the Episcopate by limiting or denying the right of an organized {JIlrlsh to withdraw from the Episcopate at the whims of a group which might at !Ome time take over the leadership. Only in this way can the Episcopate inalienably preserve the assets acquired through the effons of the preceding generations who dedicated them ex­clusively for the benefit of the Romanian Orthodox Church in America. 4. The assurance of a permanent budget of the Episcopate which wiJJ allow it to organize a stable and pemument office and especially to improve the "Vatra Rom4neasca" to the extent thllt it will bring hOMr to OUT good name and organization. The sys­tem of public solicitation anwng the faithful can be ~ry good. but when it comes to collective efforts of greater magnitude. they are not ttpproprillte to SUS14in an organization which mUtt exe,.. dse a miui01ll1TY, cultural, charitable national activity. If the Bishop must spend all his time collecting mone)' to sustain him­self and the few coW! at the VatTa, then he becomes a busineu­man and fOl'gets that he is a bishop. S. A constitution and by'laws to detail in the most precise terms the relationship between the Bishop and clergy, between the epis­copate and the parishes, constitution that must be respected by all and must define the right of the Bishop to apply effective IItlnctions against those who will not abide by them. and at the IItlme time the right of the OIurch Congress and the Synod to apply sanctions ellen against the Bishop, if he himselfwill not live up to the canons and the law$. 1 found the above-mentioned conditions as necessary because of

the fact tlult if it n undoubtedly detrimental tlult a Diocese {unction without a Bishop, it is also detrimental to the Faith to have a Bishop without a Diocese.

Hoping thot you wHl appreciate the fact tlwt just as the thoughts of Ihe Honorable council are to find a suitable solution for the functioning and prosperity of our Holy Episcopate, Iikewtse my thoughts /JI'e expressed with the intention to fmd the best possible paths to respond to your request, I conclude:

If the Honorable Council and the Honorable OI.urch Congreu

12'

. , . ,

, ,

, , , ,

find It appropriote to debate and rem/lle the lloove-ment/oned prob­lemf, I arsr!~ you tlutt 111m rtIldy to tlC«pt the honor of amdid4t· ing N . if elected, to ftrille to do all 'Nhlch IJ lumumly pol$lblt for the we/ftue of OUT Holy Oturch.

A hittorbl Onuch eonpe ..

With dlJlingulJhed ~timent$, ($I) Viorel D. Trifa Edilor of "Solla."

The annual Olwch Congress of the Episcopate was calJed to meet in 0Ucaa0. Dlinois. for July 1.2,3 &. 4. 1951 . The Astnda included not only the election of a Vicar· Bishop but a lot of other mltten of major signifi· cance for the future of the Diocese.

This was the fitst Conpe .. in which the supreme administrative and legislative body of the Diocese met after the incident with Bishop Moldovan. The Episcopate Council had, dutifully! resisted the pressures to accept a Bishop that was not elected by the Diocese, but now all the clergy and pariah delegates had to pronounce them8Clve. on the subject.

But Bishop Moldovan's cue involved also the relations of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate in America with the Mother Church in Romani •. Without any doubt, clergy and lay people held dearly thelt tradition. and were proud of thelt Romanian orgill. Truly, they founded their parishes without any help from the Mother Church in Romania, but every time they needed a priest they wrote home and occWonaUy their needs were satisfied. When they felt the necessity to organize in a Diocese they reo ceived a helping hand from the Mother Oturch. After the establishment of the Diocese they petitioned for a Bishop and one wu found in the person of PoUcarp Morusca.

What they could not understand was the total change in attitude by the new leadership of the Patriarchate . On the one side all the requests for the return of Bishop Policarp were disregarded by the Romanian Patriarch.te, while on the other hand BWtops were appointed without the knowledge or at leut the consent of the Diocese in America.

To compound the problem WlS the political Involvement of the Roman· ian Pltriuehate in Buchuut. At I time when American soldiers were fighting to uphold the principles of freedom and self detennination of the people of Korea, the new Patriarch of Romania, Justinian, was making appeals like the one published in "Via\l Sindica!'l" of Bucharest in its issue No. 1021 of January 16,1951.

He.lp for the. People. of ~off!a.

"In the iliUM of the. Romanllln Orthodox o,urch, the PIItriluch of Romanill, Jwtinilln, oddru&ed to the. people. and the faithful memben of thu (Juqch an appeal, urgfng the.m to com e. to the support of the haole lfIlt/on of Kana, whose fltht for liberty and

129

I1Iltionai independence Iuls aroused the sympathies of honest people aU over the world.

"Hundreds of millions of people of good faith and with love for the truth, from aU over the world-SllYs the urging appeal-are feIIOlt· ing against what the Americans are doing in Korea. People with love for their fellowman and for justice can never forget either the chil­dren buried alive nor the heads of innocent children which were cut o!lby the American murderers who wereemulalingamong themselves in doing this. Together with all the peaceable and working peoples, the ROmllnw.n I1Iltion has the SflCred duty to send its brotherly help to the Korean nation and thus to lighten their heroic suffering by contributing their put to the glorious Sflcrif/Cts and offerings of all humankind, for the sake of establishing peace on earth. "

A1though shocked and frustrated by such pronouncements, the Episco- , pate Council did not want to give up hope of communications and rela­tions with the Patriarchate in B]lCbarest. Therefore, as a last resort, it was decided that before the Congress in Chicago a MEMORANDUM be sent to the Patriarchate with copies to all the members of the Holy Synod. Some members of the Council believed that if all the Bishops in Romania would be made aware of the situation, someone will reconsider the policy adopted by the central organs of the Romanian Church.

Under the signature of the Secretary of the Council, the Very Reverend John Stanila, the foUowing Memorandum was sent to Romania:

mE ROMANIAN ORTHOOOX EPISCOPATE OF AMERICA Office of the Epi$COpate: 6201 Detroit Avenue, Cleveland 2, Ohio

May 15, 1951 To the Holy Synod of the Romanftm Orthodox Church The Romanilln Patriarchate, Buc1uuest

Your Holiness President Your Eminences.

The undenigned President and Secretary of the Episcopate Coun· eil of "The ROmiUlilln Orthodox Missiol1llry episcopate in Ameri­ca," being entrusted by the Episcopate Council, representing the absolute majority of the Romanilln Ortlwdox [XUIshes of North and South America, with due respect bring to Your Eminences' attention the following:

As you well know, the ROl'lflUlilln immigrann of the Orthodox faith who settled in America, in the desire to provide for their $pirl­twlllife. built with their own Iobon and monies churches and Orgtln­

ized parishes in all the Romani4n eenten in the United Stattl and <AMa..

130

, , ,

,

For the purpose to set up an organic connection between the scattered parishes Qlfd for a proper canonical administration 01 the religiolU activities, the clergy and lay people became convinced of the necessity to estfJblish fJn Episcopate. 11Ius, after preliminary meetings held in Qeveland fJnd in other /ocfJlities, the authorized delegfJtes from fJU the porishes, through the Congress held on April 25, 1929 In Detroit, declared as founded the "Romonian Orthodox Episcopate 01 America," which they submitted canoniCQlIy to the Holy Synod of the Romtlnilln Orthodox Church.

The Holy Synod in its meeting of November 1929 approved the proceedings of the Congress held in April, in Detroit, fJIId His Holi­ness Patriarch Miron, as head of the Romanian Orthodox Church, through the High Decree No. 10.21901 November 1, 1930, declared the RomaniJJn Orthodox Episcopate of America IU established canonically and invested the Interim Commission with complete administrative powers to organize, direct and conduct the affairs of this EpiJcopate unti/the election of a Bishop.

The new Epl3copate luzd been organized in conformfty .with the canons of the Holy Orthodox Church, with the Statute olorgani­zation of the Romanian Orthodox Church and in consldefation of the necessities arising from the $Ocilli, cultural and economic con­ditions of the American Ii/e. In 1932, at the Congress held in Cleve­land, the Statutes of thi! Episcopate were adopted in definitive form and, after a period of testing recommended by the Central OIurch Council of the Romtlnian Patriarchate, the Statute was ratified by , the Holy Synod in its session 01 June 15, 1933, and consequently the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America was declared as established through the publicfJtion in the Officiol Monitor No. 105 of May 8, 1934.

11Ie basic principles of the American Episcopllte Statutes were, from the beginning, the following:

fJ) fJ unified organizfJtion, with the participation 0/ all the com­ponent parts of the Church: clergy and /qymen, and with a democratic system 0/ governing;

b) total autonomy. tlutt is, the right to regulate, conduct and rtI/lnoge, through its own proper organs, its religious, cultural and administrative matters;

c) dogmatic unity with the Orthodox Church of Romania; d) observance and respect of the iawsof the country in which we

find ourselves. On this basis, by the will of the people, in 1934. the executil1f!

officers of the Epj$CCpate asked the Holy Synod to send a hierarch with full sacramental powers to shepherd the flock of faithful. His Grace Policarp Morusca was then sent and accepted. ,

His Grace PolicaTp lead our Episcopate until 1939, when during a visit to Romania he was caught there by the events of the Second

13l

World War. Since then and until today our Episcopate is deprived of irs spiritual head. During thu period the Episcopate has been and still is adminutered by an Episcopate Council elected through the vote of the delegates of all parishes.

In order tlult this temporary situation cease, the legal leadership of the Episcopate hos repeatedly reqmmed the intervention of the Holy PatrillTchate to the governing authorities in Bucharest, to per­mit the return of His Grace PoIicarp to his post. To our surprise, instead of the return of His Grace Policarp, a letter was received in February, 1947, from the Romanian Legation in Washington, in­forming us that His Grace Bishop Antim Nica was appointed as our Bishop.

Such procedure on the part of the Romanian civil authorities did not meet with the approval of the faithful and of the Episcopate's leadership. The negative reaction was only Mtura/ in an Orthodox community which has as its foundation the canonical principle of the election of a Bishop, and which community dwells in the middle of the American democratic way of life where it cannot be con· ceived that a leadership position can be reached by other metlns than the election of the leader by those who are to be led.

The fact that the Episcopate cannot accept as Bishop anyone tlult was not elected was lTIIlde known to the Holy Synod througll letter No. 39 of April 30, 1947, signed by the Episcopate Council President and the Secretary of the Episcopate. That letter was in conformity with the decision taken by the diocesan delegates, con­vened in the extraordinary Congress on March 28, J 947, in Detroit, Michigan. That Congress was called and presided by The Archpriest Simion Mihaltian and had as Secretary the Archpriest Andrei Mol· dovan. "-

The same Church Congress, as well as the ones tha/l.ollowed in 1948, 1949 and 1950, without exception and unanimouslY affirmed thllt our Episcopate is and will remain autonomous having the right to administrate its affairs through its legally constituted organs, in conformity with the Church Canons and the Statutes of the Episco­pate.

At those Congresses the parish delegates, representing all the Orthodox faithful of Romanilln origin, hIld reptiltedly affirmed that they consider His Grace Policarp Morusca as titular head of our Episcopate, and had asked the Holy Patrillrchate to intercede and to a$Sist in the return of His Grace to his flock.

They had further established tlult in case of vacancy in the Epis­copal See, the new Bishop is to be elected by the Church Congress of the Episcopate in compliance with the canonical principles and the Statutes of the Episcopate, from among the persons who fUlfill at least the minimum of requirements provided in the Holy Church Canons for the candidates to the Episcopal Office.

132

We repeat that all those decisions were taken with the plUtici· patlon of the delegates 0/ all the parishes belongifll to the Episco­pate and with ul1llnimity 0/ vote$.

Sel'O'Ql weeks after the Oturch Congreu held on July 3.1950 in Philadelphia. when with u,Nlnimity, including the role 0/ Father Andrei Moldovan, the request {or the return 0/ Hil Grace Policarp Ittll repeated, the Episcopate Office received {rom the President o{ the Holy Synod a cablegram announcing that "The Holy Synod approved the autonomy o{ the Romanian Episcopate 0/ North and South America and has approved the election 0/ the Archpriest Andre( Moldovan for the vacant seat of BiJhop" and (l$/dng that the newly elected present himsel/ to Buchan$! for ordination.

Father Archpriest loan Stanila, in thif capacity as Secretary of the Episcopate, through a letter dated August 18, 1950, received by fhe Holy PatTiarch4fe. dutifully brought fa the attention of the President of the Holy Synod that "The Church Congress did net declare tU vacant the Episcopal See and did not elect Father Andrei Moldovan as bishop for the Romanian Orthodox MiJJfcnory Episco­pate o{ America."

At the SlIme time the letter called to the attention o{ the Holy Synod that regarding Moldovan '.1' COst it WIJ.1' intentionally mi.1'in· formed in order 10 be mislead.

In spite of all those clarifications, the Holy Patriarch4te had called the Archpriest Andrei Moldovan to Bucharest and on Novem· ber 12, 1950 had inveJled him tU "Bishop of the RomanitJm in America" of which oct the legally constituted leadership of the Episcopate was informed through telegrams No. 777 of No~mber 11. 1950 and by letter no. 781/ 95011llli1ed by the clumcery o{ the Holy Synod and at the same time directed to accept Andrei Mol­dovan as Bishop and to su"ender to him all real and personal assets of the Episcopate.

The Episcopate Council called in eJCtroordifllJry session on November 16, 1950. with the absolute nurjority present, had unanimously decided not to accept the Archpriest Andrei Moldovan as Bishop nor to surrender to him any of the archives or QlSeI$ o{ the Episcopate. 'lhIlt decision was taken with COfIlideration 0/ the following:

1) In con/ormity with the Statute and deci.1'ions of our Church Congresses consisting o{ delegates who are free citizens and aware of their rights. the Romanian Orthodox EpiJCOpate of America is autonomous and. therefore, hal the exclusive right to regulate. to manage and to conduct it.1' re/igioul and administrative matlers without any outside interference. 2) Hi.1' Grace Policarp MOTUsca ; .1' cofUidered the titular head of Our Episcopate. Neither His Grace nOr the Holy Syned informed our Diocele of the eventual retirement or dismissal of His Grace.

133

MoreJO. we have not been notified o{ the reasons leoding to such a decision. The Episcopal See was not and is not considered ptIctlnt. J) Archprielt Andrei Moldovan was not elected os bisiJop by any Congreu or by any assembly 0/ the parishu belonging to the Episcopate; therefore, he cannot be appointed {or the Diocese that did not elect him. 4) Archpriest AndreJ Moldovan, himself, solemnly declared and signed under oath, in July 1950, thtIt "/ will not recognize as hierarch any other person other thtIn the one elected by the Church Congress 0/ our parishes through their legally elected and constilUted delegates. " S) Archpriest Andrei Moldo'llt1n commilled Ihe sin of lying and of fraud when he told his parishionen, in the church proper, llull he needs a sick leave so that he may go to the health resort in Hot Springs, when in fact he $Un'eptitiously went to ROrm1nia to be ordained os a Bishop lor a Diocese existing only on paper, and {or the Romonian Orthodox o{ America, who did not elect or want him as its Bishop. 6) Archpriest Andrei Moldovan deceived the Holy Synod when he ptlilioned to be elevated to the rank 0/ Bishop because "tilt! prillSts and Romani/m Orthodox faithful in America" h4d elected him. 17111 truth is that hll was nOI elected. To dllcllivil you hll h4s used this stratagem: on June 12, 1950 nine (9) persons (Glicherie Morom, John Spariosu, Petru Moga, Nicholas Martin, Arcadie SesermJllf, Paul SJobodilm, George BodiJI, Stll/an Farro and John Oprean) regutered with the Office of Ihe &crelary 01 Statll of Michigan a new anociJItion titled: "17111 RomaniJIn Orthodox Episcopatll of North and South America." Six (6) 01 the regis· trants had met on May 17, 19S0 in the 1I0me 01 Glicherie Moraru and had decided 10 mJlke Andrei Moldovan a Bishop. These per­sons were neither parish delegates nor members of our Episco­pate. They could not consider IhemsellJes a Diocesan assembly. From the Patriarc.'ral Grammilla or inIJutiture 01 Andrei Mol­dovan, the RotrU1nians in America learned. with surprise, t/wl a gathering 0/ six pencns. in a private home, was collsidered by thll Holy Synod as a "Church Col/gress." which. In the IUlme 0/ the Romanians in America "elected Andrei MoidOWIn BWtop . .. In IJlew of the aboIJe, the Episcopate Coullcil could IIOt accept

him as Bishop. Moreso, since we, here, priests and lay people, are lamiliar with his priestly "actMty" about which lie bragged in Rotnllnia. but {or wliich we found no reason to be proud of nor meril$ that could justify hiJ aJpirDtlons to the rank of bishop. In saying thiJ we have in mind tile canonical requirements for lile can­didatllS to thll Bishopric in a Oiurch in which the noble qualities 0/ spiritual, cultural and moral assets are essential, and above any other colISideralionsor interests, particularly lhose 01 a political fIIl/ure.

134

The decision of the Episcopate Council htu been fully approved by the Romanion Orthodox parishes members of our Episcopate. All of them have confirmed without dehzy the position of the Council, h4~e signed declllrations of solidarity a/firming that they wtll never recognize Ihe authority 0/ an indi~idual elevated 10 the rank of Bishop through lies, fraud, disregard of the By-Laws 0/ our Episco­pate and through flagrant violation of the Holy Orthodox Canons.

Availoble in the archives of the Federal Court proceedings in Oevelond are the origitUll declol'(ltions 0/ soJidJ1rity 0/ the fol/owing parishes:

The "Descent of the Holy Ghost " parish, Gary, Indiana- Ft. Eugene Lazar.

The "St. Nichollls'. parish, RegiTUl, Sask. Canoda- Fr. Petru Toto;

The "Descent of the Holy Ghost " parish, Phi/adelphia, Po. -Fr. loan Popovici

The "St. Dumitru" parish, New York, N. Y.-Fr. Vasile Hate­gun

The "Sts. Peter and Paul" parish, Flinto/t, $ask. Canada- Fr. loan Pescari

The "St. Dimitrie" parish, Bridgeport, Conn.-Fr. Hr/sta Vasileseu

The "Resurrection" parish, Buenos Aires, Argentina- Fr. Stefan PalaghiJa

The "St. George" pan'sh, Canton, Ohio- Fr. Traion Demum The "Falling Asleep 0/ the Virgin Mary" parish, Chicago, illi­

nois- Fr. Victor Barbulescu The "SI. Mary" poriy" Cle~eland, Ohio-Fr. Archpriest John

Trutta The "St. George" parish, Detroit, Michigan The "Descent of the Holy Ghost" parish, Detroit, Michigan­

Fr. Alexander (\leu The -" St. George" parish, Dysort, $ask. Canada- Fr. Archiman­

drite Daniel Maxim The "St. Elw" parish, EllWood my, Penna.,- Fr. Hie Ghenie The "St. John the Baptist" parish, Erie, Penna.-Fr. PaulOu­

ciun, Sr. The "Holy 0-0 S5" parish, Farrell, PenfllJ.-Ft. Nicollle Mol­

dovan The "Birth of the Virgin Mary " parish, Hairy Hill, Alberta,

Canada- Ft. V. Tomo The "St. Simion" parish. Detroit, Michigan- Ft. Archimandrite

Teofillonescu The "St. George the New" parish,lndiluuz Harbor, IndiofllJ- Fr.

Archpriest Simion Mihaltian

135

The "Str. Constantine and HelenD" parish, Indianapolis, Indiana- Fr. Paul (Jacmn, Jr.

The "Holy Trinity" parish. Los Angeles, Califomkl- Fr. , Grigorie Coste ~

The "St. John"parlsh. Niles, Ohio-Fr. Traion Vinti/o The "St. Thomas" parish, St. Louis, Missouri-Fr. CoriokJn

[we" The "St. MIlry" parish, St. Paul, Minnesota- Fr. flie Moul The St. Michael" pand!. Southbridge. Mau.-Fr. 10IlIr D.

Petrovici The "St. Andrew" parish, Terre Haute, Indiana- Fr. Vasile ·

a.1w. The "St. Mary" parish, Timmins. Ontario. Cantlda- Fr. Archi­

mandrite 1'eofil Maxim The "Resurrection" parish, Wmren. Ohio-Fr. Marln Postelnie 1

'I1u! "Sf. John the Baptist" parish. Woonsocket, R.L - Fr.loon 1 Popescu '1

The ''Holy Trinity" parish, Youngstown. Ohio-Fr. Archprl£st 'j loan Stani14

The affiliated parishes 0/ Martins Ferry, Ohio: Newark, Ohio; ~ Salem. Ohio; Fort Wayne, Indiana; South SI. Paul, Minnesota; .: then Windsor. Ontario. Ctvwda; Htmisburg. Po.: /Spa3, Alberta, ' Canada; Pierceland, Sask. Omada; etc. \ Given llult the Episcopate Council as well as the Romanian

Orthodox parishes of the R017UUlw.n Orthodox MlssiontUY Episco­pate in AmertctJ refused to accept him as a Bishop. Andrei Mol­dovan, returning from Romanw.. sought and is still seeking to assure I himfJl!lf a Diocese through the Civil Courts. Our Episcopate /$ being ,1 sued. the name of our official newspaper "SOLIA .. WIl.f plagiarized j' and arbitrarily published, while attempts have been made by Andrei ' MoldoJlQn and some of his friends to occupy and hold Vatra , Romaneasca at gun point. Thus, our loyalty is being put in doubt 'I'

with the cMl authorities and with other ethnic groups. It is there- . fore, understandob:e why there is a general altitude of indignation : against the methods used by the so-called Bishop Andrei Moldovan, ~ who is supported by only one parish, namely: "The Holy Trinity" of " Detroit, Michigan, led by the priest GUcherie Moram who does not -belong to OUT Episcopate. .'

Our greatest sadne.t'.t' is that everything is done "in the name of the Holy Synod." From circullus, ca/endius, mogazines and various ' , publicati()ns coming from Romol1ia. it appears clear that the leader- . ship of the Holy ;Patriarchate supports and encourages the in"e.t'{JOn­sible acti()n of a few individU4ls who do not even bewng to OUT 1 legally constituted Epl.fcopate.

While on the other side we .fee, with .9OITOW, thot the Holy Pam­Mchote did not take into ccnsideration the decisions of our Church , Congre.t'.t', or of the legally constituted leadership of the Episcopate.

136

We are chlJrged with the dulY to Ctlll to the attention of Your Eminence that such procedure, if not stopped now, will have con­sequences for which the present leadership of the Holy Romanian Orthodox OIurch will be held responsible.

Based on the basic principles of AmeriCtln life "that freedom and government of the people, by the people, for the people shilJI not perish from the earth" and respecting the Ctlnons of the Holy Ortho­dox Ouuch, which propide that Bishops be elected and accepted by the Diocese which they Me Ctllled to serve, and considering also the laws 01 the Romanian Orthodox Owrch, we are sure that American justice will uphold our right position and thot the faithful olour OIurch in AmeriCtl will never accept a BWrop Icm:ed upon them.

17113 pictory will however ,"ike at the prestige and the autlwrilY 01 the Holy Synod of the Mother Orurch and wiJi bring into dis­cussion even the wst relationship- the canon/Ctll one-of the Diocese of the Romanifllu in America with the Romanian Orthodox Orurch.

For this TealOn, the leiJdership of the Romanian Orthodox Epi,.. COpilte of America, in behlllf of all ptUishes di1ects its thoughts toMlf1J'd Your Eminences Klith the petition that the Holy Patrillrchate and the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Orurch consider without delDy this om and dIspose:

a) annulment 01 the ordination and investiture of Archpriest Andrei Moidomn as Bishop for the Romanians in America and take disciplfrwry action against him and his accomplices; b) Intercenion to the State authorities of Romania to permIt HI3 Grace Bishop Policarp Morusca to return among us before the OIurch CongreS$ of our Diocese, called for July of this yeJU in OIicago,-c) respect for the rights of our Romanian Orthodox Episcopate in America, as an autonomous organiz4tfon, to elect it! Bishop and to conduct without interference all its spiritullf and tulmin­Istrtltive matters:. d) recognition and respect for the principle thot the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of Amer/co Ctlnnot accept directitles and cannot obey other mil laws except those of the States on Whose tmitones our falth/ullive.

Your Eminences,

Archpriest loan Truw, President of the Episcopate Council

Archpriest loan Stanlla, Episcopate Secretary.

The Memorandum was sent by Certified Mail-Return ~ceipt ~­quested. Most of the Hierarchs of the Orthodox Chwch in Romania, In· cluding Metropolitan Mcolae Balan of Transylvania, personally signed the ~tum Receipts. But the Memorandum was never included on the Agenda of the Holy Synod.

137

A copy of the Memorandum was also sent to Bishop Policarp, He . acknowledged receipt through a short letter addressed to the Episcopate's, Office, on June 5, 1951, saying:

I acknowledge receipt of the text of the Memorandum sent to Hu Holiness the Patriarch and dated May 15th of this yem. I tlutnk You for the infoTmlllion and I will wait the decWon of the Holy Synod and of the civil authorities-as I have In fact waited in the past • ...

(""''''i lJUhop PoIkup.

About the same time Bishop Policarp, through a letter addressed to Mrs. Martha Gavrila, the president of the St. George Cathedral Ladies. Auxiliary of Detroit, conveyed the foUowing message:

At the Congreu in Chicago the situation will be clarified, ifup to th4t dIlte it is not IllretJdy decided through the a"j/ Courts. I hod to gille in writing Ilnd to sign everything IlWU requested to do. But there, the people hiIIIe to pau judgment Ilnd to decide wh4t is good, proper and u3/e/ul for the Church andfor the fllith{u1.

The Congress in Chlcago opened on July I, 1951, with 62 delegates· representing 24 parishes. Proxies from the absent parishes were not recog; nized. ,

Without pre-planning, it just happened that the mood of the Congresa· was set by a speech given in behalf of the newly established youth organi·, zation, A.R.O.Y. by Mr. John limbeson. It was the first tlme in a Church ' Congress that the second and third generation expressed powerfully the feelings of the younger members of the Church. The parish delegates, mootly advanced in years, were c8lIed to consider in their deliberations the · needs of the future. Among those needs the president of AROY: enumerated fuU freedom from outside interference and a well orgaoized _ Diocese headed by a Bishop who would understand the imperatives of the " ....

Ai was expected, Bishop Moldovan's case was first and uppermost on ' the Agenda. No voice was expressed in favor of what the former priest . Andrei Moldovan had done in order to become the Bishop of the Diocese.'

By unanimous vote: . a) the Congress gave full approval to the actions taken by the Epis· copate Council in defense of the Episcopate; b) condemned the entire procedure u!led by Andrei Moldovan and his . supporten in trying to impose hUn as a Bishop and to take over the _ assets of the Episcopate; c) solemnly declared that "it cannot and it will never accept Andrei · Moldovan as the titular spiritual head of the Episcopate"; . d) lastly. the Congress expressed "its dissatisfaction and deep sadness ~ caused by the method used by the present leadership of the Orthodox Church in Romania in dealing with a problem of such vitallmportanoe : to the Episcopate, and in which penonal and political interests weIe

138

giYCn pm:edence oYer the pennanent Interests of the Holy Orthodox Chweh." The painful experience in the case of Andrei Moldovan prompted a lon,

lLnd lively debate regarding the future relationship of the American Diocese with the Orthodox Church of Romania. Twelve (12) members of lhe Conpss prelellted a Resolution requeltina a totailk!paration of the Diocelll rrom the Patriarchate in Bucharest.

Que$tions wete Iud if this could be done without endangering the canonical !tatuJ or the Episcopate. The proponents of the ResolutlOD ~rgued that the Diocese was brought into a situation in which It has no

, ahemative but to Ict immediately. oilierwbe, there will no lon.r be I Rom,uian Orthodox Diooclll in America.

In concludinJ the debate the Congress unanimously adopted the follow-ing solemn: .

RESOLUTION

J. W1u!reas, ~ Romanlim Orthodox ptUishn and The Romanl4n Orthodox Episcopdle of America Iune IlU /Hen organized, supponed, and ltUIintllined by the faithful mDnben of 1M Romanilm Orthodox Faith, d tizens or resident! of the United Slates and of the Dominion of Catllld4.

2. Wlltrta.r. In order to tWUre the CtlnDniCtlI continuity GIld the Apo~ tolic SlIccenlon of 1114 Holy &lIlem Orthodox Orurch, the Rolf1lll'lUur Orthodox EplltX'pate of AmerkG, at the time of Its organlZ4tion, lutd asked to become a component part of the Orthodox OIurch of RomanltJ, and, at the same time, hIM1 rew red for herself the right to administer and to conduct her own flUflin flutonomously, through properly constituted OIurch Cbngreues, composed of the de/qatel of th4 Ptui$ha and also MIlth the exclu~ right /0 flbmiMte and elect its own bishop.

3. Whereas, foUowing the Instllilatton In Roman14 of Il C:1mmun/sl, dictfltOrlal, antl..chrlstiim and antl-democratk government, the Orthodox OIurch of RomQlfill:

4. is fib lofller free to preach the Word of God flbr to propogtJte the Ina te«hlngs of tM Holy Eastern Orthodox OIurch and her fflith

b. with comp/ete dilftgtUd for the organiziltional Sllltutes of our Epi3copt:lte, continuer to meddle in problems, 1114 solution of which II the exdusi..e right of the memben of our Epi3copt:lre

c. through her present iudu$hip, completely ensJal'ed by thy politiCtlI rulen, proptlgQteJ among our "llthfu] peopin here, idbU which are contrary to the free life conceptions and ideals held and respected by th4 American citizens-

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT;

1. ~ Romtlnlim Orthodox Episcopdte of AmeriCtl u hereby decland to /H completely autonomous, not only in III ildmlnlstNtive, but abo in the canonical (spiritual) affain and thus free from all rules, regulations,

139

ordm, decre~. elc., emanating from 1M Patriarch or from the Holy Synod of Romani4. •

2. The off/CIDI (legdJJ n.vne of OUT EpUcoptlte be changed {rom the pn#ntly used name 0/ ''77re Romanilln Orthodox Miflionary Episcopate . in AmerlCQ" to the name "The ROmllllUJn Orthodox Epi$COpate of Amm· : 01" (Diocese) and to reconJ all property, mobile and Immobile belonging 'i to the Episcopate in lhe new Mme. I

3. We reject aU claims mllde by the {omttl' print of Aleron, Ohio, Andni MoldoVtln, and all cl4tnu mllde by any other penon, with the 1 exception 0/ cloim:s made by persons decled by us to lOme office of 1 official polidon, to any poJirlon of authority or leiuJenJrlp in OUT Bpi$- i oopatt or to any right to tldmbtister, control or in fillY WIlY meddle In any 1 alIke offain orprobiemJofour Episcopate. .1

4. For the pre$UWltion of the canonical unity of (M Holy EtU/ern Orthodox OIU1'Ch, the Ro11Ull1f4n Orthodcx Episcopate of America shall . make new and Jtnngthen old connections and tin with all the other Orthodox Ouuchu of A.m6ica, which an fr« and which conform to the crmom o[ the Holy Eastem Orthodox 0wrdI.

5. The titular bishop of thu Romanian Orthodox EpiJCOpate of Amerl- . OJ JhQIl be nomlnllted and elected by the legally constituted Church Con- j

greu of Ihe Episcopate and wiD take o~r, with full authority the Ietldtr- ' ship and hebn of thil EpiJCOpate, afttr lulVing been COMecrtlted, ill con­formity with the CQIJon laM of the Orthodox OIurch, by at feast two (Z), . but preferably by three (3) canonical Bishops of the Orthodox QlUl'ch, \ and without any regard to IIny IIction of IIny kind, wNmoever, taken by the PDlriarch or the Holy Synod of the Orlhodox Quuch in Romani4.

Thil resolution WIlf adopted by the member! of the Oturch Corwesr wilh a deep genie of wneJS in our hurts, as we have come to the TeQfi- . ration thai the moment IUld arriped at which certain tie! with the "Old Country" nuut be broken. Well we know that the Romanian people are JU/ferlng under the weight of the het1\f)l chains of J/tnIery forced upon . them by II foreq/l , inhtmul1I power. We abo brow that mmry of the hier­Ql'CIu of the Orthodox Church 0/ Romanill, lVilness, with constUtltltton · and with deep concern /01' the future 0/ the Church lind for the spirltlJlll wei/are 0/ their jlocb, the impertinent interference 0/ the God.Jeu IOlIU11menll In the domain 0/ religion and spirlhuJl life, which are the ' speci/lc if not the eXM'Sil't concern 0/ the Orurch and 0/ her C1uistkm : -•.

For this TeQlOn we shall conIinuowly remember them in our pl'tl)'ers . and at OUl' religious ael'lli«s we will ceaaeJeuJy pray to God ''/or the bishops 0/ the Romanian Orthodox Qumh" and for their salvalion lind liberation. .

But we Ctl1Inot and do not wanl to maintain relations in the future with Orurch authorities whlt:h, under the preuure of political force, are no , longer able to respect the righl o/man to be free, II God-gil'tn right which ', for us, citizens 0/ the New World and of our adopted countriel, iI guar-

140

onteed by the cofWitutiom of the countrks In which we live,lUId we feel that it is oUT:socnd duty to defend and PTf!JUVe this right and if Mce.r:sory 10 fight in order to make people respect it and to help people enjoy it, even in countries where it is yet unknown and more so in countries In which it iJ be/III ruthlessly trompied . ..

As further proof that this Resolution exprmer the vote and consent of the delegates, it WIZI signed by the following: Rev. John Trul%o, President; Rev. John Stoniw, Secretary; George R. Gallriw, Vasile fucai, flallie Meli4n, Nicolae SlIoghi, Rev. E/ie G. Ghenie, George Albean, George YOishan, Sam TorlIut, Theodore Drotu, George 1Yrleo, Rev. Nestorllut Cicala, Nicolae Muntean, Rev. Nicolae Moldovan, Dr. WalleT Musto, Simion Sueur, Rev. flicior &riJuie.rcu, Don Rogozeo, Rev. Paul Oaciun, Sr., Fndmck faHev/cl, Nick Duda, Re}!. Coriown /.racu, Filip Toconita, Rudi Non, Rev. Alexondru GUcu, lAzar Lina, Archimandrite Daniel Maxim, AlextJndru Suiigo, Teodor fulca, amstontln Crucian, James Szillrghi, Rev. Stefan At. Opreanu, Re}!. Marin Pouelnlc, Rev. John Popo­viei, Joseph J. Oaciun, George Bate/on, Bucur Binlg, Rev. Eugene Lazar, Motel Mgnn, Jiarion Mororiu, Dr. Nico1ae C. Ne~, George Draghiclu, Vasile Bobanga, Nicolae Dragos, Rev. Vasile Halegan, Rev. Joan Surducan, Virgil Suciu, Walter Popescu, Rev. flie Motu, ArChimandrite Teo{l1 lone.rcu, Joan JndreiCtl, George JvalCU, Dr. Nlcolae Sueur, Tomo F/eaka, Petru MunIClUt, loan Sa/Hlu, George Bogdan, Nick Buto, Michael Tifrea, loan C. Serban.

The next important matter on the Agenda of this Congress was the rtvision and the adoption of the By-Laws- The amendments adopted are significant insofar as, in addition to strenghtening the autonomous status of the Diocese, the new By-Laws provide riahts for women in the parish membership and clearly deflOed the powers, authority and the responsi­bilities of the Bishop. Further the By-Laws recognized the demands of the younger generation by including the National President of AROY as an ex~mcio member of the Episcopate Council.

Once the Congress defined the relations or the American Diocese with the Romanian Patriarchate and adopted the revised By-Laws, the road was opened for the major debate for which this Congress was caUed into session-the election of a Bishop.

The Episcopate Council eune forward with the recommendation that a Vicar-Bishop be elected and that the election be made between the two candidates: Archimandrite Stefan Lucaciu and Mr. Viorel D. Trifa, veri­fied as qualified and acceptable by the Council.

Although the general consensus of the Congress was that a solution to

I, the leadership problem of the Diocese be found, some voices were raised

regarding the advisability of electing a Bishop as long as Bishop Policarp was stillllvlog. ThiI however, did not provoke a major debate. The ques­tion that was 10 be decidt:d was another one: if the candidacy should be limited to the two (2) candidates recommended by the Council or to have It opened to nominations from the floor.

141

A motion was made to rescind the previous decision of the Congress in Philadelphia by virtue of which clergy serving under the jurisdiction of the , Diocese in America shall not be accepted as candidate$. After a lively and spirited debate on the subject, the motion to rescind the Philadelphia decision was defeated with 53 votes against and 8 VOles for.

The electoral session of the Congress was called for the evening of July 2nd. The ruess period was characteristic of a pre..e1ectoral assembly. Small caucusses were held and judgment was passed on the candidates. A quite vocal campaign against the candidacy of Mr. Viortl D. Trifa whose age was · held against him. appeared to incline the balance toward the election of Archimandrite Stefan Lucaciu. The finaJ result of the vote was however: Archimandrite Lucaciu 26 votes and Trira 34; one abstention. The motion to declare Mr. Twa elected unanimously was enthusiastically · adopted by the Congress.

Cailed before the Congress to record his acceptance, the 8ishop~lect I Viore! D. Trifa told the delegates: l

I accept the holy mission to which you have elected me with deep j' emotion. I say emotion and not joy- not because wmebody's elec· tion QS Bishop should not be a joyful QCCIlslon- but because I am ;, , perfectly aware of the difficult burden you are placing upon my ,I shoulders. It Is a task I did not ask for nor do I desire. Those here prnent could be my witnesses that I did not requut anyone to I nominate me or to vote for me. When prominent persona/itres from the Romanian-American communities like Mr. Rudi Nlm, Fr. John J

Ttutza, Fr. John Stanlla and o thers asked me at the beginning of the year to consider a candidacy to the bishopric, I answered that maybe God will Indicate to them another individual more suitable for such an office and I tried to impresson them that the Rotnllllian Orthodox Episcopate of America will only partlafly wive in problems through the election of a Bishop.

Nevertheless, God willed that such a task fall upon me and destiny prevailed that once more in my life I shall renoun« myself and my personal interests for a cause. The will of God be therefore done.

You know and I have been infonned that from the moment that my name was mentioned asan eventual candidate to the Bishopric a campaign of hatred, lies and falsehoods has been initiated against me. Many pamphlen and many leiters have been circulated with denuru:iations that have reached up to the FedertJJ authorities. Voicu have been hem:l even in this hall. I am 8Ilt4/ied that the source of those sklnderous attacks Is to be found with those that are neither Americans nor of the Orthodox faith and whose purpose is 10 preJ1ent the consol1dation of the Romanian Orthodox EpfscQpate of America. Not one word would have been said 4gainst me if fate wouM not ""lie brought me to SOUA or CIllled me to the mission that you are entrusting me today.

142

For the slDnderers I have no explonation to gille, but you, the Reverend ckrgy of the Episcopate and you the parlm delegates, may be llnured that if I would have on my conscience the $I1UI/ie$l blot. I would have never accepted to become yOUT spiritullileader.

It is $IIid tlult in the past I war active in politia and that I om punuing the MIlle coune. Reference iJ mJIIie to my ptUt activity in the notionaliJtle movement of the Romanian youth. I know that for twenty yf!llTs leftist element: fTom OUT ethnic group in America hove been at the leadenhip of the Romonilz~Amerlcan fTlltemol soc/etia and hove controlled mtIIIy Romanitln publicllliotu. [)oy by dlJy tMIt elements hllve hmnmered the mind of the AmeriCtU1S with the idea that the youth of RomoniIJ is ',/lJSCist and criminol. " I am mention­ing this here not with the PWPOle to iJlject into this Omgrm Romonilln politics or to defend political deeds from there, but beCOUle I 1uzve to tell you IMt you dwukJ not be ilwmed of the younger generation of Romania. The Romanian students were neither FlJSCists, noT Nazis, nOT criminllu. They were lUltlonalists who fought tIS they could for their inherited Faith ilnd fOT the betterment of their country.

Penonolly. I lived those tima in ROmtlllilz, and I was even en· trusted with the JetJdership of thoWlUlds of university students orga­nized in the Notional Union of the Romonian Christtan Students. In all my activities I have not done anything of which to be ashamed today. I did not Ult violence against anyone, lluzve not peneculed anyone becaule of his Teligion, I Juzve not killed anyone. I have not assisted in any crimiMl IIct and I Mve not Cilused ""Yone to commit !lUch acts. '17ult I WJIS natiolUZlistic and anti.QJmmunistlc is flUe. I am telling you this beCilult there is still time faT you to withdTflW yOUT trust in me, if you consider what I did in Romonilz during my youth tIS a crime.

A program of future activity I cannot pi'eltnt to you today 0$ I did not know tMtl will be elected. We will meet in the future and discuss that subject. During the past year I had close contact with the struggles befaUen OUT Romanian Orthodox Church in AmerlCil. Many of the problems in need of a solution are known to me. I am aware of all this and I nolize that by entrwting to me the leadership of the Episcopate you have SlICTificed a young Ii/e. But this is not enough. If you wiJ/ not put shouldeT to shoulder to help me, I will not be able to do the nuuty things that need to be done.

If everyone of you returns home without furtheT caring about the problems of the Episcopate. my cross will be too heavy. Only by working together we could succeed and achieve deeds pleasing unto God. Counting on this, ;t would be easier faT me to renounce my penonal hopes and a family li/e so tluzt beginning todJly I am IeTVe

excbuively OUT Holy Orthodox Church. More than ten (10) Yf!llTS have ptUled since I have kist seen my

143

home and my paTenn and even totiDy my mother calUlot rejoice in the knowledge that her ron nuzy become a b&hop, because I Waf not able to rees14blish any con/act with them.

I pray God thaI the Owrch ltunily you fJI'e giving me todtly lor life, will be also compen:Jlltion lor the /fJlTlily I loa' in Romania.

(Excerpl$ from the tu:eepllJllt:e speech given by Mr. Viorel D. Tri/a at the (Jlicago Congress).

The strife lor !:be ordination 01 the Biabopoelect

The process of electing a Bishop, difficult u it WIS, solved only one-half of the problem to provide a spiritual leader for the Diocese. The Bishop­elect, Mr. Viorel D. rufa, was a graduate with distinction from the School ­of Theology of the University of Jassy, Romania. He had a record of active : missionary work in Romania, but he was not ordained IS a priest. After graduating from the theological school, he did post graduate work In ; Philosophy and literature and planned for a career in journalism and lay missionary work in the frame of a religious revival association in Romania "The Army of the Lord" founded by his uncle, the Rev. Fr. losif Trifa of ) $hlu. ,

Steps had to be taken ror his ordination. There were no other ' Romanian Bishops in America, and, considering the circumstances, no one ·. expected that some Bishops from Romania would come to ordain him. "

The first petition for the ordination or the Bbhop.elect went to the : Greek Archdiocese of North and South America. This was motivated by . the fact that in 1939, when Bishop Policarp left for Romania, he uked ' Archbishop Athenagoras, at that time head of the Greek Orthodox ' Churches in America, to give spiritual assistance to the Romanian Diocese in the absence of the Bishop. Archbishop Athenagoras complied and even ordained one priest, Fr. Vasile Hategan of New York, and blessed the new Romanian Orthodox Chapel which later became the church of the ' Romanian community in New York. -

At this time Archbishop Athenagoras was Ecumenical Patriarch of:' Constantinople. The head of the Greek Archdiocese in America was Arch- : bishop Michael. A formal request wu addressed to him and he indicated that, personally, he agrees that "lhis would be the best solution."

Direct contacts were established with the Ecumenical Patriuch Athen- . agoras in Constantinople, who hinted however that "

The policy o/maintaining good relationship with other Orthodox Autocepluzlom Olluc/tes might be II hindrance in the way 01 accee­ding to the requut 0/ the ROmlllfian Diocese in America.

In fact, on July 23, 1951, Archbishop Michael wrote to Father John Trutza, the president or the Episcopate Council the following letter:

144

,

. -. -,

Dear Rev. Filther:

In 4111wer to your leller of July 12th received at OIi~,1 haw to reUyou that on 111)' turlvtIlin New York I wired to Hb AII·HolinnJ the &umenlctll PtlIrltuch tlSking permission for the con.secration of Mr. V/orel Trifa.

The PtltrUuch'l amwet' 1'tCeived thil momillg WIll in the negative. Regretting therefoft for not being tIbIe to lUIut you tI1fd praying utmlt/y to the Almighty God for your guidmu:e to the benefit of the RomIlnilzn Orthodox Orurch in America, I am

Youn Ilncuely in OUT Lord (.figned) A.rtbbisbop M.1ch.=! Greek Archdloce.fe of North and South AmeriCil.

After the negative answer by the Greek Archdiocese the Episcopate Council decided to direct its efforts for the ordination of the candidate through other channels.

First in the picture came the Romanian Metropolitan Vlsadon PuN, who lived in France and was peE:SQnaUy acquainted with Mr. Viorel Trifa, the Bishop-elect. Metropolitan Visarion, infonned about this, replied through two (2) letters. On August 16, 1951 he WIote:

Dear Tri/a, Sometime tIgO you helped me and now, considering the lilWltion

in which you find younelf, / intended to mist you.-tllthouih the vineyard is no longer produ.ctiJie-but I see IhIlt Ihe obll4cle.f I'tli.fl!d in fronl of you tue 1I(.fO directed agaimt me. Sevend dilYI ago, / receiwd three (3}Jetten: one with thequmion i/it is true IhDt I am coming to the Uniled Sl4ta to participtlte in your ordlflQtlon, con· cluding, til the other two (2), thlll it would be II "crime" to do.fUch a thing.

I am also told tlult for the !lime retI$OfI / will be Iuurzned by II Jewish Committee which. ellen withou.t thil. hIu put up relutllnce to my ent'l'tUl« into the United Statel .fOmet/me tIgO. and which ducrlbes you til a "crlminlll without the right to the prielthood. II

The letter was concluded with the remark that he will still think oYer the situation.

On October IS, 1951, Metropolitan Visarion gave his defutite reply by writing:

Informed of 10 numy ob,tllCw raUed DgtIinJt you by politici4ns and of Ihe fury of the opposite group which hal no Intention for petzee and conlidtrlng llult my si~re lnreiJient/on mq provoke diullt4{lIction with both IIdJienariel. in$ttlld of helping a peaceful IOlution-/ I« mJl.felf forced to nep alide, permitting other facton

145

to intervene with their authority to bring the needed peace In the Diocese. "

.1

I For the eventuality that Metropolitan Visarion would have responded l

affumative1y, preliminary contacts had been established with Metropolitan i Anastase from the Synod of the Russian Chureh Outside Russia, a per­sonal friend of Metropolitan Visarion, to concelebrate at the ordination. Informed about the decision taken by Metropolitan Visarion and asked if the Synod Outside Russia would consider the ordination, Metropolitan Anastase replied that he considers the Romanian Churches outside Romania under the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Visarion and conse­quent1y would not interfere without specific request from Metropolitan . Visarion.

The next choice of the Episcopate Council was the Syrian.Antlohian <

Diocese headed by Metropolitan Anthony Bashir who was familiar with the happeninp in the Romanian Diocese, due to his special interest in the welfare of the Orthodox Churches in America. Metropolitan Anthony did . not reply officially to the letter addressed to him by the Episcopate Coun· • ciI, He suggested however, otT ·the record, that the Romanian Oioce!le , should contact Metropolitan l.eonty from the Russian Metropoiia in the . tJni.ted States. The same suggestion was made to the Episcopate Council by a good friend of. the Romanian Oioce.stl. the late Episcopal Bishop . Lauriston Scaife of Buffalo, New York. Consulted about this. even the ' Greek Archbishop MJchael considered it a good idea adding that "Metro-. , politan Leonty has an irregular position of independence but still is In , commuruon with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and with the Greek Ortho­dox Church in America,"

An exploratory letter had already been sent to Metropolitan Leonty on ' July 26. 1951. Now, closer contacts were established with him and the '" matter of ordaining the candidate was brought on the Agenda of the' meeting of the Council of Bishops held in New York City on October ' 18·23, 1951,

In the session of October 19th, the following was decided:

The Council of Bishops of the North AmeriaJn Merropollttmllte discussing Ihe petition of the RontlUllan Church in the United States IuJd decided the following: .

In lItew of the facr thar the Greek and Syrian Orurche$ in the United States have declined the care for the Romanian Diocese, which wus rucertained at a special meeting conference held with them on October 10, and lhilt Ihe R011Ul1l1im parishes were formerly a part of the Ruman Metropolitanote; mlizing the urgency or 0rga­

nize these parishes, which find it impossible owing to the present political circumnances of being in administratillf! $Ubordinotion to the R011Ul1lian Patriorclwte, it i$ desirable to offer to tholt! parishes

• , ,

to become ptlTt of our North AmeriCiln Metropolitllflllle which i$ • willing to grant them the right of seif..gollfmment OJ Q special

146

adminutnltive church unit, headed by a Bishop established by oW' Metropolitmwte, in accotdance with the Romanilm peoples church cotUCioUIIneu.

Conditions /OT organizinl such a Romanian Diocese in the United States ore: .

1. Omanical, during the church services, mentioning of the l14me of the Metropolitan of the territory. 2. Obtaining the Holy Otrism from the MetropolittlJ1llte. 3. The JHlTticipation of the Bishop of the ROmllnilJn Diocese In the silling$ of the Council of Bishops of the MetropoliltlfUlte. 4. Panlclpillion tlccotding to their metlfU in the. needs qf the Metropolitmwte. S. Giving every six months in/ormation on the a"uch life of the Dioce3e to the Metropolililntlte. 6. Living on the territory of the United States and $piritually guiding American citizens of RomanilJn des«nt th~ RomanilJn Diocese mwt not fUTlher ~ the title 0/ "mill:sionary. " . 7. The Bishop of the ROm4llilJn Diocese will betu the title 0/ Bishop of Lansing and Michigan.

Acting Secrettuy of the Metropoliltln Council.

Very Rev. John Semanitzky.

Following this decision. the President of the Episcopate Council, Pro John Trutza, presented himself to the Council of Bishops in session to­gether with the Bl!hop-eJect, Mr. Viorel D. Trifa and declared themselves in agreement with the stipulated conditions with the exception of the title of the Bishop and the frequency of Diocesan reporn to the MetropoUa.

In its session of October 23rd, the Council of BWlops (Art. 21)

RESOLVED

In a leiter from the Romaniizn Consistory agreeing with the fun· dilmentai point! of the conditiens presented to the Consistory, the Sobor Ites the sign of God', providence in the organization 0/ the Orthodox OIurch in AmeriCG and there/ore the requested chtmges ore accepted and the SaboT rew lllts to continue the intercoune with the representatives 0/ the Romaniizn Diocese in the United Sttltes of America tlnd requires:

(I. An act signed by the offictals affirming the acceptance of the conditions 0/ the Metropolio with the above·mentioned correc­lions.. b. That the ctmdid4te elected at the Congress, Mr. Viorel D. Tri/a. present a petit/()n to the Sobor of Bishops requesting tlult they ordain him to the Holy Orders and tonsure him for mon­asticism; accompanying the petition an act of hi: election. C. Present complete Information from the Romanian Consl$lDry

147

in the United SUItS pt7ll1inillg to the m4intM4llCe of the newly­electt:d bishop. d. After ncdvUW all the facts according to the llbolle-mentioned pointJ, they must tuJc HiJ Gra«, the MetropOlitlllt, to set the onIer and time of lhe tonsure for mOllllJt/dsm and to the e/e­Noon to the Flnl two rrmkI 01 prielthood bttlWrn NOl1mIw 17 and 21, 1951. in the city of INtroit. ~ nomiNItion and con· AXiation to the rank of Bishop, in agreemmt with the petition of the Romanian Consistory, it to be pnj'ormed in the clwrch of the Holy Trinity in Youngstown; inllitationl for fhl! conJe(;l'otion to be #nl to neruby bishops, according 10 the Metropolitan's de­cWon. t, Commlulon the Com/story to provide Epl$copaJ vnlmen" and J/a/f and ow pre$ellt the order 0/ nomiNI/1on and con#­CTtItion to biJhop in two (2l IIIngu*, (Englbh and Romanilln) tmd litt the order of Installation accordm, to the customs of the Romanilln Ouuch.

•

I

I ! • , ~ l

l Fonnalitaes beinl completed, on October 31, 1951, the Episcopate I

Council received the fonowing telegram:

In reference to the Romanian Oturch the Council of 8ishops Nu decided thot the cortsef:'ation 0/ the Rom(llfilm IJUhop will tofu place in Younptown on NovembeT 22nd.

The /ollowlng BiJhoPI ~ been de#gnDted to o/flCiate: The MOll ReJI. Metropolitan Leonty The Right ReJI. BUhop John 0/ Detroit and Qeveklnd. The third Bishop will be appointed by the Metropolitan at a kiter

date. After the t:oruulutlon of the Romanian BUhop, The Most ReJI.

Archbishop Michael of tM Greek Church and The Most ReJl. Metro­politan Anthony 0/ the Syrian CJrurch- wiU be notified.

Acting Secrettuy 0/ the Metropolitan Council

Very ReJI. John Sem.utUy . .

Following lhc telegram, invitations were sent out and preparations were ' made throughout the Diocese for a large participation of clergy and parish delegates.

Two weeks later, on November 16th, Father Trutza receiwd another telegram:

On account of illnw of Metropolitan Leonty I revet to inform you tlult the ceremony of Miination will hIl've to be postpOned.

Rel't1't:nd Joim Semlllittky. Secntruy Metropolitan Council 0/ the Ruman Orthodox Orurch of NMth America.

Although It wu a known ract that Metropolitan leonI)' was advanced in age. strong suspicion prevailed that the iJ.Iness might be • diplomatic

148 ,

• •

one. nus was confirmed on November 30, 1951, by the following tele· gram received by Father Vasile Hategan, the Romanian parish priest in New York City :

In tuXOrdmtce with decirion of Council of BisIw,n held November 2/$/ and 22nd in &:nton, Metropolitan Uonty wi/lltOt be able to discuss qlM3tion of consecration of Romanian Bishop until they wUl receive Ilecessory go~nmetlt reportl.

AJexlllder Bez.smtttnY, lecrtttuy.

What had happened .Is that immediately after the election of Mr. Viorel D. Trifa IS Bishop, a most vicious personal campaipl wu initiated against him by Bishop Andrfll Moldovan's group. Periodicals like: EPISCOPIA, TRIBUNA, CREDINTA, seconded by a Romanian-American !ertist news­paper ROMANUL AMERICAN of Detroit, were distributed In thousands of copies with headlines and full pages of slanderow attacks against the Bishop·dect . Among others he was accuted of being a "Nazi and Fascist," Ihal he wu mmied with the wife liring In Romania, that he is a heretic who converted to Roman Catholicism and that he was Involved in anti· Jewish atrocities during the time he was the national president of the University Students of Romania. To add weight to their allegationJ, Bi&hop Moldovan penonally appealed for assistance to the Romlllian Jewish Federation in New York . TI1ere they found a certain Dr. Charles Kramer ready to jOin them in the campaign. Dossien were compUed with all kinds of statement. and false decluations and presented to the Imml· gratlon and Naturaliz.atlon District of New York.

When news of the scheduled consecration in Youngstown, Ohio, Clrne out, they called Metropolitan Leonty telling him that the Blshop-eJect .Is going to be deported in a nutter or weeks and thererore, his consecration .sbouJd be stopped. As proof they told the Metropolitan to contact Inspector Solomon from the INS in New York.

True, the reply from Inspector Solomon was that the Immigration Service is in possetsion of I ''voluminous incriminatory nle." Hence, the decision of the Metropolitan to postpone the consecration appeared natural.

Inrormed about this, Mr. Viore1 D. Trifa contacted through his attorney th( INS office in New York and requested an explanation_ He further offered to submit voluntarily to an examination under oath. The offer wu accepted and he was examined for three (3) days (December 4·6,1951) In th( offices of the Immigration Department in New York. All accusations were brought up and answen were given to all questions. 1be accusations were proven unfounded and the case was closed_

Following the closing of the cue with the brunigration Department, the Episcopate Council petitioned Metropolitan Leonty for a new date of consecration. The response came in the form of a letter to Father John Trutza from the Metropolitan Council, which aald:

149

February 12.1952 R~tld Father:

At the Cbuncil 0/ Bishop: con...ened in plenary session it was decided to tUkevery parish 0/ Ihe Romanian Orthodox Church in America #eking affiliation with our church. to indjpidually preU!nt to His Eminence the Most Reverend Metropolitan Leonty a properly documented official excerpt 0/ the minutes of their respective parishes mtIIIifesting desire to pkzce themselves under the church jurisdiction of His Eminence the Moy RelJel'end Metropolitan Leonty. Every pgrish priest must 01$0 individuldly petition [or acceptance. You are hereby requested to convey thiJ decision 0/ the Sobor o{you; Bishops to aU )'Oura/lilwted priesn and parishes.

(Signed) Very R~. John Semanitzky Member of the Metropolitan Council (Signed) Rev. Joaepb Pishtey Secretary 0/ the Metropolitan Ccuncil

,

,

, • •

• -. This )etter was interpreted by the Episcopate Council as a veiled pressure to force the Romanian parishes to deaJ directly with the Metro­polia by-passing the Episcopate Council Some parishes were consulted 00',

the subject and the response was "that no one win comply with such Ii ' request." "

• • Infonnal conversations with the Chancery of the Metropolia appeared to indicate that the Metropolia would like only to be sure that the parishes · consent to the oldination of the Bishop.elect.

Consequently I a statement by each individual parish was prepared say- , -~, .

The Episcopate Council of our Episcopate is urged to execute without further del4y the decision taken in the Electoral Congress, held on July 3, 1951, at Chicago, by moktng immediIJte intervention for the consecration of Mr. Viorel D. Trl/a as bishop of our Epi,.. coate.

"

,

The text did not meet with the approval of the Chancery of the Metro.:. polia because on March 6, 1952. the fonowing letter was received by,. Father Truw: '

Reverend Detu Father: Please instruct your every parilh which is desirous of affiliating

with our MetropoJia 10 complete one of the appended forms and return some to this office. as early as possible.

Our further action in this matter will depend entinly upon your complianct with the above request.

(slgnedjRelJ. J08eph Pisbtey Secretary.

ISO

,

I

The Episcopate Council did not comply and Father Trutza requested to he heard at the next session of the Council of Bishops. He. and the cand!· !.late. were received for a few minutes of explanation at the April 1.3. 1951. session of the Council of Bishops.

The result was. however, that the Great Sobot of Bishops

consented to receil'f! under their Cllooniall ;uriadjction the Roml1llwn Orthodox ptlrimes but finds it impossible. at the present time, to consecrate Mr. Viorel D. Trjfa as Buhop.

It was noted that the Metropolia was addreSSing itself to "the Romanian parishes" and not to the Episcopate Council. The name of the Episcopate was not even mentioned in the Great Sobor of Bishops. This procedure ended, for the time being, the contacts between the Romanian Diocese and the Russ1an Metropolia.

It should be mentioned here that the search for a solution leading to the ordination of the Bishop-elect was complicated also by other factors.

In addition to the special circwnstances of the Romanian Diocese, per· sonalities and jurisdictional claims were intertwined here in the United States in a very complex situation. The leadership of the Romanian Diocese was striving to get brotherly assistance from canonically estab· lished Orthodox jurisdictions in America without entering into permanent commitments regarding the future of the Diocese. The break with the Mother Olwch in Romania decided at the Congress in Chicago was forced upon the Diocese by the events. It was a real separation but deep inside the leaders of the Episcopate entertained the hope that political changes might occur in Romania giving the Romanian Patriarchate the possibility to act free of political interferences. Hence, the very cautious approach to the subject of jurisdictional arrangements with the Orthodox Churches in America.

Such an attitude gave the adversaries an overhand in arguing the non­interference principle. This was strongly supported also from Bucharest. The Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Olurch was following closely the events in America with' the assumption that Bishop Andrei Moldovan has been accepted by the majority of the people and that the ordination of the candidate elected in Chicago could be prevented. In. the Fall Session of the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church. held on November 12, 1951, a report was presented on the situation of the Episcopate in America. After hearing the report by the Commission on External Affairs of the Patriarchate the Holy Synod decided:

1. The Holy Synod acknowledges, with thank!, the porental care which Patriarch JustiniDn"iv taking for the spiritual progreS$ and even for the material one, of the Episcopate of the ROnlllnians from the two AmeriCII$. 2. The Holy Synod takes note of the warm reception which the clergy and lay members of America have gill'e1l to His Grace Bislwp Andrei upon hh arrival from the Mother Country.

lSI

3. 17te Holy Synod. likewise. takeJ note 0/ the efforts nwde by Bishop Andrei Moldovan and by his dloce$tl1l organsfor the occupa­tion of the DIoce$tl1l Headquarters at the "Romanian Vatra" and abo 0/ his missionary activity through which the prestige 0/ the Episcopate u being consolidlJted. and also the prestige of the JJishop and that of the Ronumlan Orthodox (}aUl'ch of AmeriCQ. 4. 17te Holy Synod Mlces note of aU the Interventlom l1UIde by Patri4rch Justinian In connection with the interference of some foreign hierarchs In the spirilUlli aftan 0/ the epiScopate of the Romanians in America and authorizes the Patri4rch Justinian to con· tinue to be watchful with the lOme love fOT the well-being of this Episcopate. 5. The Holy Synod condemns the U/ega/ action at (}aicago of the "trutzilts . .. (Minutes of the Holy.synod of November 12. 1951. om No. 22J25/195Jt

The ordination or the new Bishop takes place in PbHedelphiL

While the" discussions with the Russian Metropolia were dean of the Eastern District of the Diocese. the Very Popovicl, had established contacts with the Metropolitanate Ukrainian Orthodox Churches of the United States of America, headed the Most Reverend Metropolitan John Theodorovich. Sharing with Ukrainians the plight of his Diocese, Father Popovid found at Ukrainian Church leaders a tota] understanding of the problem and even ." willingness to offer a helping hand.

The Episcopate Council sounded officially the possibility, 'and response was positive. A letter from Metropolitan Theodorovich said fact:

March 3,1952 My Beloved JJrothers in OIrtst, OUT Redeemer:

It Is a pleasure /0 inform you that YOUT petition fOT OUT help to your Owrch- the Romanian Orthodox EpiSlXJpate of AmeriCtl-by consecration of yoUI' CtlndidlJte for JJishop into the bishophood was duly deliberated upon by OUl' Synod of JJishotn and the consistory of our OIurch and we aU Cilme to the declnon to grant yOUT petition.

Herewith I In/onn you that the bishops of our C71urch will con· aecrate YOUT CIlndidlJte.

The Metropolitan even suggested the dates of ordination to be March 10-16, 1952, in the Romanian Church in Philadelphia.

The Episcopate Council aclcnowledged with gratitude the letter, through a telegram sought a delay in the time or ordination. There two (2) reasons for this position: on one side the CoWlcil wu still

1S2

that the response from the Rupian Metropolia would be positiYO; on the other side the question was raised in the Council regarding the canonical status of Metropolitan Theodorovich and the Ukrainian Orthodox Oturch.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the United States encompessi"8 OYOr 100,000 members considered itself autonomous, which autonomy was not fonnally recognized by other Orthodox Churches throughout the world. Metropolitan Theodorovich himself was consistently under the accusation that he is a ' 'self-made'' bishop, having started his hierarchical rank from Vasyl lipkivsky, who became the leader of the Ukrainian Church in 1921 through laying-on-of-bands by priests since no bishop was available to comecrate him. Clarification of this Important matter was mandatory before prl)(:Uding with the ordination.

A study commission was appointed and, after weeks of research and consultation, the conclusion was reached that while the canonical autonomy of the Ukrainian Church could be in doubt, the Apostolic Succession of its hleruchs'could be traced to the regular orders of Metro­politan Dionysius of Warsaw, the head of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church in Poland which was in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople and also with the Romanian Orthodox Church in Romania. Metropolitan Theodorovich himself stated that he considers the lipkivsky episode as a tragic period in the Ukrainian Church history and that he himself has regularized his hierarchical pc»I.tion by consecration as a Bishop in August 27, 1949 here In the United States.

Slated to concelebrate with Metropolitan John for the consecration of the Romanian Bishop were Archbishop Mstyuav of New York and Bishop HeMady of Chicago. Both traced their ordinatiOlU to Bishops ordained through the Polish Orthodox Church.

Satisfied that, according to the data available at that time, the Aposto­lic Succession of the Ukrainian hierarchs was In order and after receiving the negative response from the RussiJn Metropolis., the EpQcopate ColUlcil accepted wholeheartedly the Ukrainian offer to ordain the Bishop-elect.

This acceptance was also strengthened by the fact that no conditions whatsoever were impaled by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church on the Episcopate or its parishes in exchange of consecrating the .Btshop-elect.

1he date ror consecration was let for the Bright Week ending on Sun­day, April 27; 1952.

News of the scheduled ordination reached the Romanian Patriarchate and resulted In the foHowing telegram received by Metropolitan John Theodorovlch:

The Holy Synod of Ihe R onumlan Orthodox Owrch Mel not consent to the con$«fQtion. of Viord Tri/a 4f iJWwp Stop Your ptII1icipation in the CQn!ecratlcn of Trlfa will be CQnddered tU an inter/ennce in the tif/airs of our Owrch and you will be punWred according to the EcummicaJ OIurch Rules with lhe DismIsJtJJ from your Holy~.

(Signed) Justinian Patriarch of Romanill.

153

Parallel to this action from Bucharest Bishop Moldovan voiced Strong opposition through telegrams and telephone calls to Metropolitan Theodo­rovich. He repeated the usual allegations that: "Trifa is married with the wife living in Romania, forsaken by him ; that he was the commander the Iron Guards in Romania -and. is only a "stooge" of Father Trutza; etc.

To add some weight to his opposition Moldovan contacted on April , 1952, Dr. Charles Kramer from New York, who, according to his own confession, sent a telegram of protest to the inunigration Service to inter­cede to prevent the ordination of Mr. Trifa.

The consecrating Bishops were also harassed through anonymous and threatening telephone calls, but they did not back down.

While this was going on, the candidate was spending his time at QlUlch in Philadelphia, for the Resurrection Services and was spiritually for his ordination.

The special religious services, including the Divine Uturgles for the ordination, started on Friday, April 25th in the in Philadelphia. While the Vesper Service was in interrupted by Federal Marshalls who, accompanied lawyers served Metropolitan John; the Bisho~lectj Father dent of the Episcopate Council and Father John Popovici, the local with a Federal Court Order enjoining the above-mentioned "from oono "ole ing the consecration and ordination festivities of Viorel Trifa as and/or Vicar· Bishop for the Romanian Orthodox ~"',, The -Order was signed by Judge AIlIU1 K. Grim of the Stales District of Pennsylvania upon a petition by Bishop Andrei Moldovan.

The intervention of Bishop Moldovan did not come as a surprise anyone, but the restraining Court Order was another matter. Hurried counsel was sought through the Philadelphia parish's lawyer, . J. Xlioger. The attorney tried to contact Judge Grim but he had left bench and the city inunediately after signing the Order on Friday noon at the closing,of the Court business.

Consultation with other lawyers and judges led to the conclusion the Com Order itself violated the First Amendment or the ern,"''"'" of the United States guaranteeing the free exercise of religion.

Although deeply concerned about the consequences, the advised to proceed with the consecration and then wait fOr the reaction the Court.

This was done on Saturday and Sunday with the three (3) hierarchs offiCiating, assisted by a large number of Romanian Ukrainian priests and deacons. Members of the Episcopate Council hundreds of parishioners from Philadelphia and from out of town w.n present at the solemn moment when the Bisho~lect Viorel D. Trifa given the new name of Valerian and when he was entrusted with pastoral staff.

The spiritual joy and the satisfaction that fmally the Episcopate Bishop, was tempered only by the fact that the consecrating BishoPs

. . 1S4

the newly consecrated 8i$hop were summoned in Court on April 30, 1952 10 anNe, the charge of Contempt of Court. The helrinS before Judge Grim wu I dmnltic one. Bishop MoldoVln's Ilwyers, joined by the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania as "amicus curile," pressed for citation for criminal contempt. Attorney for the defendants, MlJdmillillll J. Klinger, took the stlllld and under oath de· clared thlt hb conscience dktlled him to Idvbe his clientJ that this was I religious let and thlt no Court hid the power 10 restrm.

AJ I result of !til declaration, the Court ordered the Oerk of the Court to include Mr. Kllnger IS a defendant. Justifying IUs position Mr. Klinger added:

I considutd thiJ thoroUlhly. I weighed it. I wdghed the act. I know what the act mQ}' meon. IIutd to reconcile my obligation to thiJ Court as an officer. I had to reconcile my obligation tIS a man to God, not a member of the .wne faith, sir. (N. R. Mr. Klinger was of Jewbh Relf&ionJ. It iJ that unfortuNltely or fortunately, khq1iJticoIly spttlking, com~lled me to tm the step that I did, tmd IItIY to Your Honor IItry resp«t[uUy tlull if I 'Nt7'( to take lhisstep agoln I am fl[raid that my conscl£nce would dictate tlult I ,ake It.

It took more than two (2) yean, until Septmtber 28, 1954, for Judge Grim to ponder over the cae and to dismiss it without fin~ the defendantJ, including Ittorney Klinger, in contempt.

The official enthronement of the newly ordained Bishop took place iii St. George Clthedral. of Detroit, on Sunday, July 6, 1952, during the lC1$ion of the annuli. Church Congress.

Thus ended the semh for I Bishop that started in 1947 and it took the Romanian Orthodox Episcoplte of America through some of the most dramatic moments in its history.

HiItorical Sequence I. Followin, Cbe enthronemenl of Bishop Valerian as Vkar.Bbbop and

actina head of the Diooeae, the Romanian Orthodox Epilcoplte went chroUjh I period of reGlalnizllion. The Selt of the Diocete wu estab­IiIhed It the Vatra Rom- eml in G~ I,b, Micblpn. The Constitution ud By-Lawa .. ere amended II ihe Church Conge. held in Canlon, Obio, In 1953. AdmlnirtradYely and canonically the Diocese ~m"aed in I status of autonomy up 10 1%0, when contacts were feeltablQhed with the RI' 'In Melropolia in the United States with the purpoee to ~JUlaize the Qilonical pOlilion of the Diooeae. 1be Grelt Coundl of Bilbops of the Metropolia, connned in New York on March 31, 1960, unanbnou!lly re.olved to accept the Rom_ian Orthodox Epilcopate of America under the canonical .;arildiction at the Metropolia and 10 recognize the Romanian Dioc:He .. I 'lmial ad.mmistntively -=If .. oveming IfOUP of

155

"r-''''l'II headed by • Bishop, elected by the Romanian national Cbuu:h ' 'IIngR:SS, in confonnity with its own By-laws. 1be Great Council of '

IIllIItops further exammed the status of Bishop Valerian, dedared itaelf ' o.:onvioced that he alway. acted m good faith, acoepted him into the jun. diction of the Metropolia and, in order to dUpeI any doubt about his origi .. aI comecralion, Metropolitan Leonty, assisted by Bishop Dimiby throuah the lIying-on of their hande, continued his Holy Orders. Come­quentty. the Holy Synoo invested him with the canonical right, the power and the authority to shepherd the Romanian Diocele as a member of the ., Holy Synod. The relations betwHn the Ruman Metropolil and the , Romanian Diocese wtle so beneficial to aU concerned that in 1970, when '. the R"man Orthodox Metropolia was legally and canoniCIIJ.y If8nted Autocepbaloul .IaCUs and thua became the Orthodox Church in America, ~ the Romanian Diocese was the first to acknowledge and to accept the ' jurisdiction of the newly established AutocephaJous Church, ;

2. Bishop Andrei Moklm8D, who unsuccessfully had tried to impose , himltlf as the Bishop and to control the IIS8tts of the Diocese, after losing in the courts, incorpOf1lted on September IS, 1953, a parallel Dklee., \ called The amon/cal Romanilln Orthodox MissIoniuy Episcopate in America. ne name WlIS ch ... ~ to The Romanian Orthodox MissiofUU'J' Episcopate in America on Apri124, 1963, ad to The ROmmlUJn Orthodox ' MissioTUU)' Archdiocese in America on August 6, I97S. However, alI.Joag " the way he pretended that his Diocese is the o,.uw one. He died in 1963 and aflef three yeas of vacancy. the Bishop's Throne of the Mi may Dioceflt was occupied by Archirmwlrite Victorin Ursache, appointed by, the Holy Synod of Romania in June 1966, and ordained on August 7, 1966 It WindlOf, Onlmo. The puaUtl Missionary Dioceflt under the " leadership of Bishop Victorin gained lOme strength through. the influx of priests specially selected in Romania but did not succeed to break the unity of the parishes loyal to the original Diocese. AtRmpts to unify the two Diootaes y,e.ae hindered by the insistence of the Romanian Patri-. archate in Bucharest that aU Romanian parishes should break their canonical relationship with the Orthodox Quach in America and jOin the . Romanian PatriarchaR. ,

3. Afler losing on aU grounds in their attempt to control or break the ~ ~~""igu;n'''' Dioceae, the Romanian Patriarchate, the Romaruan gowmment I' and the Minionary DioceIe in America concentrated on personal attacJr .. • ainsl Bishop Valerian. Through the services of the (.'bief Rabbi of 1 ROmanill, Dr. Mothe ROIleD, they succeeded to align with them lOme Jewish orpniz.ation, thus giving the campaign .. mst Bishop Valerian. political, religtous and even racial O'tatone.

,

IS6