As if to add insult to injury, Abp. Elpidophoros returned on July 3 to St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church on Park Avenue. This is the same “St. Bart’s” where the archbishop and his entourage had served the Divine Liturgy to commemorate the thirtieth anniversary of Patriarch Bartholomew’s reign from Istanbul…err…Constantinople. At that occasion on June 11, the archbishop in his non-homily lavished obsequious praise upon his boss saying, “He is a living Apostle of love, peace and reconciliation.” Yeah, tell that to Metropolitan Onuphry and the faithful in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, who have endured ecclesiastical schism, theft of church properties and sometimes even physical violence. That mayhem has been caused indirectly by Pat. Bartholomew’s meddling in Ukrainian politics. Auwe!, as the Hawaiians say. “No!”
This time, Abp. Elpidophoros was at St. Bart’s in a more personal capacity to visit with their rector, Bp. Dean E. Wolfe. The purple shirt you see is the indication of episcopal ordination. Wolfe used to be the bishop ordinary of the Episcopal Diocese of Kansas for the thirteen years from 2004 to 2017. Like many TEC dioceses around the country, it is a little liberal oasis in a conservative state. Bp. Wolfe cut a notch in his belt when “he officiated (at) the first authorized Episcopal same-sex marriage in the diocese.” (St. Bart’s website) Of course, there is no such thing. St. Bart’s is a large congregation, fully a quarter the size of the whole rural Diocese of Kansas. Wolfe must feel quite at home at that megachurch, where they are actively queering midtown Manhattan.
Regarding the tete a tete, the archbishop said “Ecumenical dialogue and collaborations are vital witnesses to Christ’s teaching and ministry.” We all want unity amongst Christians, but true ecumenism will never compromise the Truth of the Faith in order to make nice with heretics. The stricter kind will seek the return of schismatics to the Orthodox Church. It almost sounds unAmerican to say that, but it’s the inconvenient truth. By revisiting St. Bart’s, the archbishop emphasized his desire to grow closer to the Episcopal Church despite the repugnance of TEC’s promotion of the LGBTQ+ whatever-in-hell-turns-you-on agenda. That is the impression that one is left with.
Certainly a seasoned politician like Abp. Elpidophoros knows well that repeat association with heretics like Bp. Wolfe telegraphs a tacit agreement with their teachings. That, in turn, implies an abandonment of the Orthodox teaching that stands in stark contrast to the heresy. God forbid. We cannot but conclude that the archbishop is sending the wrong message to his faithful followers. Please, we don’t need this, Your Eminence – not after the unprecedented destabilization caused by the events of the last year and a half. Not now.
This author is – used to be – a cradle Episcopalian and Anglican priest who felt the need to leave his beloved denomination because it had abandoned Christian morality. It was not without having first made sacrifices that I renounced my ordination and submitted to (re)baptism as a layman in the Orthodox Church. Imagine my disappointment to see our venerable archbishop flirting in his official capacity with the very Episcopalian heretics with whom I felt the need to part company. Auwe!
Lawrence B. Wheeler – B.A., M.Div. Former Anglican priest, convert to Orthodoxy. Originally published at: St. Bart’s Redux (weborthodox.com)
Unless they are quickly excommunicated then Orthodoxy loses all credibility. It goes the way of the Anglican.
Celebrating the EP’s anniversary in a non Orthodox church? Oh……..k.Makes alot of nonsense to me.
I think somewhere along the line we got the messed up idea that if we’re buddy-buddy with heretics or non-Christians (or maybe their beliefs) we would be communicating Christ’s love and it would draw them in.
Did we ever stop to think compromise itself is unloving? As a catechumen, one thing I was taught was “the Church doesn’t chance for you. You change for the Church.” We shouldn’t have lights and screens and rock bands or LGBT flags to draw the world in because it is the world that is broken, not the Church. We have something they need, not the other way around.
I would also like to call to our minds a couple of events from the early Church. Remember in Acts when Ananias and Saphira were dishonest about how much they were giving to the Church and both were struck dead? Today many of us would call this “overkill” on God’s part. But this shows not a change in God, but a change in us. We have gotten way too comfortable with sin and compromise. Christ demands a lot for us, but these demands provide a safe haven for God’s people in the midst of this chaotic world.
The other thing was how St. Paul in 1 Corinthians told the Church to excommunicate the unrepentant errant member. We don’t burn apostates, we kick them out. This is punishment enough, or it should be, if we are who we are supposed to be. It’s not our job to validate “Christians” who are committing blatant sin. It’s our job to preach the truth, while saying “the Church is here ready to accept you whenever you are ready to repent of your errors and join Christ’s body.”
It’s as though Elpidophoros wanted to make perfectly clear those who were willing to forgive him this lapse in judgment: “No! I know very well what I am doing! I am with the ecumenical queers!”
“Istanbul…err…Constantinople”
Is this supposed to be funny? Never leave out an opportunity for some MP vs. EP rethoric? This has nothing to do with Ukraine. The UOC-MP is NOT taking a strong anti-ecumenist stance. The Ukraine situation also has a lot to do with the nature and politics of the MP / Russian Federation who see and present themselves as a continuation of the Soviet Union.
And on the actual substance of the article, which is the repeated ecumenical actions of Archbishop Elpidophoros towards the Episcopal Church in New York? Do you have an opinion on that?
Well, the MP rethoric takes away from the substance. It makes it seem like weaponization rather than honest concern about the attack on morality and dogma.
Also gloating about Constantinople being occupied by the Muhammadans seems unbecoming to a Christian. The only motivation for that I could envision is Moscow’s desire to take over the Ecumenical Throne.
The author is in the Greek Archdiocese and is a former Anglican. Many of us who blog here are either in a Greek Archdiocese parish (Canada or the United States) or spent decades in one before leaving. So we have a totally different take on the line and the intent rather than it being “MP.” When you are in a “Greek” parish, you become aware of the small, but rabid percentage of ultra-Greek nationalists who still dream about “the city” and a restoration of the glories of the Eastern Empire. For these people, the Orthodox Church revolves around Constantinople. This is how you can have a “Greek” archdiocese that is not actually run by the autocephalous Greek Church but rather by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and no one bats an eye. If you question anything going on in the Patriarchate of Constantinople, then you are immediately labeled “anti-Greek,” especially if you are a convert. Though anyone with any history in the Greek Archdiocese has seen that term applied even to Orthodox who were born in Greece. We had an article on this site, which was in Greek and English, written by a Greek employee of an Orthodox charity based in Athens and he was labeled “anti-Greek” because of the content.
To me, this line was simply a reaction to the extremism that we have faced among “Greeks,” many of whom were actually born in America and not a few of the worst offenders actually have non-Greek spouses. Constantinople fell in 1453. The Greeks made a valiant effort to reclaim the city in the early 20th century (100 years ago now), but came up short. They are further away from the goal of recovering Constantinople than ever, as only a military power such as the U.S. or Russia could defeat Turkey. Greece has no chance. The EP rules over a few thousand Greeks at home, and largely survives on the basis of the “diaspora” and as an asset of American foreign policy. These are just facts. Those that fear Russia want to prop up the EP. Those that fear the EP end up touting the MP. It is an ugly game.
In the end, all this arguing simply sows chaos and disunity in a nation (the U.S.) that should have no part in any of these squabbles. As a former Anglican who lost his church in his lifetime, this author is trying to sound an alarm and he is very concerned about the attack on morality and dogma. He is also concerned about the situation in the Ukraine, about which any conversation gets one labeled in some Orthodox quarters “pro-Russian” or “anti-Greek” even though the EP is based in Turkey, not Greece. Did he muddy the waters by adding in the first paragraph? Perhaps, but from an editorial perspective, we thought it was valid to call out the suffering that the “apostle of love” has contributed to in the Ukraine as a prelude to the chaos the exarch of the “apostle of love” is sowing in NYC with his ecumenical moves.
Dear OR staff:
You have hit the nail squarely on the head. I couldn’t have explained it any better myself.
Readers who boast that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church ought to sit up and take notice. In the end, the Church will prevail, but if you do not take a stand and make a stink now, you may have yourself to blame when you lose the Church as you have known her. Radical innovators will totally ignore you as they use their authority to bend the Church to their purposes. Read twentieth century Russian history, if you don’t think that is so. Do you really want to drink from the same cup and be baptized with the same baptism as the Russian Orthodox Church did? (Mk. 10:38ff) If not, pray up and speak up!
Thank you for your extensive elaboration. I’m not at all adverse to criticism of what is going on in the EP. If I misunderstood your intentions, Constantinople is still Constantinople for us Orthodox and will always be, regardless of if it will return to us or not.
When it comes to “MP rethoric” it seems like precisely what you said is happening:
“all this arguing simply sows chaos and disunity in a nation (the U.S.) that should have no part in any of these squabbles”
And this by design.. Just like the Russian Federation has a firm grip on alternative media in the West among other places, it seems like MP advocates have been carefully positioned themselves as the “defenders of the Faith” (defenders of “traditional values”) when the situation in the MP shows the opposite.
Regarding the Ukraine issue, it is extremely sad, but the blame cannot be one-sided only. One has to have some understanding for a people (Ukranians) who found themselves under Russian domination previously and now under constant threat by a “Russia” that uses Soviet symbols and to a large degree identifies with the Soviet Union, and a Patriarchate headed by Soviet Bishops which very much hold to the partyline. We also should not forget how the MP was set up: by grace of Stalin, in opposition to the genuine first Hierarch Peter, by exile / imprisonment / murder of most of the faithful Hierarchs, creation of a new Synod who would make marriage vows with the antichrist Soviet state… hardly canonical.
Looking at the big picture, all things we now see happening are related. Some parts of our beloved Orthodox Church are cancerous and major surgery will be the only answer. What happens in America reflects the powers that be in other places and for our Church to be restored to her former glory, changes will have to take place. There will have to be a mass exodus in some quarters; it is unavoidable as the point. Rhetoric–at this point–will not change a thing. Some will have to relocate to jurisdictions that hold the line in all things.
Could you tell me what jurisdictions “hold the line in all things?” I can only think of Georgia where Patriarch Ilia’s (and I suppose other Bishops?) desire to further the cause of ecumenism is dampened by the faithful taking a stance.
What’s your answer to that question? It would be helpful to have another perspective on that.
Forgive me, what is the question that I should answer? If it is about the various local Churches, all are compromised to a greater or lesser degree, with Georgia (to my knowledge, never been there, don’t know the language) holding the line the most. But it’s interesting that even there, HHB Ilia has met Rabbi Schneier, one of the major facilitators of syncretistic ecumenism, and said unfortunate things during the visit of the Pope.
Bulgaria left the WWC and took a laudable stance against Kolumbari, however I am told they are now very much on board with the covax agenda.
Non-commemorators are few and far between, some in Greece, some in Romania, some in Russia. E.g. Fr. Theodore Zisis. Vladyka Longin, the one Bishop of the MP who has been vocal against its ecumenistic activities seems to be commemorating again afte having ceased for some time. Then there is Vladyka Artemije’s Diocese in exile which is holding the line in Serbia.
Brothers and sisters, this is what apostasy looks like. And we have seen this before. When any church officials start making allowances for the gay agenda, changing doctrine is not far behind–I guarantee it. If you–the bishops–cannot sort gender properly, then everything else is up for discussion and can be changed. That is what happened with the Episcopalians. How long will the faithful put up with this? I know every one is comfortable with the church (Greek) they have been attending for multiple generations, but at some point, it is time to make a point, and the only point they might get, is if is people take their selves, their young, and their money elsewhere. This is beyond saving, in time God will judge it with the rest of the world. Get out before ugly things hit the fan. time to find and form a new jurisdiction for the new diaspora. There is no other answer to the continued “ecumenicism”.
Spot on John Lee!