“The measure is backed by California Church Impact, a group whose members include the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, the Greek Orthodox Church and others. But lawmakers have been flooded with letters of opposition from groups including the California Catholic Conference, the First Southern Baptist Church and the Thousand Oaks Christian Fellowship.”

Strictly speaking, this statement is perfectly accurate. The Greek Orthodox Church is a member of California Church Impact which is backing the measure. That’s bad enough.

It is nice to hear that GOARCH is not explicitly backing the California Church Impact position and, in fact, has stated that this position is at odds with Orthodoxy. But the question then becomes, “Why let yourself be used as a legitimizing token for a pseudo-Christian front?” The answer we normally get is not too convincing. “We are there to witness the Orthodox faith to separated brethren.” Fine. Join “Claim the Blessing” too, or an organization of “Christians” for “choice”. Lots of witnessing needs to be done there. What’s the difference between those organizations which advocate unorthodox morality and CCI which advocates unorthodox morality? In a way, CCI and the WCC and NCC are worse. Claim the Blessing dares to be evil on one issue, as does, for example, Catholics for Choice. CCI/NCC/WCC dare to be evil on quite a few issues.

Lying down with dogs makes it highly likely you’ll catch fleas. This puts into focus the inherent foolishness of ecumenism. Does anyone in his right mind think we are convincing progressives to adopt Orthodox theology or morality? No. So apart from giving us prominence, does anything good result? No. Is it good to be perceived prominently as taking common cause with those who despise Christian morality? No.

So why in the world are Orthodox Churches members of these morally despicable organizations?

Your point?

Well done, indeed Fr. Although I fear that Harry is on to something, the fact that the GOA diocese in question corrected the assertion is a credit to them. And yes, Fr Hans and the AOI do deserve the credit regardless.

Yes. Still, unless those who published the wrong thing to millions publish the corrective press release: it’s only half a car. Has the Met. Of S.F. delivered the release and called the various big papers looking for a correction? If not, then it’s a gesture to critics, not meant to be effective where the damage was done. Much as there was no article (at least that I found) where the Met. in the newspapers up and down CA who published his positive signal for gay marriage published also his participation in a larger group retraction. The public’s idea of what the church is there I think goes un-corrected.

On another note, AOI as a news agency????? Father, you have come a long way……………..

Wasting no time with confusion, they set the record straight quickly. Thanks and well done.