Archbishop Elpidophoros Should Continue with Others and Other Matters Too…

In my commentary of May 18, 2026, titled “The Archbishop Acted Correctly,” regarding the painful developments involving the presiding priest of Holy Trinity Cathedral in New York, Archimandrite Chrysostomos Gilbert, I wrote, among other things, the following:

“We must acknowledge that the Archdiocese — that is, Archbishop Elpidophoros — in this instance acted correctly and wisely by suspending him from priestly duties following allegations of ‘inappropriate communication with another adult individual,’ as revealed by The National Herald on Friday afternoon, May 15.

After all, this concerns the Cathedral Church of the Archdiocese, namely the foremost church of the Church in America.

Elpidophoros placed the Church and its interests above individuals, sympathies, and courtesies because he recognized that here, in America, there is no room for behavior that not only offends the Church, but also places it in danger.”

As additional details become known — as we revealed in our online edition on Sunday afternoon, May 24 — namely that “Fr. Gilbert was browsing disreputable websites of perverse men,” and that when the Archbishop confronted him with evidence during their meeting on Wednesday, May 13, at the Theological School, he acknowledged involvement in the “inappropriate communications” and confirmed that he was the individual in the photograph, there can be little doubt about the extent of the immaturity and recklessness involved.

Through this lapse, he demonstrated a troubling lack of awareness of who he is, what he represents, and the responsibilities associated with his role. And because a certain rumor mill has developed among some parishioners, as well as among certain recently self-appointed pseudo-ecclesiastical commentators and pseudo-theologizers regarding his possible return as dean of the Cathedral, Elpidophoros would have to exercise extraordinarily poor judgment to proceed in such a direction.

Allow me to explain with a brief theological and ecclesiological reminder, as simply and clearly as possible:

The congregation and its supposed representatives — namely the parish council — do not appoint priests to a community, or rather to a local church, because we are not a Congregationalist church, to use the Protestant term.

Holy Trinity Cathedral, and indeed every cathedral, is first and foremost the church of the local bishop, where his episcopal throne (cathedra) is located — hence the term “cathedral” — and where he is obligated to celebrate the Eucharist, that is, the Divine Liturgy. In this case, it is the church of Archbishop Elpidophoros.

However, because beyond the Cathedral there are many other parishes or local churches, and naturally the bishop cannot simultaneously be present in all of them, he ordains priests and appoints them to serve those communities. Thus, the priest in a parish functions as an extension of the bishop; he does not act independently or autonomously, but performs sacred functions in the bishop’s name. This is why he commemorates the bishop during the celebration of the Divine Eucharist, the Sacraments, and the Services.

It is understandable and appreciable — and indeed I have pointed this out more than once in our reporting — that Fr. Chrysostomos Gilbert enjoys the esteem of the Cathedral faithful and that he revitalized the parish’s communal life in many respects.

Nevertheless, the events that have transpired leave, I believe, little room for Elpidophoros to reverse course and reinstate him, thereby exposing the Cathedral and the Archdiocese to unnecessary risk and, more importantly, diminishing the moral credibility of the Church itself.

Having now completed seven years in the administration of the Archdiocese, I want to believe that he has realized that this is not Turkey, with its well-known Ottoman mentality, but America, where the press and institutional safeguards are taken seriously.

The Roman Catholic Church stands as an example, having paid — and continuing to pay — dearly for its failures. At least Roman Catholics possess substantial resources, reserves, and extensive real estate holdings with which to compensate victims harmed by clergy whose actions destroyed — and in some cases continue to destroy — the lives of innocent people.

We, on the other hand, often struggle merely to survive through Greek Festivals — and thank God for them, because many communities might otherwise have closed. That is the harsh reality.

If Archimandrite Chrysostomos remains in the priesthood, careful evaluation and appropriate therapy and guidance would be warranted, and assigning him to a parish environment involving young people and children would seem inadvisable. He should be appointed to an office position to make his livelihood.

And let me state something else clearly: I have nothing personal against anyone, specifically including Archimandrite Chrysostomos Gilbert, whom I do not know personally and with whom I have never even spoken by telephone.

Nor, of course, is there anything personal against Archbishop Elpidophoros. Our critical interventions arise solely out of concern for our Church and our Greek-American community. Plain speaking.

Therefore, with due respect, we recommend that when he returns to his See at the beginning of June, he personally explain to the Cathedral congregation, as well as to the broader Church and Greek-American community, what transpired and what is at stake because of the “inappropriate behaviors” of the Cathedral’s dean. Heaven forbid that he delegates this to Villis, or to Nektarios, or to Tsougarakis, or certainly to Athenagoras, whom he would do well to “send away” back to where he brought him from, for reasons known to Elpidophoros himself and, naturally, also to Bartholomew…

Beyond the immediate matter at hand, broader issues within the Archdiocese also require attention.

Elpidophoros should also have the courage to address other matters and reassess certain decisions involving individuals he brought from Turkey, Greece, Africa, and most recently Jerusalem, before problems become larger and more difficult to manage.

The monasteries, too, deserve closer attention, given that they often operate with limited accountability. Questions surrounding them have not disappeared and should not simply be ignored.

Moreover, Elpidophoros can no longer continue hiding from the festering wound of Saint Demetrios Cathedral in Astoria and its Greek School. He himself must take responsibility — not the planted “captains” and “captainesses,” as he called them from the pulpit of Saint Catherine’s, specifically Elaine Allen, who is everywhere and involved in everything if you prefer; the ever-giggling Athenagoras; and the meddlesome holder of multiple positions both here and in Greece, Stamkopoulos — because ultimately the responsibility belongs to the Archbishop, not to the aforementioned hangers-on.