Bishop Arsenios Saltas of Brooklyn (1889-1955) and the G.O.C. of Greece

References from Ἐπίσκοπος Mαγνησίας Xρυσόστομος Nασλίμης (1910–1973): Ἀκατάβλητος Ἀγωνιστὴς Πίστεως καὶ Ὑπομονῆς [Bishop Chrysostomos Naslimes of Magnesia (1910 1973): An Invincible Struggler in Faith and Fortitude], by Bishop Klemes of Gardikion [now Metropolitan of Larissa], Vols. 1 and 2 (Athens: Holy Monastery of Saints Cyprian and Justina, 2019). Translated from the original Greek.

+++

He [Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes, appointed to the United States in 1946] then wonders how the Holy Synod, for such a decision, did not appear to submit a report from all the members of the Greek community there, invoking only the request of a certain well-known woman, and also why the matter is not referred “to the like-minded Hierarchs in America, Christopher and Arsenios [42]... so that, with their care, a suitable priest may be appointed to the Church of Saint George.” [41]

Footnote 41. Archive of the Offices of the Holy Synod.

Footnote 42. The aforementioned bishops Christopher (Contogeorge) and Arsenios (Saltas), being sporadically mentioned in the correspondence among the clergy of the Patristic Calendar of that time, are believed to be following the Patristic Calendar in America; however, due to the unclear origin and exact status of theirs, as well as other reasons, there exists reservation or even negativity towards them. Nevertheless, in the present excerpt, reference is made to them, possibly due to their better knowledge regarding matters in America. Arsenios Saltas was later accepted as a hierarch in communion by the Holy Synod of our Church, on January 14/27, 1950, with the title “Archbishop of Brooklyn,” along with those with him (see periodical The Voice of Orthodoxy, issue no. 79/January 30, 1950, p. 2); however, the reservation towards him remained and rather increased, with his eventual and formal departure from our circle in the year 1953 (see more on this in the appropriate place in Volume II of the present work).

- Vol. 1, p. 346.

***

Another effort concerned the possibility that Saint Chrysostomos of Florina might accept cooperation with Bishop Arsenios (Saltas) of Brooklyn, America, who since 1950 had been a member of the Hierarchy of the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, without, however, there having been official communion at a hierarchical level. [35]

On the part of the holy former Metropolitan of Florina, there was reservation both regarding the canonicity of Arsenios of Brooklyn and regarding his confessional mindset, because Arsenios was not reputed for his traditional appearance and practices, and also sought to associate himself with the Patriarchate of Alexandria in order to obtain confirmation of his consecration, as well as the title of Exarch of Alexandria for America!

This concern is evident in a letter from Volos by the subject of our biography (Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes) to Monk Antonios Moustakas dated December 17, 1953; the hesitation of Saint Chrysostomos also pertained to the origin of Arsenios of Brooklyn, so that he did not wish to cooperate with him for the consecration of a bishop, but also to his broader stance and hope, from the time even before the persecution: he lived with the expectation of resolving the Calendar issue “by a mutually agreed method” and did not wish to add further obstacles to the realization of this vision, which never abandoned him. This is the chief and fundamental reason, as is concluded from the thorough study of the available sources, why Saint Chrysostomos, beyond practical and other difficulties, did not proceed to an episcopal consecration before his repose. As is known, moreover, his hopes for succession had been placed in Polykarpos of Diavleia, but he withdrew because of the unacceptable behavior of certain individuals from the Patristic Calendar faction, which is why he (St. Chrysostomos) did not see reason to risk a new “experiment,” especially with excesses that were not tolerable to his extremely sensitive canonical conscience.

 

Footnote 35. See The Voice of Orthodoxy, issue no. 79/January 30, 1950, p. 2. Arsenios Saltas was consecrated bishop in America in 1934 by Christopher Contogeorge, who had also been consecrated in America earlier that same year by bishops of doubtful origin and canonicity,* in order to serve and cover the so-called “independent” Communities/Parishes in America, which had refused to submit to the Greek Archdiocese under then Archbishop Athenagoras of America; many of these even retained the Patristic Ecclesiastical Calendar. Thus, around 1950, two distinct realities appeared to be coalescing and “intersecting” in America, which obviously did not entirely coincide and were not sufficiently “united in spirit” (see Anastasios Hudson, Metropolitan Petros of Astoria – A Microcosm of the Old Calendar Movement in America, 2004, pp. 28–30). This, of course, was not known in Greece, but there existed an instinctive reservation. The recognition of these independent bishops in America by the Patriarchate of Alexandria—or more precisely, at least of Arsenios by the Patriarch of Alexandria (Christopher in 1947, Arsenios around 1953)—demonstrated that on the one hand their apostolic succession was not entirely groundless, while on the other hand it also indicated their instability and alienation from the principles of the G.O.C. of Greece. As is evident from letters of the Saint Chrysostomos of Florina from the years 1953–1954, according to reliable information he received also from America, Arsenios is described as two-faced, with a “hermaphroditic” [ambiguous] stance, and thus is considered untrustworthy and not ecclesiastically in communion. As it turned out, his incompatibility with the Genuine Orthodox was ultimately impossible to overlook.

- Vol. 2, pp. 57-59.

[* According to Independent Bishops: An International Directory, ed. by Gary L. Ward, Bertil Persson, and Alain Bain, Apogee Books, Detroit, 1990, p. 88: "He (Conotogeorge) was consecrated at St. John the Baptist Church in New York City on February 10, 1934, by Sophronios Bishara (of Los Angeles)... assisted by Theophanies Fan Sylin (sic) Noli (of Korçë)."]

***

ΙΕ.10. Two letters to Saint Chrysostomos of Florina on the matter of succession

At the beginning of October 1954, the subject of our biography (Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes) sent two letters to the, as he calls him, Most Reverend Metropolitan, Holy Chrysostomos, formerly of Florina. In the first letter, dated October 2, 1954, he expresses his admiration for the strength and endurance of the venerable First Hierarch, who, despite his age (84 years), bears “the enormous burden of the administration of the Holy Struggle, both in its spiritual and in its material part.” And he continues: “Your endurance and patience have proven to be admirable both spiritually and physically.” However, he respectfully reminds that it is recommended to appoint capable assistants to shoulder part of the burden, and this can be achieved through the consecration of at least two Hierarchs. The opportunity was provided by the presence in Athens at that time of Bishop Arsenios of Brooklyn from America, and for this there are many reasons, which he summarizes briefly. He also makes an effort to offer a psychological explanation, as he writes, regarding the First Hierarch’s hesitation concerning the consecration, since he firmly believes in the canonical ecclesiastical status of the Holy Struggle, without being influenced or swayed by the artificial appearance of canonicity and legality of the Innovators, who enjoy the support of secular authority and with whom the other local Churches are connected and in communion. He hastens to emphasize, in conclusion, that the above were presented out of pure concern for the Holy Struggle and not from a pursuit of ecclesiastical ranks. [38]

Not having in view the possible response of Saint Chrysostomos of Florina to the above letter, we are aware also of a new letter dated October 9, 1954 from Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes, who invokes the paternal forbearance of the First Hierarch in order to put an end “to a matter troublesome for both parties.” [39]

There is confirmation regarding Arsenios of Brooklyn that he vacillates concerning his position, but the fact that he is accepted by Patriarch Christopher of Alexandria constitutes proof of his episcopal rank. As for cooperation with him, there must of course be agreement and an examination of his disposition, and in the event that it is determined he invokes unacceptable pretexts, all relations with him should be severed. Arsenios, however, due to a mistaken assessment of the circumstances, became entangled in internal disputes among the Alexandrians themselves and underwent temptations. [39a]

What remains, emphasizes the letter-writer (Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes), is the prayer that God may keep the Most Reverend long-lived, so that we may not be deprived of an ecclesiastical Shepherd before enjoying the longed-for union in Orthodoxy, as was still vividly expected and believed at that time. “Let us then not become burdensome to Your Eminence, and let us entrust our hopes to the divine Founder of the Church, Who even before something comes to pass knows the beginning and the end of persons and events, which in this present life have been foreordained for the fulfillment of His pre-eternal counsels.” [39]

This final phrase, reminiscent of Maximian terminology and thought, demonstrates not only Patristic formation, but also—so we believe—a Patristic mindset of non-insistence out of reverence before the God-bearing Father and Shepherd, stemming from trust in Divine Providence, from a genuine Ecclesiastical Mindset, and from the awareness that it is not human efforts, even the purest ones, that “save” the Church, but the Divine Will which brings to fulfillment Its pre-eternal plans for the salvation of mankind within the Church; and this is accomplished through trials and temptations, so that the power and wisdom of God may be revealed and glorified, and not human worth, foresight, or reasoning.

 

Footnote 38. Archive of the Offices of the Holy Synod.

Footnote 39. Archive of the Offices of the Holy Synod. There is the conviction that Saint Chrysostomos of Florina was possessed by anxiety regarding the securing of a successor situation, and also that he had particular affection for Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes on account of his evident gifts. Characteristic is the preserved statement of Archimandrite Gabriel Liveris, who, returning at that time from Athens to Northern Greece, where he was serving, would say: “Our Shepherd has invited an exceptional scholarly Athonite for this matter [obviously referring to Eulogios Kourilas]. But he receives no reply. There is only Fr. Chrysostomos Naslimes of Volos, but he is young in age and only one man. There are no people who recognize his great worth.” (see Brief Biography of the Metropolitan of Magnesia Chrysostomos Naslimes, Holy Monastery of the Meeting of the Lord, Chortokopi, Eleftheroupolis, typewritten text, n.d., p. 6).

Footnote 39a. [Patriarch] Christophoros of Alexandria accepted Arsenios by himself, personally, and appointed him his Exarch in America, but his Synod, with which he was at odds, did not recognize that act and communicated this to the Greek authorities, in order that they proceed to deport him as dangerous from both an ecclesiastical and national standpoint. Arsenios did not heed the advice of Saint Chrysostomos of Florina not to expose himself to harmful actions, and thus suffered the consequences of his disobedience. (On this matter there exists a handwritten letter of Chrysostomos of Florina to Konstantinos Sideris, dated October 6/19, 1954.)

- Vol. 2, pp. 61-63.