Rev. Dr. John Chryssavgis
Executive Director of the Huffington Ecumenical Institute at Holy Cross School of Theology

At the beginning of his first term, I wrote an article exhorting Donald Trump to self-restraint in matters of faith. This article is an extension of that plea in the second Trump term, urging the President to do likewise when it comes to creation care and, specifically, the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Every day, it seems, we are exposed to an unrelenting onslaught of increasingly polarized and deeply fragmented, often ill-natured and vitriolic discourse about what Trump is doing to America and the world. From geopolitical upheaval over NATO, Greenland, and Venezuela to local chaos over heavy-handed immigration raids to fatal shootings in Minneapolis, this administration seems positively addicted to crisis. We’ve all grown used to it somehow. It’s become the white noise that suffuses and surrounds our daily consciousness, to the point where it is scarcely even noticeable any longer. Any criticism is immediately deflected or dismissed—in a grievously unserious trope that entirely inverts reality—as “Trump derangement syndrome” or “fake outrage.” Its effects are readily apparent not just on social media (where it has always festered most conveniently), but increasingly in faith communities, professional circles, and family life. Relationships everywhere—from intimate gatherings to global alliances—are straining under the weight of one man’s unbridled lust for power and money as well as revenge and attention. No president in US history has resorted to so many lawsuits and withholding government money to stifle criticism and change policy, thereby generating a climate of fear and silence.

In addition, many are tired of seeing someone of such moral inadequacy and uncultured boorishness absorb so much of the oxygen in media (mainstream and unhinged) and in public conversation (real and in cyberspace). It seems to have altered reality for everyone: corporate and church leaders cower to and enable him; evangelical crusaders and religious neophytes idolize and normalize him; entitled plutocrats reap tax benefits and government contracts, while small business owners, young adults, and blue-collar workers are left with more medical and personal debt.

For whatever reason, not everyone can see that he has thoroughly debased the office he holds. For whatever reason, not everyone can see that he has done irreparable damage to the reputation of the United States as a reliable ally. For whatever reason, not everyone can see that he has internally divided and globally isolated our nation. For whatever reason, not everyone can see that he has fundamentally compromised and undermined core constitutional and civil rights. The onslaught persists on a daily basis.

It᾽s no wonder then that the recent news that the EPA will soon be revoking the endangerment finding at the EPA is but another one-day news blip. Who cares and who even knows what it is?  The 2009 “Endangerment Finding” demonstrated that public health and welfare are threatened by greenhouse gases (oil, gas, and coal), which should be regulated by the federal government. It is the scientific and legal foundation on which government policy and court rulings is based. Revoking it ends the government regulation and has lasting consequences that gamble with the future of our children. Whether we voted for Trump or not, can we not all at least agree that he does not have any right to gamble or, worse, sabotage the future of our children and grandchildren irreparably and irrevocably?

Against this backdrop, it is incumbent on those of us who still retain an appreciation for the stability and sanity that preceded this era, at the very least, not to look the other way when it comes to what Trump has done to a precious domain of policy that means a great deal to me and one that receives far less attention than deserved—namely, climate policy. In particular, we cannot ignore the evident determination of the Trump administration to slow or reverse commitments on this front undertaken by his predecessors, despite those promises already being embraced and endorsed by private and state actors alike around the world, such as the United Nations Climate Change Conferences.

In the past, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has written to several US presidents to convey his congratulations on environmental policies or concerns about energy issues. But let me focus on just one president for purposes of this article. I was at the Phanar each of the years below when His All-Holiness wrote to President Obama:

• Thanking him in 2011 for his “comprehensive national strategy and policy in the ‘Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future.’”
• Commending him in 2013 for his “Climate Action Plan” and “the courageous manner, with which [he]underlined our moral obligation to future generations by assuming ‘the courage to act before it’s too late,’ affirming [his]inaugural pledge to ‘preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God.’” On the same occasion, Patriarch Bartholomew added: “There is no doubt in our mind that this is a movement as critically urgent and as morally imperative as any campaign for fundamental human and civil rights.”
• Supporting his efforts in 2015 through the Environmental Protection Agency to formulate “the unprecedented and long anticipated ‘Clean Power Plan,’ which drew clear and direct connections between climate change and human health.” At that time, the Patriarch also noted: “We believe that this world has been granted to us as a divine gift and as a legacy for future generations. Such decisive and definitive action is as critically urgent and as morally imperative as any political campaign for fundamental human and civil rights. For the willingness to exploit the environment is revealed in the willingness to tolerate human suffering.”

As we watch and witness the unprecedented reversal of environmental standards and rampant deregulation of the energy sector touted by this President, I cannot help but fear that the price that will inevitably be passed along to our children is of even less concern to our generation than I had previously supposed. The short-sightedness of the current administration—rooted as it is in the President’s ignorant and contemptuous dismissal of the climate crisis as “a giant scam”—will no doubt be contested in the courts and in future elections. But the final reckoning will doubtless extend beyond the ephemeral spheres of law and politics. Its real repercussions will be felt by untold generations to come—in other words, by those who have not yet had the opportunity to cast a ballot or have their voices heard, who will ultimately feel most aggrieved by the political myopia and self-centeredness of this moment. To put it mildly, they will wonder at those who were silent.

In this context, I cannot help but feel a deep sense of disappointment, if not outright repugnance, at the hesitancy with which those organizing the Templeton Prize ceremony in honor of His All-Holiness in September 2025, sought to avoid attracting the displeasure of the White House. Their fear of expressing anything that might be perceived as critical of or even potentially offensive to the current administration fundamentally belies the principal ambition of the patriarchate’s ecological initiatives, which is to highlight the perennial and often-forgotten connection between faith and science and shed light on the corresponding association between environmental degradation and countless forms of suffering. In a powerful and prescient, if in retrospect, sadly ironic twist, His All-Holiness reminded his audience of precisely the perspective I would have hoped that the church and wider polity might adopt, but is instead contradicted on a daily basis:

“We cannot heal our relationship with the planet without healing our relationships with each other. We cannot achieve environmental sustainability while maintaining social inequality. We cannot save the earth without practicing justice . . . May we find the courage to speak truth to power and the wisdom to speak love to fear. May we discover that caring for creation is not a burden but a gift. And may we remember, even in dark moments, that every crisis is also an opportunity, every death the possibility of resurrection. The earth is groaning, but it is also hoping. The question is whether we will join its song of grief or its chorus of gratitude.”

Now is the time to end the fear of retribution and silence. Now is the time to speak out for the Green Patriarch’s long legacy of creation care and for the future of generations to come. Now is the time to speak out before the revocation of the “endangerment finding” and for the record in the courts that will handle the appeals when the revocation happens. Future generations will be looking and listening!

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Rev. Dr. John Chryssavgis was born in Australia and studied theology (University of Athens) and Byzantine Music (Greek Conservatory of Music). He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Oxford.

After spending time on Mt. Athos, he served as Personal Assistant to Archbishop Stylianos in Australia, where he co-founded St Andrew’s Theological College and taught at the University of Sydney. Subsequently, he was appointed Professor of Theology at Holy Cross School of Theology and directed the Religious Studies Program at Hellenic College.

The author of many books and articles in several languages on theology, spirituality, and ecology, Fr. John’s publications include three volumes of collected works by His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, whose biography by Fr. John was published by Harper Collins.

By Matthew Namee

This morning, February 19, 2026, Metropolitan Dimitrios Couchell reposed. Although comparatively few know his name, he was, in fact, one of the greatest men in the history of Greek Orthodoxy in America…

Read the complete article here

---

Related Article

Memory eternal, Metropolitan Dimitrios of Xanthos

It is with deep sadness but hope in the Resurrection that we announce the falling asleep of Metropolitan Dimitrios of Xanthos on February 19, 2026. Metropolitan Dimitrios is survived by his son Nikita David Mesfin, whom he adopted in 1985 while visiting an orphanage in Ethiopia, David’s wife Maki, and their children Ezra and Emra. The Metropolitan is also survived by his brother Archon John Couchell and his wife Kiki, and his sister Fanya Couchell Paouris.

Upon learning of the passing of Metropolitan Dimitrios, His Eminence Archbishop Elpidophoros of America officiated a Trisagion service for the repose of his soul at the Archdiocesan Chapel and said, “Our beloved Metropolitan Dimitrios served our Church in America with unwavering love, deep devotion, and heartfelt zeal. He guided our Church forward—strengthening our youth, advancing our missions, and fostering ecumenical outreach. May his memory be eternal, and may we faithfully continue along the path he so thoughtfully set before us.”

Metropolitan Dimitrios (Couchell) of Xanthos was born in on February 17,1938 and graduated from Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in 1963. After continuing studies at Yale Divinity School in New Haven, CT he became a part of the Archdiocese staff under Archbishop Iakovos.

He left behind many blessed and great ministries that will survive him for centuries to come, all for the Glory of God. These ministries include founder of the Orthodox Christian Fellowship (OCF- agency of the Assembly of Bishops), founding editor of the Orthodox Observer, founding Director of the Orthodox Christian Mission Center (OCMC- agency of the Assembly of Bishops) and founding Executive Director of St. Photios National Shrine.

In 1977 he was elected to serve as President of Syndesmos, which was headquartered in Helsinki, Finland concluding in1980 with the first World Orthodox Youth Festival, hosted by the Orthodox Monastery in Valamo, Finland. Today the Syndesmos legacy is continued and revived through SUPRASL: A World Fellowship of Orthodox Youth, run by Director Archdeacon Joseph Matuziak and is held in the historic Monastery of the Annunciation in Eastern Poland.

Along with all of these achievements Metropolitan Dimitrios also assumed, during his time, the roles and responsibilities of the following: Foreign Mission efforts of the Archdiocese, Ecumenical Officer responsible for the Inter-Orthodox, Inter-Christian and Inter-faith relations of the Archdiocese, General Secretary of SCOBA while serving on the Executive Committee of the NCCC, and various committees of the WCC, and was on the Board of the New York City Council of Churches. He was also selected to participate in the delegation representing the Ecumenical Patriarchate at the meeting with Pope John Paul II for the Patronal Feastday of Sts. Peter & Paul in 1999.

Metropolitan Dimitrios continued to be a presence and active member in Saint Augustine, FL following his retirement in 2007, where he has a standing exhibit in the creed room at the Shrine Museum. This dedication is a testament to his time at Saint Photios National Shrine, beginning in 1981 when he was elected as Executive Director, which was followed by his ordination in 1983, elevation to archimandrite in 1985, episcopacy in 1988 and in 2023, the see of Xanthos to Metropolis. Metropolitan just recently celebrated his birthday at the Saint Photios National Shrine Weekend.

May his memory be eternal, and may the Lord grant him rest among the righteous.

Details of the funeral service:
Thursday, February 26, 2026 at 10:30 a.m.
Greek Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity, St. Augustine, FL

Today, February 18, His Eminence Archbishop Elpidophoros presided over the regular Spring session of the Holy Eparchial Synod, convened via teleconference. 

At the opening of the Synod’s session, the Archbishop, after welcoming the members of the Holy Eparchial Synod, announced the itinerary for the forthcoming visit of His Beatitude Archbishop Ioannis of Albania, to the United States in order to participate in the International Academic Conference organized by the Huffington Institute of Hellenic College Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, dedicated to the person of the late Archbishop Anastasios of Albania (Boston, March 2–4, 2026). On this occasion, His Beatitude Archbishop Ioannis will preside over the Pan-Orthodox Festal Divine Liturgy on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, March 1, at the Church of Saint Catherine in Braintree of the Holy Metropolis of Boston. 

Thereafter, the Synod, as a body, offered prayers for the repose of the soul of the recently departed and ever-memorable Bishop Timothy of Hexamilion. 

Subsequently, the Holy Eparchial Synod addressed the items on the agenda and, among other things: 

1. Approved, in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of the current Charter of the Sacred Archdiocese, the initiation of the process for the transfer of the Community of Saints Theodoroi in Gloversville, New York, from the Holy Metropolis of Detroit to the Direct Archdiocesan District, in consultation with the Archdiocesan Council and subject to the final approval of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. 
2. Was informed of the decision of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem to offer the use of its property on Long Island in order in order meet the needs of the Jordanian/Palestinian Vicariate of the Sacred Archdiocese. 
3. Approved the new “Guidelines on Parish and Clergy Engagement in Political Activity.” 
4. Following a request by His Eminence Metropolitan Nathanael of Chicago for the elevation of his Chancellor, the V. Rev. Archimandrite Dionysios Anagnostopoulos, to the episcopal rank in order to serve the Holy Metropolis of Chicago as his Auxiliary Bishop, the Holy Eparchial Synod, upon the proposal of the Archbishop, proceeded with the implementation of the process for the formulation of the triprosopon, as provided by the current Regulations for the Election of Auxiliary Bishops. Following a vote, the triprosopon, on the basis of which the Ecumenical Patriarchate will be requested to proceed with the canonical election of an Auxiliary Bishop, was composed of the following Very Reverend Archimandrites: 1) Dionysios Anagnostopoulos, receiving 7 votes; 2) Nektarios Cottros, receiving 3 votes; and 3) Makarios Niakaros, receiving 2 votes. 

At the conclusion of the session, heartfelt wishes were exchanged between the Archbishop and the Synodal Hierarchs for the forthcoming Holy and Great Lent. 

A Look at the Recent Influx of Converts

Rev. Matthew Brown
Doctoral Student in Systematic Theology at Fordham University

Ever since emerging from the lockdowns, Orthodox parishes—almost exclusively English-speaking ones—have experienced a historic increase in inquirers and converts. It is probably safe to say that there hasn’t been such an intense and sustained period of growth in the history of Orthodoxy in America. What is remarkable is not only the sheer number of newcomers but also the short timeframe in which this has occurred.

This past July, I participated in the Orthodox Church in America’s All-American Council, a triennial event comprising the Synod of Bishops along with clergy and lay delegates from across our jurisdiction. Nearly every conversation I had with fellow clergy was marked by the same theme: unprecedented growth. Parishes with 10, 20, or even 30 catechumens were not outliers—they were the norm.

This influx is novel not only in quantity but in composition. Before COVID, inquirers were typically devout individuals from other religious traditions experiencing a crisis of faith—what is now popularly termed “deconstruction”—or people marrying into the faith. Converts were usually white. Today, we are seeing people from nearly every background, most of whom have little or no religious upbringing. They are not as knowledgeable or devout as the typical inquirer from previous decades. Furthermore, the ethnic and racial diversity among them is significantly broader than anything we’ve seen previously.

As much as this is a cause for celebration, it is also a moment for caution. This influx presents serious pastoral challenges. Across jurisdictions, there is a shortage of clergy. Catechumens and inquirers require substantial attention—and rightly so. Setting a firm, healthy foundation for our “little ones” (neophytes) is our duty. Growth on this scale demands that we rethink how we do catechesis: it must be more organized, and priests must increasingly delegate ministry to lower clergy and trained lay leaders. Organization has not historically been Orthodoxy’s strength, but it is now essential.

The internet is playing a central role in drawing these seekers to the Church, simply because our society is online to a far greater degree than ever—especially Generation Z. The internet has expanded Orthodoxy’s visibility enormously. Almost every visitor to our parishes today has encountered the Church first in the virtual realm. Additionally, Orthodox Christians enjoy an outsized online presence—both in quantity and quality. I suspect this is due to two factors: first, we are the youngest of all Christian traditions in America, as highlighted by the recent Orthodox Christian Studies Institute report analyzing the 2024 Pew Religious Landscape Study and the Cooperative Election Study. Second, the kinds of people who convert to Orthodoxy are typically self-selecting outliers. Orthodoxy, not being a mainstream tradition in America, tends to attract those who are seeking something markedly different.

A New York Times article, commenting on the previously mentioned 2024 Pew study in February 2025, noted that—for the first time in decades—the decline in American religiosity has stalled, primarily due to Generation Z. Ruth Graham writes: “The ‘nones’—those in the American population who tell researchers they have no religious affiliation—have been growing for decades. ‘Now that growth has either slowed or stopped completely,’ Dr. Burge said, ‘and that’s a big deal.’”

An earlier Times article from Fall 2024 highlighted another surprising trend: a significant uptick in religious observance among young men. This “masculine turn” among Gen Z was also noted by the Pew study, which revealed that Orthodoxy now has the highest percentage of male adherents among Christian traditions in the U.S.

Some corners of online Orthodoxy have characterized this trend as a manifestation of “toxic masculinity” or viewed it as more a problem than a cause for celebration. I believe such characterizations are overstated. From my own pastoral experience, I have not encountered what I would consider a prevalence of ‘toxic masculinity’. Rather, what is far more common is a good degree of immaturity, but this is to be expected among young adults who overwhelmingly come from broken households. A good religious community with healthy older male role models is a good antidote. Furthermore, what one sees online is far from representative of what walks through the front doors of our churches. Too often I fear our opinions on many matters in society are disproportionately formed from the virtual rather than the analog and we live in a media landscape which in its ruthless attention economy has primed us to be overly reactive and fearful.

Historically, religion in America has skewed heavily female in terms of adherents. What we’re seeing now is a narrowing of that gap. Pew data confirms that Orthodoxy, at most, has achieved a 50/50 gender ratio—whereas other traditions, especially mainline denominations, remain overwhelmingly female.

If your parish has not seen this phenomenon, one likely reason is the language of your liturgical services. Converting to Orthodoxy is already a significant undertaking; adding a linguistic barrier is often too much. Those seeking Orthodoxy are not looking to change their ethnic identity, even if they deeply appreciate the cultural diversity within the Church. Rather, they seek to transform the cultural and social space they already inhabit through the Orthodox faith. These individuals will almost always gravitate toward communities where the Divine Services are celebrated in English.

Now is the time for the Greek Archdiocese to transition to English-language worship. I do not mean a token gesture—I mean predominantly. A good rule of thumb is this: the liturgical language should reflect the linguistic reality of the parish. If only 10% of the worshippers speak Greek as their first language, then no more than 10% of the Liturgy should be in Greek.

Moreover, this is not an Orthodox land. We have been entrusted with the Gospel and charged to proclaim it. We ought to have an eye not only to the linguistic reality of our parishes, but to the wider community in which they are set. Our worship should reflect the language of this time and place. This is a real sacrifice. The language of our ancestors is not without value. But it is a small treasure to relinquish for the sake of the greater treasure of fulfilling our Lord’s desire: “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all people to myself” (John 12:32).

If we want Orthodoxy to be more than an ethnic enclave or a boutique religion for outliers, we must remove the barriers that keep seekers at bay. We must not bind them with burdens too heavy to bear (Matt. 23:4). To settle for remaining a marginal tradition in American life is a betrayal of our Lord’s command: “Go into all the world…” (Mark 16:15).

We stand at a pivotal moment—a gift has been given to us. What will we do with it? Will we, in Eucharistic fashion, offer it back to God in thanksgiving?

In the Divine Liturgy, we take the fruits of the earth—wheat and grapes—and mix them with our labor to produce bread and wine, making them something more than what we started with. Then, in imitation of Christ’s own sacrifice, we offer them back to God. If we do the same with this present gift to the Church, we will find, as we do every Sunday, that God will give it back to us a hundredfold. “Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over…” (Luke 6:38).

But we must do the work—all of us. God will not complete this mission without us. The wheat and wine of this present moment in Orthodoxy will become for us the very body and blood of Christ. For what does the human heart desire more than love? And what is love, if not communion with the One who first loved us? And who is more beloved by God than the lost sheep (Luke 15:1-7)?

Let us love them with that same cruciform love. A resurrectional gift awaits us—if we are willing to join Christ on the cross and make the necessary sacrifice laid before us now. Then, when we offer the Holy Gifts, we will be able to say with all sincerity: “Thine own, of Thine own…” (Anaphora of St. John Chrysostom).

About the author

Rev. Matthew Brown
Doctoral Student in Systematic Theology at Fordham University

Who this is for:

Orthodox Christians who love the Church and want to understand—without pressure or polemics—what “administrative unity” means, why it is discussed, and why it matters.

1. What do we mean by “administrative unity”?

Administrative unity refers to Orthodox Christians in a given country being organized under a unified, coordinated ecclesiastical structure, rather than multiple overlapping jurisdictions based on ethnic or historical lines.

It does not mean:

• Changing Orthodox theology or doctrine

• Eliminating legitimate liturgical or cultural diversity

• Disrespecting the episcopacy or canonical order

It does mean:

• Greater coordination, clarity, and stewardship

• A more understandable Orthodox presence in society

• Structures that reflect the Church’s life in the place she exists

2. What is the situation in the United States today?

In the United States, Orthodox Christians are served by more than a dozen jurisdictions, often overlapping in the same cities and regions.

This arrangement developed historically as immigrants brought their faith with them. While this was understandable at the time, many now ask whether these structures still serve the Church’s mission today.

3. Why does this matter?

Administrative division can affect:

• Witness: Orthodoxy is harder to understand when represented by many parallel structures

• Stewardship: Duplication of effort and resources

• Pastoral life: Confusion for converts, youth, and mixed-background families

• Future generations: Young Orthodox Christians often ask why unity seems distant

These are not political concerns—they are pastoral and practical ones.

4. What has been done so far?

In 2010, the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the United States was formed to foster cooperation and move toward canonical normalization.

Progress has been made in areas such as:

• Shared ministries

• Pan-Orthodox cooperation

• Common statements and relief efforts

At the same time, many Orthodox Christians perceive that visible administrative unity remains elusive, and questions persist about pace, structure, and direction.

5. What is the role of the laity?

Orthodox tradition recognizes that the laity:

• Share responsibility for the life and witness of the Church

• Have a role in expressing concerns respectfully and faithfully

• Contribute through prayer, stewardship, education, and dialogue

Listening to the laity—carefully and without pressure—is part of healthy ecclesial life.

6. What is Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL)?

Orthodox Christian Laity is a national lay organization dedicated to:

• Education and communication

• Encouraging dialogue about unity

• Supporting the Church’s witness in America

• Acting respectfully, constructively, and non-confrontationally

OCL does not seek to replace or challenge Church authority. Its role is to listen, educate, and elevate responsible lay engagement.

7. What can I do?

You can:

• Learn more and stay informed

• Share resources respectfully

• Participate in anonymous listening efforts like the Unity Pulse

• Pray for the Church’s unity, witness, and faithfulness

Administrative unity is not an abstract idea. It is about how the Church lives, serves, and witnesses in this land—now and for generations to come.

Add your voice: Take the Unity Pulse (1 question, anonymous) – CLICK HERE
Receive thoughtful updates: Sign up for OCL’s Unity Briefings – FILL IN THE FORM BELOW

Fr. Peter Samore, Director of Communications

The Orthodox Studies Institute’s Matthew Namee and Dcn. Seraphim Rohlin join Fr. Andrew to talk about statistical trends in Orthodox Christianity in America and speculate about how they might play out in the coming decades.

Eighteen years later, what’s changed?

Originally published November 25, 2025

Inside the OrthoSphere, everyone’s talking about Ruth Graham’s New York Times article about the influx of converts—particularly men—into American Orthodoxy.

Funnily enough, I wrote an article about this very thing eighteen years ago. It was a surprising phenomenon, back then, that the majority of converts were young men. These guys were just showing up at the doors of Orthodox churches, usually after a lot of independent study. (There’s a saying: “Why did he become Orthodox?” “He read too much.”)

Back then the predominance of male inquirers really stood out, because Western Christian churches had long excelled in attracting women. (In a piece I wrote for Christianity Today in 1999, I cite a female-to-male ratio in American churches ranging from 2:1 to 7:1.)

And here’s an aside, which means you can skip this part: I have long wondered at the sad side-effect of the Reformation, that there were suddenly many different versions of Christianity to choose from. Each person was free to hear the current thought-leaders, read the Scriptures, and come to their own conclusions.

That meant churches were in competition with each other to attract members. (I’m not arguing about the content of the Reformation now—just focusing on this inevitable side-effect.)

Horribly, in 20th century America the choose-your-own-theology option blended with the developing consumerist ethos, and churches began thinking they’d better “be relevant” (there were dire warnings about that, in the 1960s) and “seeker-friendly” (likewise dire, 1980s).

Churches yearned to to reach unbelievers by identifying their “felt needs” (hoo boy), that is, what unbelievers thought their needs were. Churches should find out what unbelievers thought they needed, and offer it, to attract them.

It was assumed that people felt sad and lonely, so these churches offered comfort and reassurance. And entertainment. Mega-churches were mega for a reason. Sadly, their offerings largely attracted already-Christians rather than unbelievers, so the earnest motivation of evangelism went mostly unfulfilled.

I hope I don’t have to explain this—this aside has already gone on longer than it should—but women generally have a greater tolerance for this sort of thing than men do. (Yes, I know there are exceptions. Me, for example.) That’s why Americans think “Religion is for women,” even though we know that’s not true of Islam or Orthodox Judaism.

Any human likes being comforted and reassured—this approach is not just “for women.” But men, in general, are quicker to get itchy about it.

That’s why Orthodoxy seemed masculine, when it came to public notice in the late 1980s. Orthodoxy did not go through the softening effects of competition and consumerism that confused American churches. It knew what it was to be battered by persecutors of Christian faith but, if anything, that made Orthodoxy more committed to its ancient self, more emphatically unchanging. Thus it escaped the saponifying process of American consumerism.

When I was trying, eighteen years ago, to figure out what made Orthodoxy so attractive to men, I took a seat-of-the-pants approach: I asked ‘em. I emailed a hundred Orthodox men, most of whom joined the Church as adults, and asked what they thought made the Church particularly attractive.

I got far more responses than I could ever use, even allowing the piece to run to 3700 words. The most consistent answer could be summed up in one word: Challenge. Men just really loved the challenging tone of Orthodoxy. They liked the clarity of what was being asked of them. They liked having a goal.

In most churches of their prior experience, once you were in, you just stayed there as the years went by. You kept hearing inspiring sermons, singing inspiring songs, and reading inspiring books. Eventually you died and went to heaven.

These Orthodox converts loved that something was now being required of them. That sin is a danger, a poison, not merely superficial matter like breaking a law. Sin is infection, not infraction.

And the Cross is not a transaction whereby our sin-debt is paid; the Father forgives our sins without requiring payment, like the father of the Prodigal. (If Scriptures are cascading through your mind as you think “But, but, but—” read my short book, Two Views of the Cross.)

Sin is a poison that destroys the soul, so we struggle against it every day. That means everyone’s first step is humility. Even the greatest hierarch knows he is a sinner and has to cling to humility.

These men loved finding out that the Bible is actually true, when it comes to spiritual reality. Saints and angels, spirits good and bad, they really exist. The battle is real, and begins anew every morning. They love that. It must be the same thing inside that makes men want to sign up for the Marines.

It was common back then to see enthusiastic husbands bringing reluctant or bewildered wives to church. I was one of them, one of the wives who didn’t get it. My husband fell in love with Orthodoxy instantly, but it was too foreign and inscrutable to me.

I asked not long ago on my Facebook page, if you were one of those resistant wives but now love Orthodoxy, how did that come about? And people said, looking back, it was just that they kept going to worship. Their objections faded as some authenticity, some authority, emerged through the process of worship. They encountered the God whom all Orthodox worship points to, and now they love it as much as their husbands do.

I think what I missed at first, and was bewildered by its absence, was the attention to me and my needs that I had received in Protestant life. Looking back, boy, what a relief to be freed from that.

Eighteen years ago, things were different; if men were going to church voluntarily, it made the news. But today men are actually more likely to attend church than women, which the Barna Group calls “a major gender shift.” There are more men in churches everywhere, not only Orthodox churches. Perhaps this constitutes one of our Church’s few and treasured memories of being a trend-setter.

And things changed in Orthodox churches as well. While it used to be mostly men on the doorstep, now it’s now a grand mix: single men, single women, wives bringing hesitant husbands, husbands bringing skeptical wives, happy couples bringing each other, parents with a baby, parents with a couple of kids, parents with lots of kids, and (sometimes) perplexed parents dropping off teens who have been reading a lot of odd books lately.

What’s important to notice is that it isn’t, and never was, “Orthodoxy is masculine.” It only felt masculine, in comparison with the general run of American churches.

Because Orthodoxy wasn’t submerged in consumerism, that resistance felt masculine. But Orthodox spirituality is the same for men and women, and doesn’t artificially divide humanity in half. We all follow the same path.

But that’s not exactly right, because each of us is actually on a specific path, prepared for us by God, a path no one else is called to walk. With the help of our pastors or spiritual mothers and fathers, we discern the will of God for our lives and discern the way ahead.

(It’s beautiful that Orthodoxy is still small enough that that sort of personal guidance is possible. But more on that below.)

We are treasured by God in such an inexpressibly personal way, infinitely loved by the Person who knows us so much better than we know ourselves. Though we know ourselves in part, when you look down that well of self it just gets darker and darker. But if you got to the bottom you would see a glimmer of light: God’s love coming back to you. God who completely understands you, infinitely more than you can understand yourself. He has created a particular path for you, so you can be liberated from the pain and danger of of poisonous sin.

It’s like Orthodoxy is a great big fitness club, and there are all kinds of exercise machines there. There are some machines that almost everybody uses, and some only a few people use. We rely on trusty older friends in Christ to help us discern what we should be working on, and how. (They, too, are being guided by more-experienced friends.)

Each of us is so much more complex than we are even capable of knowing, and we suspect we are darker inside than we could bear to know. But under the darkness, God’s love was there all the time. God knows even the darkness inside us that we couldn’t face. And yet he loves us.

But that’s not the end of the story: he also sets us free. Christ went into Hades to lead us out.

My son Fr. Stephen Mathewes wrote on his Facebook page:

«A further reflection on the Orthodox-trending topic of “Orthobros” and perceived threats to the Faith…

I love that the Orthodox Church is masculine—although, I would say that it is not so much masculine as it is paternal. Like a good father, the Orthodox Church sets an example for me, instructs me, challenges me, corrects me, even chastises me. It gives me disciplines to work on and learn from. It will not let me make excuses for myself, but to stand again and keep going. It reveals to me an inner strength that I didn’t know I had (specifically, Christ energizing me). It prepares me to be in this difficult and treacherous world. It shapes me, and grows me into the person I need to be.

And at the very same time, I love that the Orthodox Church is feminine—or, more rightly, maternal. Like a good mother, the Orthodox Church feeds me (the Eucharist), washes me (baptism and absolution), clothes me (baptismal garments and priestly vestments), provides me with a home (church) and a family (fellow members). It holds me in my pain, tends to my wounds, reassures me when I am frightened, comforts me. It doesn’t tell me to stuff my feelings down, but gives them a voice in the prayers and hymns. It allows me to weep with sorrow and joy.

And with both the paternal and maternal voice, the Church tells me how much I am loved.

We need the Church to be both. And, thanks be to God, it is both.»

Did I tell you he’s my son? Would you like to see some baby pictures?

But here’s a note of concern. What’s different now is the sheer quantity of new arrivals. We seem to be at the tipping point between “It’s a great problem to have!” and “It’s a problem.”

My retired husband (Fr. Gregory Mathewes-Green) and I attend the church where our son (Fr. Stephen Mathewes, as above) is pastor, Christ the Savior Orthodox Church in Bluff City, Tennessee (“A Pan-Orthodox Community Witnessing To Southern Appalachia”).

Before covid, we’d have 60 or 70 worshipers on a Sunday. Now attendance is usually over 200. This past Sunday we had 248—the same number as at Pascha, just this past April. But it’s typical to have over-the-top attendance on Pascha, and this was just an ordinary Sunday.

So this “great problem to have” is shaping up to be an actual problem. There just aren’t enough Orthodox clergy to go around. Fr. Stephen had a packed day on Saturday, and another packed day on Sunday, and couldn’t fit in the traditional Post-Liturgical Nap. I watched him fall asleep at the dinner table.

It seems the people of All Saints Orthodox Church, Raleigh NC, are not uniformly happy with Ruth Graham’s New York Times article. Deacon David Keim posted a response which is getting fervent appreciation from fellow members of the church.

Journalists who write about religious topics, if they don’t understand the core of a church, the thing members love so powerfully, start looking for politics. If they can spot (or imagine) chest-pounding masculinity, or bizarre beliefs they consider “right-wing,” they conclude that that’s what’s really going on, and all the churchy talk is just a smoke screen.

So Graham leads with the scary appearance of “Orthobros,” converts mentally warped by “hard-edged influencers” on the Internet. Far down toward the bottom of the piece she admits that parish priests claim to address this problem:

In interviews, parish priests said they see it as part of their jobs to acculturate “Orthobros” with extreme views to parish life, which they insisted was far removed from the violent rhetoric online.

But critics say that top church leaders rarely condemn even the most noxious rhetoric from high-profile Orthodox Christians.

Are there high-profile Orthodox Christians emitting “noxious rhetoric”? I can’t think of one.

And who are those “critics”? Shouldn’t you cite your sources, so we can decide if they are capable of speaking knowledgeably?

Overall, it struck me as ironic that an atheist could grasp the inner life of All Saints Church so much more accurately that the “high-profile” [heh]religion journalist did. I’m talking about Jared Smith on his channel, Atheist Church Audit; he visits churches and records often-scathing reviews.

In this video about his visit to All Saints, I’ve cued it to the point where he says he was talking with the greeter in the narthex when the priest came through with his “holy entourage,” censing the room with his “I don’t know the term—jingle-bells incense.”

As he came into the foyer she paused, stopped speaking with me, turned to him, and bowed.

And something about that feels profound.

That even though I was a visitor, and even though she wanted to make me feel welcome, that came second to paying homage to God.

View the whole video—it’s really worth seeing. He gets it. She doesn’t. I wonder if she knows that.

In his Substack post on the NYT story above, Rod Dreher kindly calls me the “most influential Orthodox convert in the country.” I have wondered about that over the years, the role God gave me. With all this talk about Orthodoxy offering a challenging, “masculine” profile, why me? I’m short and plump and (by now) white-haired. Whatever is the opposite of “athletic,” that’s me. If God planned to address the Marine-gene in men, it seems like he could have chosen someone more appropriate.

What I think it is, is that God put me here so people could think, “Well, if she can do it, I can definitely do it.” Maybe my general insignificance was encouraging to others. Maybe that was the plan.

Someone said to me recently, “You have definitely earned the right to be called the Matriarch of American Orthodoxy!” That made me laugh. I don’t have any desire to rule like a matriarch. But if people will be kind to me, and take care of me if I get feeble-minded, that’s all I ask.

Here’s a lovely video about Annunciation Orthodox Church in Bergen, Norway. They are seeking to build a church that will express the truths of Holy Orthodoxy in the beauty of traditional Norwegian artistry. If you’d like to contribute, wait for the QR code at the end.

It’s hard to take in the sheer quantity of books being published about Orthodoxy now. When we were chrismated, in 1993, there was Metropolitan Kallistos Ware’s The Orthodox Church and not much else (and no Internet).

Now we’re able to see an Orthodox church-in-process in Norway, and today a translator asks me to link to his book, The Lives of the Athonite Athletes of Reverence from the 19th Century: Translated from the Russian original.

Yesterday I received a copy of The Diary, the journal kept by a Finnish Orthodox nun from her teen years through 45 years of monasticism. I get so many requests to blurb or review books, videos, and such that I have to guard my time—though I prefer to say yes, because people were kind to me when I was first becoming a writer, and I want to help others along the way.

But after I saw the cover of this book, I didn’t need much persuading. It was that little smile.

Thank you for persevering through this long post. Thank you for your prayers. I have to get up and struggle against sin every day, too.

CLICK HERE or on the image below to view/download the PDF

By Hellenic College Holy Cross

February 11, 2026

BROOKLINE, MA  – Today marks the launch of The Scriptorium Initiative at Holy Cross (TSI) website for the worldwide community. The website and The Scriptorium Initiative are the creation of the faculty of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology under the vision, leadership, and assiduous work of Dean Fr. Eugen J. Pentiuc.

Conceived by Fr. Pentiuc as a scriptorium (a designated room for thinking and writing—much like the scriptoria at the Qumran community or Medieval monasteries), TSI website provides special “office” locations (i.e., mini personalized websites within the rich and powerful TSI website) where Holy Cross faculty find a fitting environment for teaching, preaching, and proclaiming the word of God beyond the confines of the seminary classroom.

Said Fr. Pentiuc, “Our hope is that the website will become the etheric (digital) agora for a dynamic, continuous, and influential, exchange of ideas between Holy Cross faculty and various groups such as clergy, faithful, or just seekers of truth, beauty, and meaning in a world of rapid change.”

The TSI website is Holy Cross’s home for continuing education in the areas of Bible, theology, and spirituality from an Orthodox Christian perspective. The continuing education program envisioned by TSI, entitled Catechesis, is currently in its final phase of development and will be introduced soon. The program is crafted for clergy and laity. Four-week modules will offer clergy ways to refresh their theological education or acquire new skills in the digital proclamation of the Gospel of Christ. For lay learners of all abilities, continuing education will present the basics of the Orthodox faith in its theological and practical aspects. Enrollment information on Catechesis courses is forthcoming.

In October 2023, Holy Cross received a grant from Lilly Endowment Inc., based on a proposal written by Rev. Pentiuc and Dr. James C. Skedros, to help establish The Scriptorium: Preaching and Teaching the Word of God in a Digital Age. The grant is part of Lilly Endowment’s Compelling Preaching Initiative which aims to foster and support preaching that inspires, encourages and guides people to come to know and love God and to live out their Christian faith more fully. Lilly Endowment (https://lillyendowment.org) launched the Compelling Preaching Initiative in 2022 because of its interest in supporting projects that help to nurture the religious lives of individuals and families and foster the growth and vitality of Christian congregations in the United States.

Through a hybrid delivery network of offerings in-person and online, and in a variety of forms ranging from courses, workshops, and conferences to podcasts, webinars, and online television shows, The Scriptorium Initiative advances Holy Cross’ commitment to compelling preaching from the pulpit and to continuing education aimed at reaching traditional churchgoers as well as non-churchgoers.

His Eminence Archbishop Elpidophoros of America said, “We are grateful to the Lilly Endowment Initiative for believing in the vision and mission of our beloved School. This grant comes as a confirmation of Holy Cross’ rebirth
and its status as a place of the highest academic standards, dedicated to the service of the Church, of our Holy Archdiocese, and all clergy and faithful who will grow spiritually closer to God by engaging with the Lord’s teaching.”

In supporting and commending wholeheartedly the efforts of Fr. Eugen and Dr. Skedros, the Co-Directors of the Scriptorium,” continued His Eminence, “I also extend my Archepiscopal blessing to all the laborers involved in this new phase of our Theological School. This is indeed an exciting time when preaching and teaching can extend far beyond traditional settings or platforms to address the growing complexities of continuing education for both our clergy and laity. May the Good Sower bless The Scriptorium Initiative at Holy Cross, so the seeds cast around the globe may bring a rich harvest for the glory of God and His Holy Church!”

Fr. Eugen offered special thanks to Lilly Endowment for its financial support for the construction of the website; to GM7 and Sebastian Mahfood, OP, who secured the initial phase of website development; and to Mr. Alex Popovici, ThM, who completed the final development of the website work and secured a friendly learning management system with all the necessary trimmings for a robust CEP.

By Theodore Kalmoukos

BOSTON – At the 35th Leadership 100 Conference, held in Phoenix, Arizona, Archbishop Elpidophoros of America set forth his intentions regarding the transformation of the Theological School into a university—as The National Herald had previously revealed—as well as the relocation of the Archdiocesan Cathedral of New York to St. Bartholomew’s Church in Manhattan.

He also spoke of the sale of one of the two Archdiocesan Office buildings to finance the acquisition of St. Bartholomew’s, while the other building would be converted into the Archbishop’s residence. It is noted that Archbishop Elpidophoros has resided within the Archdiocesan building since the day of his arrival in America in June 2019, following renovations carried out on the premises.

According to a report in the official publication of the Archdiocese, the Orthodox Observer—published in English, as Greek has been almost entirely discontinued—the Archbishop articulated these intentions, which were presented as his “vision,” in response to a question posed by Leadership 100 Executive Director Paulette Poulos.

Specifically, when asked by Ms. Poulos to outline his principal visions for the Church, Archbishop Elpidophoros placed the Theological School at the very top of his priorities. He noted that as the institution approaches its 90th anniversary, its endowment remains smaller than the $38 million that Leadership 100 alone has granted it over 42 years.

“This school is the number one priority of our Church,” he declared. “We explored the idea to grow Hellenic College Holy Cross into a university. Why not?”

To illustrate his point, the Archbishop cited the example of the University of Balamand in Lebanon, founded in 1988 by Patriarch Ignatius IV of Antioch. That institution, he noted, began as a seminary in a monastery in the Koura District of northern Lebanon—not in a wealthy capital, but in a rural area near the Syrian border—and has since grown into a thriving university with some 15,000 students.

“In our case,” Archbishop Elpidophoros said, “we have a school for 90 years, located in the educational Athens of the world, in Boston. Let’s try to create the first Greek university in the United States.” He added that such a project would require careful long-term planning and the full dedication of the community, not just its leadership.

Moving the Cathedral to St. Bartholomew’s: “Symbols Matter” 

Drawing a direct line from the legacy of Archbishop Iakovos—who walked alongside the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in Selma, Alabama, in 1965 and in doing so placed the Greek Orthodox Church at the center of American public life—Archbishop Elpidophoros argued that the time had come for the next great step.

“It was Archbishop Iakovos who took a huge step,” His Eminence said. “He took an immigrant church and put it in the center of American political and economic life. Everybody now knows, after Iakovos, who the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America is.”

The next step, the Archbishop proposed, is to acquire St. Bartholomew’s Church—the landmark Byzantine-style Episcopal church at 325 Park Avenue between 50th and 51st Streets in Midtown Manhattan—and make it the new cathedral of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese.

“In Manhattan, there are two monuments that are the monuments of Manhattan,” he said. “One is St. Patrick’s Cathedral. And the other monument in Manhattan is St. Bartholomew’s Church on Park Avenue. I think it’s time for us to move to St. Bartholomew’s.”

Archbishop Elpidophoros noted that St. Bartholomew’s is designated a National Historic Landmark and features richly Byzantine-inspired architecture.

The plan, as outlined by the Archbishop, would consolidate the institutional infrastructure of the Archdiocese. The substantial community house adjacent to St. Bartholomew’s could become the national headquarters of the Church. He proposed that Leadership 100, which currently pays rent for its offices, could relocate there. The National Philoptochos Society could also move in, as could the Order of Saint Andrew the Apostle, Archons of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

Of the two Archdiocese-owned buildings on East 79th Street, the Archbishop proposed that one could be sold to help finance the acquisition, while the other—the building containing the chapel—could remain as the Archbishop’s residence.

“Symbols matter in this country and in every country,” he told the audience. “This will make our Church one of the mainstream churches in the United States, respected and accepted by everyone.”

Meanwhile, the current Archdiocesan Cathedral of the Holy Trinity on East 74th Street could be repurposed to dramatically expand the Cathedral School, which the Archbishop described as struggling for space. He pointed to a growing demand for church-run parochial schools in Manhattan as a strong reason to give the school room to grow.

He also spoke of “the wave of converts to Orthodoxy” and the “need for well-trained catechists,” stating that “the Church needs certified catechists—individuals who have completed coursework through the theological school, received proper accreditation, and are equipped to be the designated teachers of the faith in their parishes. These catechists would bring consistency and quality to the process of receiving converts.”

CLICK HERE or on the image below to view the video (Romanian with English subtitles)

Saint Arsenie of Prislop, the Confessor, was born in 1910, bearing the name Zian-Vălean Boca. He studied Theology in Sibiu and Fine Arts in Bucharest. A refined intellect, he showed from an early age a deep inclination toward the monastic life. He became a monk of strict ascetic discipline, a spiritual father loved and respected by many, and a unique iconographer, remarkable for his ability to give visible form to the Divine Mysteries.

In Transylvania, through his spiritual guidance and deeply lived ministry, he inspired a genuine movement of renewal of the faith. Endowed with many spiritual gifts, he worked numerous miracles even during his lifetime, for the calling entrusted to him by God was an exceptional one.

Father Dumitru Stăniloae described him in these words: “His word springs from the rock-like steadfastness of one who neither bargains nor wavers like a reed shaken by the wind, but remains whole, just as his speech is: pure, opposed to every passion and to every thought of pride.”

Under the communist regime, he was regarded with hostility by the totalitarian and repressive system. He was cast into prisons, yet the prayers of Saint Arsenie moved even the guards to tears and opened the locked doors sealed by the tormentors. For this reason, he was eventually released, though granted only a severely restricted freedom. He was slandered, humiliated, and kept under constant surveillance. Moreover, he was forbidden to serve again as both monk and priest.

Even so, countless faithful continued to seek him out, asking for spiritual guidance and help. He fell asleep in the Lord in 1989 and was buried at Prislop Monastery. He is commemorated on November 28, and to this day he is sought by believers—through pilgrimages to Sâmbăta, Prislop, and Drăgănescu, through prayers of the heart, and through the reading of his spiritual writings.

This documentary, produced by the Association of Orthodox Christian Students of Romania (ASCOR) and published on the association’s official channel, seeks to bring to the public’s attention the life, work, and witness of this great saint of the Romanian people. The material is based exclusively on interviews conducted between 2013 and 2015, as well as in 2025.