The vociferous presence of Elder Metropolitan Emmanuel of Chalcedon in the Phanar has caused complaints and frustration after having been installed in the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
I am informed that the Metropolitans in the Bosporus region, either younger or older, are not very happy with the intense mobility of the second in class, according to the typikon, hierarch in the Phanar.
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has a deep-felt appreciation for him and considers him capable of taking on the role of the maestro in the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Many admit that he is not wrong to some extent. He is polyglot and has experience in contacts with Orthodox and non-Orthodox.
The Ecumenical Patriarch’s preference, however, has set him against all others. Metropolitans in the Phanar say it is the first time that two Metropolitans do not attend the meetings of the Ecumenical Patriarch.
The meetings take place with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew with only Elder Metropolitan Emmanuel accompanying him.
The Elder Metropolitan of Chalcedon is considered a problem mainly by the “team” of Metropolitan Dimitrios of the Princes’ Islands, whose members are apparently annoyed.
A Metropolitan who is not a native of Constantinople has taken on a role that goes beyond its responsibilities. As the head of the great Metropolis of Chalcedon, Elder Metropolitan Emmanuel has sometimes taken on the role of “leader” who causes discomfort and complaining that do not seem to abate.
According to my sources, the displacement of Metropolitan Amfilochios of Adrianople —to put it mildly— from the environment of the Ecumenical Patriarch is due to the Elder Metropolitan of Chalcedon.
The once-powerful Metropolitan who has influenced greatly the relations of the Phanar and Athens is currently “on ice” and it is unknown when and whether he will return (always in the presence of Elder Metropolitan Emmanuel).
Pulpit and confession are two different things
To be honest, sometimes the flexibility and ideological… U-turn (to put it mildly because I am referring to a priest) impresses me. In his sermons, a priest of the Archdiocese of Athens, who serves a very large parish that is considered a “hive” of spirituality, emphasizes the need for vaccination.
However, during his private conversations with people close to him and his spiritual children (this priest has many spiritual children), he advises them to stay away from vaccination.
What one says in his sermon from the pulpit and what one says in his private chats are two different things. I would recommend this otherwise nice elderly priest to be inspired by the example of the Abbot of Vatopedi Monastery, Elder Ephraim, his suffering, and the health effects of coronavirus.
When he meets him, he should ask him: “Did you have to be vaccinated or not? What would you be your advice to us after this adventure, Elder?” He may disagree with the vaccination. But what example does he set for priests and his children when he speaks in an ambivalent way, either in public or in private?
From the column of Greek edition orthodoxtimes.gr, Melchizedek
