Archbishop Elpidophoros’ Misplaced Priorities

By An Anonymous Orthodox Faithful

Archbishop Elpidophoros of America is obviously incapable of maintaining order within the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. But rather than addressing internal challenges, he is persistently involving himself in international political. His support for LGBT, among other modernist stances, has already alienated traditional Orthodox followers. However, he continues to pursue a modernist agenda that includes floating trial balloons on other controversial topics like women deaconesses. And now he is reported to be aligning with the Ukrainian authorities’ efforts to dissolve the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which may only fuel further controversy.

According to some Ukrainian sources, back in 2022, Abp. Elpidophoros was contacted by the Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Kyiv, Bishop Michel Anischenko of Komana, at the then Bishop of Edmonton Hilarion’s suggestion. His counterpart from the UOC to discuss the Exarch’s idea of the UOC’s temporary transition under the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s omophorion became Archbishop of Artsyz Victor Bykov. Their secret meeting took place in September 2022, when Archbishop Victor visited the United States with a humanitarian mission.

At the meeting, Abp. Victor spoke on behalf of the UOC’s First Hierarch Metropolitan of Kyiv Onufry without him knowing. He even agreed that Metropolitan Onufry may start commemorating the Ecumenical Patriarch at the Liturgy among other Primates of the Autocephalous Churches as a gesture of goodwill, hoping to persuade him with the alleged gains of the negotiations for the UOC.

Some observers speculate that Elpidophoros’ intervention in Ukrainian church affairs is motivated by a desire to undermine Metropolitan Emmanuel of Chalcedon, his main competitor in the struggle for the patriarchate, and boost his own chances of becoming the next Ecumenical Patriarch. This guess fits well with his broader pattern of using international issues to advance his ecclesiastical influence — until it concerns his Turkish birthland’s attack on Byzantine Orthodox Christian heritage.

That’s why Archbishop Elpidophoros is reported to have been very interested in the proposal that Metropolitan Onufry might start a dialogue with the OCU in case the OCU ceases seizing temples from the UOC’s parishes. The GOArch’s Primate wasn’t also confused with Victor’s asking for a meeting between Bartholomew and a group of bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, whom he promised to attract, to discuss a possible transfer to the temporary jurisdiction of the Phanar.

Before his appointment to the Archdiocese in the United States, Abp. Elpidophoros was actively engaged in the Ukrainian church issue, that’s why he was well versed in it and familiar with all the key figures. So, he was well aware of the lack of trust and even desire to pass over under the jurisdiction of Constantinople among the UOC hierarchs, priests, and laity. Nevertheless, he didn’t leave the idea of outshining Met. Emmanuel in Pat. Bartholomew’s eyes. He didn’t leave it even when Victor, who had eventually reported the negotiations to Met. Onufry, returned to the Archbishop of America by phone with new, virtually unacceptable to Constantinople, terms of the UOC’s Primate. Abp. Elpidophoros still hoped that he would be able to soften Onufry’s stance through negotiations and contacts with individual bishops of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which would help him proceed in Constantinople.

In April 2023, Archbishop Elpidophoros managed to include Metropolitan of Pisidia Job Getcha and the aforementioned Archbishop Hilarion, at that time already Archbishop of Winnipeg, into the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. He also gained the support of a couple more members of the Synod. With their help, after a loud wrangle and accusing opponent Met. Emmanuel of betraying the interests of the Mother Church, Abp. Elpidophoros managed to force a decision to create a commission for negotiations with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church at a regular meeting of the Synod.

As is already known, Metropolitan Emmanuel, acting through the OCU’s Metropolitan Eustratiy Zorya and the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, blocked the arrival of the commission for the year 2023. The subsequent visit of Met. Emmanuel to Kyiv almost buried the idea of negotiations. Archbishop Sylvester Stoychev, who met with Emmanuel from the UOC’s side, sent a letter to Archbishop Elpidophoros and openly demanded Elpidophoros publicly condemn in person the seizures of UOC temples by the OCU in order to continue the dialogue. It seems like only this letter brought the Archbishop back to reality and made him leave his adventure; being disappointed with it, he significantly reduced his contacts with the UOC.

Just to remember, this high-stakes ecclesiastical maneuvering came at a time when the Ukrainian Orthodox Church was facing potential outlawing by the government. So, the real attitude of Abp. Elpidophoros toward “the issue of unity in Ukrainian Orthodoxy” is quite clear.

On top of that, in his efforts to influence the Ukrainian situation, Elpidophoros has reportedly drawn Metropolitan Tikhon, the Primate of the Orthodox Church in America, in to facilitate negotiations between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Patriarchate. That put the OCA in a precarious position and entangled it in complex international disputes, which could jeopardize its relationships with other Orthodox jurisdictions as well as its own stability and unity.

Unfortunately, under Patriarch Bartholomew and hierarchs like Elpidophoros and Emmanuel, the Ecumenical Patriarchate has reached an extreme degree of decline. The Patriarchate’s alleged political bias and involvement in financial improprieties, including bribery related to the Ukrainian autocephaly decision, have further damaged its reputation.

Even the Ukrainian government appears confident in its ability to manipulate Bartholomew for political gain, as evidenced by his support for controversial Ukrainian laws targeting religious organizations. Indeed, if he helped former President Poroshenko, now President Zelensky can also expect the same. And it doesn’t matter to them if Pat. Bartholomew’s actions, such as the controversial decision to grant autocephaly to a minority Ukrainian church faction in 2018, would be accused of causing division and violence.

Some Orthodox commentators now view the Patriarchate of Constantinople as having strayed so far from traditional Orthodox values that they liken it to a “Babylonian harlot”. As divisions deepen and controversies multiply, many faithful Orthodox Christians are left questioning the wisdom and motivations of their hierarchs. The controversial strategies deployed by these leaders have not only jeopardized their own standing but have also cast a shadow over the future coherence and integrity of Orthodoxy in America and beyond. This suggests that American Orthodoxy may need to choose a different course to maintain its spiritual integrity.