A follow-up to this story below.
 |
(ocanews.org) - In a letter to Fr. Elias Yelovich, dated November 9th, Bishop Thomas of Charleston has informed the suspended priest that “it has been decided that you should be ...removed from the roster of clergy of this Archdiocese. This action is being taken with the blessing of His Eminence, Metropolitan Philip, and is effective immediately.”
In the two page letter Bishop Thomas continued:
“The reasons for these actions are numerous. To name a few:
1. Your continued disobedience to directives passed on to you by my office, specifically those dealing with your own spirtual care, namely continuing against my direction to have a layman as your confessor.
2. Secondly, maintaining a parish council president who is not in good canonical standing with this Archdiocese. You have been sent a number of times a copy of the Priest’s Guide containing the model constitution for parishes, which indicates that council members must be in good canonical standing.
3. Proclaiming throughout your deanery that one of your parishoners is a “prophet” and accounting and proclaiming “miracles” without consulting the hierarchs of this Archdiocese.
Your recent postings to the website ocanews.org led us to interview you and investigate your activities. The investigation revealed that you had not changed any of the behaviors about which you had been warned. In addition to the serious items listed above, the disparaging remarks you posted about the Metropolitan on the Internet have contributed to our taking this action. Likening our Archbishop to a father who beats his children will never be tolerated. There are proper ways that we can disagree as brother clergy, and there are inappropriate ways. This one certainly was inappropriate. One wonders what the appropriate way to disagree in the Antiochian Archdiocese might be. I have yet to see any disagreement with Met. Philip by his clergy or laity that did not result in a swift and severe response. Even asking about his wealth (which he called "millions") was sufficient for him to tell the curious party "to go take a leap." Hardly sagacious or pastoral, but certainly unambiguous.
As you know we have repeatedly asked you to conform to the practices of our Archdiocese and specifically to repudiate the remarks you posted on the Internet. Sadly, you have refused to work with us. This being the case we have no other recourse but to take this action.
We pray that you will come to repentance.
Yours in Christ,
+Bishop Thomas (signed)
Rt. Rev. Bishop THOMAS (Joseph)
Auxiliary Bishop
Diocese of Charleston, Oakland and the Mid-Atlantic
cc: Most Rev. Metropolitan PHILIP
Posts
I'm so pleased that this priest, one way or another, is out of the clutches of Met. Philip.
ReplyDeleteOne also wonders why this parish council president was not in good standing. Had he upset the Powers That Be as well? I don't particularly want to know the answers but it seems to me that, provided he can land on his feet and find a welcoming home elsewhere, Fr Elias will be spiritually, emotionally, and psychologically better off.
I am curious about the trend of open criticism of clergy and hierarchs on the internet. I think this tool is a double-edged sword. On the one hand it can bring a higher level of accountability to the Church Hierarchy, which is good. On the other hand, one may also be spreading the poison of their own bitterness, fueled by a lack of all the facts. It becomes digital gossip under the guise of "letting people know what's going on" or, "giving people a voice".
ReplyDeleteYours is by far the least judgmental of all comments I have heard on this issue. So don't think I was lumping you with the gossip croud.
One friend likened Met Philip to the Taliban. That's a scary proposition. It puts a person in the place of the pharisee who prayed to himself.
Then again, I suppose we sometimes need to resort to rhetoric in order to get a point across. It's hard to know the balance between the confrontation of St Paul towards St Peter, and the humility of the Prayer of St Ephraim. "Lord help me to see mine own faults, and not to judge my brother."
Anyhow, I appreciate the post, as this is a big controversy in our archdiocese.
Wow, what a disparity in treatment of two priests, Fr. Elias vs. Fr. Stephen of Houston. I guess if Fr. Stephen becomes guilty of critiquing the Met. then more serious action will be taken in his case. This is really scandalous.
ReplyDeleteJeremiah, you bring up a good point. I am reminded that the names given to the clergy of the early church was that of servants and slaves for Christ and His Church. Certainly, we must acknowledge the Ignatian exhortation ("Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic Church.") as illustrative of his pastoral role, but we also must be mindful of his role as servant.
ReplyDeleteThe history of the Church is full of examples where the people did not stand for the (heretical/inappropriate/permissive/etc.) actions of their hierarchs. For as much as the autocephalic and synodal nature serves as a check to the power of any one bishop, the roar of the people (the vocal backing) is also important as a corrective.
The actions of this hierarch seem to be pointed at demanding obedience, disbanding organizations, and enforcing silence. I won't stoop to name calling or ad hominem attacks, but I also won't fall in step with the expectation of mute conformity.
All that being said, I have seen the same comments and posts you have that compare Met. Philip to a snake ("the snake" to be exact), a poison, and still more colorful titles and refuse to make use of those terms. As an icon of Christ, any insults I hurl at him I hurl at myself as we are joined in faith. I think there is an understandable need to put his actions into perspective and the lexicon of the Bible lends itself (e.g, brood of vipers, cups full of filth, little dogs) to some very pointed labels. For me, an argument is made less impressive when it makes use of invectives.
Sadly, these disagreements are sometimes a cause for some to lose their faith in the Church. Another good reason I try to use care when I pick my editorial words in posts like this.
Thanks for commenting!
I am not Antiochian. My only interest in this Archdiocese is the WESTERN RITE.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what is true or false any more in Orthodoxy in America. I would attach myself to a WR ROCOR group if one was near but there are none.
I could truly vent on things like this starting with 'does Met. Phillip have a relationship with Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefforts Schori?' They are both making a power grab of their respective churches which is unprecedented me thinks. The Antiochians have been known as Eastern Rite Episcopalians for several decades so maybe Kathy and Phil have a plan.
Some of this is tongue in cheek but even I don't know which part.
"AND JESUS WEPT"
"A layman as a confessor" is an "offense"? Clericalism, plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteIf that layman is giving absolution it is an offense. But if he is not, then I agree. However, the whole prophet thing seems to be slightly montanist, though I do not know enough details about this particular priest to know.
ReplyDeleteI do also think that we ought to be a little more charitable with Bp. Thomas and Met. Phillip. As this letter shows, there is more to this situation (and often is) than meets the eye or can be covered on OCANews.
Perhaps we are too informed by our 20th-21st century sense of American fear of anything that looks like power, OTOH perhaps he really is in a power grab. Still, we ought to be careful how, when, and who we condemn in the process. It might just be ourselves.
While Met. Philip's previous actions don't lend themselves to the benefit of the doubt, Bishop Thomas' letter does cast a different light on this.
ReplyDeleteI read the comments on OCA.org, and the prophet and miracle talk did strike me as a bit loopy. Also, if items 1 and 2 are true, he was disobedient.
Don't get me wrong, I have little doubt that it was the abusive father talk that got him canned, but Fr. Elias may not be the best poster child for Met. Philip's overreach.