“Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them,

and they that are great exercise authority upon them.

But it shall not be so among you:

but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:

Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto,

but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:25-28, KJV)

The word the Athenians used for their Assembly was Ekklesia, the same word used in the New Testament for Church
(and it is the greatest philological irony in all of Western history that this word,
which connoted equal participation in all deliberation by all members,
came to designate a kind of self-perpetuating, self-protective Spartan gerousia -
which would have seemed patent nonsense to Greek-speaking Christians of New Testament times,
who believed themselves to be equal members of their Assembly.)

- Thomas Cahill, Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: Why the Greeks Matter


Sunday, October 17, 2010

Lessons in Statistics

It has been suggested by our Metropolitan in his letter, December 2007, and others that the number of people who cared to respond to the survey sent out in 2007 - the one our Metropolitan and our lay leaders said they would abide by - was not really a "majority" since only 427 responded when 1325 surveys were sent out. Thus, the contention is that it is not "really" 87% who are against splitting the community.

Anyone who has completed high school (or watched an election) knows that this is patent nonsense. Statistics is an actual mathematical science. It operates on observable and measurable numbers and not on wishful thinking.

The assertion by those who did not care for the results of this survey is that too few participated, as though the trend was not clear. Participation by about one-third is MORE THAN ENOUGH for an accurate assessment.

To hear some of these people, our Metropolitan included, one would think that those who did not participate would have ALL voted to split, but just didn't get around to responding.

A breakdown of the results (see previous blog) is further indication of just HOW unpopular the notion is. Even the PE respondents' results indicate a strong desire to remain united.

Below is a table that shows just how accurate a statistical sampling of 427 respondents vs. 1325 sent surveys would be:

(The Web site to generate these results may be found at: http://www.custominsight.com/articles/random-sample-calculator.asp)

Only the 13% that is disproportionately represented in the make-up of the Parish Council (and not by accident, as we all know) has caused this division and dissension and has blown it out of all reasonable proportion. This minority, along with our clergy, has used the division THEY have sown in order to justify an outrageous attempt to generate a takeover by devious means of this community's assets that were built by the community AS A WHOLE and that are OWNED by this community as a whole. If it is to split there is a methodology and a process in place. That minority is aware based on the survey that this is unlikely and so they resorted to secrecy and lies, instead of having the GUTS to do what our grandparents did and BUILD THEIR OWN CHURCH. Instead, they expect the majority to simply accept this land grab, under these outrageous circumstances, as a "done deal".

- Barbara Billinis Colessides

No comments: