The Ligonier Meeting was a meeting of 28 or 29 Orthodox Christian hierarchs in North America, specifically those affiliated with SCOBA, held November 30 to December 2, 1994, at the Antiochian Village in Ligonier, Pennsylvania. The bishops met together (many for the first time), held multiple sessions and presentations, and issued two statements, specifically on evangelism and on the notion of American Orthodox Christians being a "diaspora".
It was not strictly a council or synod per se, but it had many of the characteristics of a synod, particularly the conciliarity or sobornost which results in the meeting of the Church's bishops together in collegiality, referring to itself as an "episcopal assembly." The conference was presided over by Archbishop Iakovos of America, primate of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America and the SCOBA chairman.
History
Preparation The original idea for the meeting at Ligonier was generated in the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America some years prior to the invitation by SCOBA, according to the Romanian Archbishop Nathaniel Popp of Detroit:
The proposal was decided that the Orthodox Church in America, the Autocephalous Church, should issue an invitation to all hierarchs in North America to gather together in fellowship in order to come to know one another, face to face. Included would be even those who were not represented on SCOBA, meaning, at that time, the large Ukrainian Church.
What transpired is a matter of historical facts and chance. Some of the hierarchs considered that the forthcoming Millennium Celebration of the Evangelization of Rus should take precedence over this local meeting, and thus, an invitation from the Orthodox Church in America was postponed. On another occasion, the Holy Synod resurrected the same idea but a particular hierarch, not a member of the Orthodox Church in America, requested that an agenda was first necessary and so, the meeting was postponed for lack of a more defined purpose beyond the hierarchs getting to know one another and have general discussion about common problems and needs.
Thus it came to be that, to its credit, the invitation came from the SCOBA which, through its efforts organized and brought about this meeting in Ligonier. Only hierarchs who had representation in SCOBA were invited, and thus the informal gathering envisioned by the Orthodox Church in America came to be a more formal meeting of those hierarchs who were in mutual "canonical" communion with each other. Thus, some of the hierarchs now represented in SCOBA were not then present for the meeting.
At Ligonier In November 1994, the invited hierarchs assembled at the Antiochian Village in Ligonier, Pennsylvania, hosted by Metropolitan Phillip of the Antiochian Archdiocese and presided over by Archbishop Iakovos of America, primate at that time of the Greek Archdiocese and SCOBA chairman (by custom, the chairman of SCOBA is elected by its members, but the one elected is always the primate of the representative of the Church of Constantinople in America).
Five months before, Metropolitan Spyridon Papageorge of Italy gave a speech at the 32nd Biennial Clergy-Laity Conference of the Greek Archdiocese, in which he plainly stated that both he and the Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew, wanted an end to "ethnic ghettoes" which divided Orthodoxy in America. He denounced ethnic insularity at the expense of "our spiritual identity," and that it was time to cut the "Gordian knot of nationalism." Spyridon was generally regarded at the time to be the natural successor to the aged Iakovos, and his bold words for unity seemed the perfect cue for what transpired at Ligonier (Michalopoulos and Ham, 180-181).
Though Iakovos officially presided over the event, he "graciously receded into the background as Ligonier was under the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Philip, who was thus the host and official prime mover behind the conference." Philip gave the address to the gathered bishops, and Archbishop Dmitri Royster of Dallas gave the official response. "By all accounts, unity and amity of purpose abounded. The assembled bishops came to an agreement and issued a statement declaring their intention of forming a united American Orthodox Church" (ibid., 181).
Aftermath The documents which were issued by the conference did not include negative language regarding the old world patriarchates. Indeed, they were mentioned quite positively in the context of the origins of the immigrant churches on American soil. There was close attention to canonical protocol, and no declaration to form a separate religious denomination was attempted, nor was there a declaration of the formation of an autocephalous American Orthodox Church. The meeting can be quite fairly described as simply a gathering of Orthodox bishops in America, thinking and speaking together with one voice on the canonical problems facing their ministry in America. Michalopoulos and Ham continue:
Unfortunately, the Ligonier Statement was viewed by some of the patriarchates as a "power grab" by Iakovos, who heretofore had been accused sotto voce of cultivating a "cult of personality." Many feared that he was on the verge of having himself proclaimed as "Patriarch of America." Some of the Old World patriarchates were scared of losing their American dioceses simply for economic reasons.
One of the signatories, Metropolitan Christopher of the Serbian exarchate, openly admitted that the ultimate goal of the Ligonier conference was not only unification, but also autocephaly. The fact that this interview (as well as Christopher's comments) was conducted on videotape and was distributed to parishes all over North America showed there was no hidden agenda at Ligonier. Regardless, Ligonier disturbed not only the Old World patriarchates, but some priests and laymen in America as well. More than a few were perfectly happy with the status quo. (ibid., 181)
What is clear from the reports and documents of the conference, however, is that there was no agenda to force a submission of some American Orthodox to others. The senior hierarchs all had something to lose from unification, whether it was property, prestige, revenue, seminaries, orphanages, and so on. The focus was not on "pecking order," as The American Orthodox Church puts it, but on "the canonical irregularities that plagued American Orthodoxy" (ibid., 182).
In any event, if any of the "big three" hierarchs—Iakovos (GOA), Theodosius (OCA) or Philip (AOA)—had been elected as the American Orthodox primate, the reign would have been a short one. All three were old men (two have since retired). None of these three men could have been an "empire builder," but rather only a "transitional figure" (ibid., 182). There was no attempt to make such a move, however.
The American Orthodox Church characterizes the move for unity at Ligonier to have ended up a failure:
What began as a sincere plea for an end to disunity eventually accomplished exactly the opposite. Why did it fail? Clearly, the view that this was a power grab by Iakovos played some part. It is believed that one of the signatories of the Ligonier Statement, Bishop Vsevolod of the Ukrainian archdiocese, told Bartholomew that Iakovos was getting ready to have himself declared "Patriarch of America." Although the goal of unity had been openly declared as desirable in Spyridon's earlier address to the Greek archdiocese, the inflammatory reportage of the Ligonier Conference by this particular conferee may have caused Bartholomew to question the motives of its signatories. It is just as possible that other forces, which had no desire to see a united Orthodox witness in the United States, were at work behind the scenes. (ibid., 183)
The death-knell for the accomplishment of Ligonier seemed to sound in the subsequent removal of Iakovos from his see. It could be that Bartholomew "feared the loss of financial support from America," that he "feared the loss of American political clout in facing the Turks," or that it perhaps was "nothing more than a power struggle between two strong men" (ibid., 184). No matter the reasoning, in 1997, the patriarch sent a delegation from the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople which forced Iakovos to resign after a nearly 40-year tenure. "Despite missteps along the way, to the fullest extent possible, Iakovos bridged ethnic divisions and forged an Orthodox consensus. He almost succeeded in creating the American Orthodox Church" (ibid., 184).
Not all commentators view Ligonier as a failure, however. Certainly, many of the hierarchs who met one another now know something of their brothers in the episcopacy, and that cannot be undone. Additionally, the very idea of what happened at Ligonier continues on in the consciousness of American Orthodoxy. It may eventually be that Ligonier will be seen not as a failure of unity, but one step along the way toward its pursuit. Archbishop Nathaniel (Popp) of Detroit has this to say:
Ligonier nailed open the doors of indifference and urged us to go through the wide gates of cooperation, mutual support and service to our fellow citizens, sharing the faith with others and spiritually expanding our own lives in evangelical ministry to all God's people.
Let us now hear about the fruits which bear witness to the blessings generated by Ligonier in the Church, and let us be open to be inspired to expand our witness to the unity of the faith and our fellowship in the Holy Spirit.
Documents Two statement documents were issued at Ligonier, one on the Orthodox Church in North America and one on Missions and Evangelism. Their content may generally be characterized as a rejection of the notion that Orthodox Christianity in America constitutes a diaspora, that the ongoing uncanonical disunity of American Orthodoxy must come to an end. Additionally, the statement on evangelism makes it clear that American Orthodox bishops regard the purpose of the Church in America as a missionary one.
Statement on the Church in North America Statement on Mission and Evangelism
Participating hierarchs The following hierarchs signed the documents of the Ligonier Meeting, with one exception noted. The list reflects the titles of these bishops at the time. Whether there were twenty-eight or twenty-nine bishops actually present, there are twenty-eight pictured in the group photograph taken at the meeting, and there are twenty-eight different signatures on the documents.
Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America: Archbishop Iakovos Coucouzis Metropolitan Silas Koskinas of New Jersey Bishop Iakovos Krinis of Chicago Bishop Methodios Tournas of Boston Bishop Philip Koutoufas of Atlanta Bishop Maximos Aghiorgoussis of Pittsburgh Chorbishop Alexios Panagiotopoulos of Astoria Bishop Anthimos Draconakis of Olympos Bishop Philotheos Karamitsos of Meloa Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA: Archbishop Vsevolod Maydansky of Scopelos American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese: Bishop Nicholas Smisko of Amissos
Orthodox Church in America: Metropolitan Theodosius Lazor of Washington Archbishop Dmitri Royster of Dallas and the South Archbishop Kyrill Yonchev of Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania Archbishop Peter L'Huillier of New York and New Jersey Archbishop Herman Swaiko of Philadelphia and Eastern Pennsylvania Bishop Nathaniel Popp of the Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America Bishop Tikhon Fitzgerald of San Francisco and the West Bishop Seraphim Storheim of Ottawa and Canada Bishop Mark Forsberg of Boston and New England
Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch: Metropolitan Philip Saliba of York and All North America Bishop Antoun Khouri of Selefkia Bishop Basil Essey of Enfeh al-Koura
Bulgarian Orthodox Church: Metropolitan Joseph Bosakov of America, Canada and Australia
Romanian Orthodox Church: Archbishop Victorin Ursache of America and Canada
Serbian Orthodox Church: