Καλές Γιορτές

Καλα Χριστουγενvα! ΕΥΤYΧΙΣΜΕΝΟ ΤΟ ΝΕΟ ΕΤΟΣ! 

Merry Christmas! HAPPY NEW YEAR!

 

 The moderators of TOCB wish all parishioners in this community a blessed, safe and Joyous Christmas Season and a Happy, Prosperous New Year.

 

Jim Kastanis' Remarks to the Parish Council, Dec. 17, 2012

Moderator's Note: Mr. Kastanis gave his permission to have his remarks published.

Mr. President thank you for letting me speak at your board meeting.

I have 3 topics I would like to address.

1- It has been seven months since our so called free and fair elections, and to date, other than repairing the leaks at P.E. and carpeting the Sunday School rooms at H.T., nothing has been done to resolve the plague that is affecting our community - the splitting of the community. We have had many assemblies and meetings where the community has unanimously voted for ONE COMMUNITY with two churches. Why hasn’t the board, proestamenoi and the Metropolitan addressed the issue and tried to resolve the problem? WE the community have asked for help and have received nothing in reply. 

2- It is my understanding, and I stand corrected if I am wrong, that the UPRs state that a community shall have ONE Proestameno, ONE Philoptochos and One Parish Council. Why are we in VIOLATION, and have two Proestamenoi, two Philoptochos groups? The members of the community are continually required to follow the UPRs, while the clergy disregard them or change them to their liking. 

3- In regard to stewardship, there will be no increase in stewardship as long as the people have no voice in the secular affairs of the church. At one time it was an equal voice between parish members and clergy; now it is a dictatorship by the clergy. PAY-PRAY-OBEY.

Where do we go from here?

WHY IS IT THAT THE LAITY RAISES THE VOICE OF SANITY?

Archdiocesian Council VP Jaharis’ Address Underscores Metropolitans’ Odd Status

Analysis By Theodore Kalmoukos

Michael Jaharis, Vice Chairman of the Archdiocesan Council, raised some very important issues about the life of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in America in his speech to the Council, which is published in this issue of TNH.

He touched upon the problems that were created with the elevation of the local ecclesiastical districts to Metropolises. In essence, the current administrative structure refutes the unity and the coherence of the Church.

Ecclesiologically speaking, it is a very strange ecclesiastical and administrative structure simply because the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America is one unified Ecclesiastical Eparchy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with only one ruling hierarch, the Archbishop of America ,who should be commemorated in the Eucharist and in the Sacred Services as the shepherd (ruling bishop).

The local Metropolises belong to the Archdiocese, as Jaharis quite correctly pointed out, and not directly to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, despite the fact that the metropolitans commemorate the name of the Ecumenical Patriarch, not of the archbishop. If they commemorated the archbishop’s name, the Archdiocese would have been autonomous.

The metropolitans are not really ruling hierarchs but something in between auxiliary bishops and titular metropolitans, and thus should not be commemorated as shepherds.

Moreover, a local church – in this case a Metropolis – can only have one bishop (shepherd). The way the system has been designed today, the metropolitans appear to be ruling hierarchs from Monday to Saturday in their Metropolises, and when the archbishop visits their Metropolis on Sundays, he is the real ruling hierarch (shepherd).

When Archbishop Demetrios recently visited the Metropolis of Boston and he liturgized at the Cathedral on the occasion of the memorial service of the late Archbishop Iakovos, he was “the presider of the Eucharist” and he was commemorated as the shepherd, while the local Metropolitan simply assisted as a hierarch. That was very vivid to those in the congregation who understand the order and the canonicity of the liturgics.

Painful though it may be to contemplate, the sad reality is that unity of the Church and the withering of the parishes are in danger from the metropolitans themselves. The cases of the Metropolises of Boston and Denver are very vocal. They are tragic situations.

The issue of the Theological School that Jaharis referenced is well-known. The Theological School is a finished matter. It needs reorganization of structures, mentality, and personnel. Yes, it is a matter of personnel.

The monasteries, about 21 of them, which priest-monk Ephraim, former Abbot of the Philotheou Monastery of Mount Athos has established throughout the United States, are emerging as the Archdiocese’s most dangerous disease. It is already visible in so many parishes, which tend to become centers of a dangerous fundamentalism and distortion of our Orthodox Faith once they are infected.
Unfortunately, we have the phenomenon of priests of the Archdiocese who become militant members of the fundamentalist movement of “Ephraimism.”

To be clear, I respect and revere true and healthy monasticism, and consider it “the joyful sadness” of the Church. There is a huge difference, though, between healthy monasticism and the cultish mentality that the Ephraimite monasticism promotes.

Jaharis made a special reference to the tragic death of novice monk Scott (Ioannis) Nevins last June under strange circumstances in a short distance from the monastery of St. Anthony of Arizona, which appears to be less a monastery than a resort in the Arizona Desert.

The big question remains unanswered: where did Ephraim and his acolytes find the money to build all those monasteries in such short period of time?

Jaharis also mentioned the events at the Patriarch Monastery of St. Irene Chrysovalantou in Astoria, which has shaken our Greek-American Community.

It seems that Jaharis said much about so many serious ecclesiastical issues that none of the hierarchs has ever dared to say.

LETTER FROM YANNIS ARMAOU to HIS EMINENCE METROPOLITAN ISAIAH - ΓΡΑΜΜΑ ΤΟΥ κ. ΙΩΑΝΝΗ ΑΡΜΑΟΥ ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΜΗΤΡΟΠΟΛΙΤΗ ΝΤΕΝΒΕΡ κ. ΗΣΑΙΑ

Yannis Armaou
2751 Highland Drive
Salt Lake City, UT.  84106
801-232-9164

Your Eminence, Metropolitan Denver Isaiah

Allow me to answer your recent letter to our community dated November 26, 2012.

You refer to, as the main reason for your refusal to ratify my election, the legal statutes of the church, specifically, Article 30, paragraph 4. First, this article does not apply in my case, because it refers to an already approved Board, and not to someone who is not yet officially a member of that Board.

However, I'm wondering after four years, where it was evident that you and the local priests so obviously violated the regulations; did you forget their content? You and your clergy ignored our right to elections and general assemblies, repeatedly appointing boards of your choice. In such circumstances, you rightly emphasized that the Patriarch and the Archbishop would never go against the established rules.
By what right, therefore, did you and your priests violate them these past years? What article gave you that right? Perhaps - “I decide; I command “ - with each new version (in those years)?

You mentioned your visit to my family. I want to assure you that the feelings of good will expressed are mutual. You are always welcome. Your characterization of me as “a pawn”, however,  made those who know me smile; and, needless to say, I cannot write those comments to you for obvious reasons.

For God’s sake, I have not asked you to take action against the Patriarchate, and the excuses you offer are, if not childish, absolutely inappropriate. The letter was sent to the Patriarchate because even though you are aware of the problem, you have done nothing about it.

You are also continuing, stubbornly, to bring to mention the economic issues of our community. The constant misinformation fed to you, emanating from a local clergyman and a minute portion of parishioners who are ignorant in monetary terms as to the difference between highly restricted funds (designated for highly specific purposes) and operational funds. The ongoing mention of such is utterly monotonous.

Also be assured that the reason I request the removal of Fr. Kouremetis is not economic at all, since for many years in our community we have managed to maintain three priests. Yet Fr. Michael claims that he is always the victim and never the perpetrator. The truth, unfortunately, is completely missing from his vocabulary.  Whatever has happened in our community, he is the last to learn of it and never knows anything. This, is but the latest version of (the example of) Pontius Pilate (washing his hands). Regardless, the devastation brought to this community for ten consecutive years, is enormous.

Be certain that the majority of the community believes that for you to support this priest with such certainty, he must be blackmailing you with some dark secret. If it is true when Fr. Kouremetis says whatever he does, is done with your blessing, then my humble opinion is that you should resign and retire.  You have no right to destroy a community for a vendetta that only you know why it exists.

The elected parish council has tried, insofar as is humanly possible, to bring unity and peace to the community. It is also trying to correct the mistakes of your appointed directors regarding the financial and administrative chaos in recent years in the community. All this is done with a deep sense of responsibility, hard work and high transparency. You insist that you had the letter written by President Tsagaris sent out to the community in the name of transparency. Why did not you do the same with previous councils you appointed? Why did you, your priests and your previous appointed councils try to split the community in secrecy, without parishioners knowing anything? Why did you not you explain to Father Kouremetis that he needed the approval of the parish council to spend money in order to avoid too many offenses he has committed over the years in our community with complete ignorance of the respective councils? The list is long and full of too many incidences. As for the articles you decry which were published in the local press, the current council has no involvement or responsibility for such. In conclusion, aren't you as you have written, an ADVOCATE of transparency?

On the occasion of the birth of Jesus Christ our Lord Jesus Christ, I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, always healthy.

Venerating you right hand,

/ S /

Yannis Armaou

Cc: His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew

       Eminence Archbishop Demetrios

Yannis Armaou
2751 Highland Drive
Salt Lake City, UT.  84106
801-232-9164

Σεβασμιώτατον Μητροπολίτη Ντένβερ  κ.κ. Ησαΐα,

Επιτρέψτε μου να σας απαντήσω στο πρόσφατο γράμμα στη κοινότητα μας  26 Νοεμβρίου 2012.

Αναφέρετε ως κύριο  λόγο της άρνησης σας για τη επικύρωση της νόμιμης εκλογής μου το καταστατικό της εκκλησίας,  Άρθρο 30  παράγραφος  4.  Πρωτίστως, το άρθρο αυτό δεν ισχύει στη περίπτωση μου διότι αναφέρεται στο ήδη επικυρωμένο συμβούλιο και όχι σε κάποιον ο οποίος δεν είναι ακόμη επίσημα μέλος του συμβουλίου.

Όμως, αναρωτιέμαι μετά από τέσσερα χρόνια εις τα όποια εσείς και οι ιερείς καταπατήσατε τόσο ολοφάνερα το καταστατικό, μήπως ξεχάσατε το περιεχόμενο του.  Αγνοήσατε το δικαίωμά μας  για εκλογές και γενικές συνελεύσεις,  επανειλημμένως  διορίζατε συμβούλια της αρεσκείας σας. Επιπλέων τονίζετε  πολύ σωστά , ότι ο Πατριάρχης και ο Αρχιεπίσκοπος ποτέ δε θα πήγαιναν  εναντίον του καταστατικού.

Εσείς και οι ιερείς σας ΜΕ ΠΟΙΟ ΔΙΚΑΙΩΜΑ το καταπατήσατε  επανειλημμένως;  Ποιο άρθρο, σας δίνει αυτό το δικαίωμα;  Το αποφασίζω και διατάζω σε νέα έκδοση ίσως;

Αναφερθήκατε στην επίσκεψη σας στην οικογένεια μου. Θέλω να σας διαβεβαιώσω ότι τα αισθήματα είναι αμοιβαία.  Είστε πάντα ευπρόσδεκτος.   Ο χαρακτηρισμός σας στο πρόσωπο μου ως πιόνι έκανε όσους με ξέρουν να χαμογελάσουν με νόημα και περιττό να σας πω ότι τα σχόλια δε επιτρέπεται να τα καταγράψω, για ευνόητους  λόγους.

Προς θεού δε σας ζητώ να ενεργήσετε εναντίον του Πατριαρχείου, αλλά  ή δικαιολογία σας είναι αν όχι παιδική, τελείως απαράδεκτη. Η επιστολή εστάλλει στο Πατριαρχείο διότι εάν και ενήμερος του προβλήματος με τον πατήρ Κουρεμετη, αδιαφορείτε παντελώς διά την επίλυση του.

Επίσης συνεχίζετε  επιμόνως να αναφέρεσθε σε οικονομικά  θέματα της κοινότητος μας. Η συνεχής παραπληροφόρηση εκ μέρους του τοπικού κλήρου και ελάχιστης  μερίδας ενοριτών όπως και η άγνοια αυτών και εσάς του ιδίου διά τη διαφορά  των χρηματικών όρων (restricted  funds and operational funds) σας καθιστά ΜΟΝΟΤΟΝΟ.

Επίσης σας διαβεβαιώνω  ότι ο λόγος πού ζητώ την απομάκρυνση του πατρός  Κουρεμέτη δεν είναι καθόλου οικονομικής φύσεως, διότι επί πάρα πολλά έτη διατηρούμε στη κοινότητα μας τρείς ιερείς.  Ισχυρίζεται πάντα ότι είναι το θύμα και ποτέ ο θύτης. Η αλήθεια δυστυχώς λείπει παντελώς από το λεξιλόγιο του. Οτιδήποτε έχει γίνει στη κοινότητα μας είναι ο τελευταίος που το μαθαίνει και ποτέ δε ξέρει τίποτα .Είναι η νεωτέρα έκδοση του Ποντίου Πιλάτου. Η καταστροφή πού έχει επιφέρει στη κοινότητα επί δέκα συναπτά έτη, είναι τεράστια.

Η πλειονοτης  της κοινότητος  πιστεύει, ότι για να υποστηρίζετε τόσο πολύ τον ιερέα σίγουρα, σας εκβιάζει με κάποιο μυστικό. Εάν είναι σωστά όσα λέγει ο πατήρ Κουρεμέτης, δηλαδή, οτιδήποτε κάνει , γίνεται με τις ευλογίες σας, τότε ταπεινή μου γνώμη είναι οτι πρέπει  να βγείτε σε σύνταξη. Δεν έχετε το δικαίωμα να καταστρέψετε μια κοινότητα  για μια βεντέτα που μόνο εσείς ξέρετε γιατί υπάρχει.

Το συμβούλιο προσπαθεί όσο είναι ανθρωπίνως δυνατόν να επιφέρει ενότητα και ειρήνη στην κοινότητα. Επίσης προσπαθεί να διορθώσει τα λάθη των διορισμένων συμβουλίων σας αναφορικά με το χάος που επικρατεί τα τελευταία χρόνια στα οικονομικά και στην διοίκηση της κοινότητος. Όλα αυτά γίνονται με υπευθυνότητα, σκληρή δουλειά και μεγάλη διαφάνεια. Εσείς που υποστηρίζεται ότι στείλατε το γράμμα του προέδρου κ. Τσαγκάρη στην κοινότητα στο όνομα της διαφάνειας, γιατί δεν λέγατε και στα προηγούμενα διορισμένα συμβούλια να πράξουν το ίδιο; Γιατί εσείς, οι ιερείς σας και το συμβούλιό σας προσπαθήσατε να χωρίσετε την κοινότητα με μυστικότητα χωρίς οι ενορίτες να γνωρίζουν τίποτα; Γιατί δεν έχετε εξηγήσει στον πατήρ Κουρεμέτη ότι χρειάζεται την έγκριση του συμβουλίου για να ξοδεύει χρήματα, ώστε να αποφευχθούν οι πολλές παραβάσεις που έχει διαπράξει όλα τα χρόνια  στην κοινότητά μας  με πλήρη άγνοια των εκάστοτε συμβουλίων.  Η λίστα είναι μακρά και τα παραδείγματα πολλά. Όσο για τα άρθρα τα οποία δημοσιεύθηκαν στον τοπικό τύπο, το τωρινό συμβούλιο δεν έχει καμία ανάμειξη ή ευθύνη. Εν κατακλείδι, εσείς δεν είστε όπως γράψατε και σε ένα γράμμα σας ΥΠΕΡΜΑΧΟΣ της διαφάνειας;

Επ’ ευκαιρία της γεννήσεως του Θεανθρώπου Κυρίου ημών Ιησού  Χριστού  σας εύχομαι Καλά Χριστούγεννα και Ευτυχές το Νέον Έτος, πάντα με υγεία.

Aσπάζομαι  τη δεξιά σας.

/s/

Ιωαννης Αρμαου

Cc:  ΑΘΠ τον Οικουμενικόν Πατριάρχην Κωνσταντινουπόλεως κ.κ Βαρθολομαίον

        Σεβασμιωτατον Αρχιεπισκοπον Αμερικης κ.κ. Δημητριον

Pots Calling Kettles Black

I was waiting until this month of November to make a final decision regarding the ratification of the parish council candidate; Mr. Yannis Armaou, to. the Pairsh (sic) Council, on the basis that the final payment to the attorney who handled the recent law suit against the previous parish council would be paid.

Your Eminence: There was NEVER any question but that the legal costs of your appointed would be paid. We supported that our newly elected Parish Council, in a selfless effort at reconciliation, chose to pay this bill. We paid our own legal bills that were incurred thanks to your intransigence and the unethical and illegal efforts of your appointed.

We knew that what your appointed were doing (and are still doing) - at your behest, then and now - not only was and is contrary to any tenets of Christian behavior; these actions were and still are also contrary to those UPRs you and they love to hide behind.

Be that as it may: we ARE anthropoi and good Christians! We forgave seventy times seven as the Lord instructed! We have continued to seek and yearn for unity! Only you, the Proistamenos-of-Prophet Elias-ONLY, and about six dozen people continue to thwart unity, and your actions in instructing certain parishioners to establish a separate corporation in the name of Prophet Elias (only) - in direct opposition to the instructions of the Archbishop and the Holy Synod - is but the latest example of that intransigence. It is not we who are disobedient, Your Eminence.

Unfortunately, however, the recent letter sent to His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and to His Eminence. Archbishop Demetrios and attributed to Mr. Armaou regarding Father Michael Kouremetis forces me not to ratify his election. The reason for this is because the contents of the letter go against the Uniform Parish Regulations, Article 30, Section 4:

Attributed to Mr. Armaou? Mr. Armaou is a grown man - a man who understands and accepts the consequences of his actions. He sent letters to the Archdiocese and to the Patriarchate and signed his name! There is no "attribution"! No one TOLD him to do this or wrote those letters for him! Being rather articulate, he sent his thoughts and his words. Unlike others, he's not hiding behind anyone's cassocks! Mr. Armaou is no one's pawn.

It must be known by all the members of the Archdiocese, clergy, monastics, and la:ity, that the Uniform Parish Regulations have been reviewed and. approved, as they appear today, by the Ecumenical Patriarchate years ago. See Article 3, Section l,P. Our Patriarch would never go contrary to the official approval of the U.P.R.'s; neither, consequently, would the Archbishop.

Putting our Archbishop "on the spot" yet again? Your Eminence contends that the Archbishop submitted the decisions of Clergy-Laity Congresses to the Patriarch, and His Beatitude accepted such. No one, clearly, ever questioned among the hierarchy whether such ridiculous, one-sided constructs might have unintended consequences. So long as there was complete and utter control by the hierarchy, "what could go wrong?" WHAT, INDEED! Yet in the midst of this flawed situation, and even under those same flawed regulations, the Archdiocese and the Holy Synod quite specifically asked that you allow this community to heal and to make its own decisions as to if, when and how it might split. You won't abide by that decision, even though the flawed regulations say you must.

The fact that the Holy Synod asked that you desist in your truculent actions toward this community is, to you, meaningless. You're the top boss here - right? In your ongoing actions, you are not only bullying this community, you are also bullying the supposed "first among equals" in this country, Archbishop Demetrios! Haven't you said, over and over again, that the Archbishop and the Holy Synod can't tell you what to do in your Metropolis?

It is tragic to consider that the Patriarch, in assenting to this disastrous construct, in order to avoid dealing with another strong leader in America, such as Archbishop Iakovos, is destroying the vibrancy of Greek Orthodoxy and Hellenic culture in this country, and most certainly in this valley!

I have gotten to know Mr. Armaou in my several visits to the community, as well as his parents and have even had the occasion to share a meal in their home; and I have considered them fine people. I suspect that Mr. Armaou may have been used as a pawn and projecting someone else's thoughts and desires. Even so, I cannot, nor wish to go, against the Patriarchate; and therefore am unable to ratify his election because of the letter attributed to him.

Mr. Armaou a pawn? Obviously, you, as our "shepherd", clearly views his flock as ACTUAL sheep. Like many others who worship and serve in this community, Mr. Armaou is educated, forthright, hardworking, forceful, successful and has been a dynamic presence here for several decades. He recently chaired a very successful Greek Festival in September under highly difficult circumstances. He also worked tirelessly for the annual Thanksgiving dinner program for the city's needy and indigent at the church. Mr. Armaou does not deserve to be infantilized or demeaned in this manner.

Finally, please know that the Salt Lake community is the largest parish in the Denver Metropolis, Your recent parish council elections proved it. Know that the parish in Houston, Texas is immediately second in size, and it consistently has had four fulltime priests. If much of the stewardship monies of the Salt Lake community did not go to one of the four independent accounts, which are not under the custodianship of any current parish council, as has been happening in the community, the parish would easily have more than enough funds to submit its 2011 obligations, as well as its 2012 obligations to the  Archdiocese. Moreover, the parish would have ample funds to cover the full compensation of four or five fulltime priests, which would be appropriate to serve the spiritual needs of all the Greek Orthodox people in greater Salt Lake.

Houston Annunciation Cathedral at present has three - not four - priests, one of whom has a second (actually, his first) profession as a medical professional. We don't know the full allocation of parish resources with regard to the community's priests' income and benefits, but we do know that Houston, generally, is a more prosperous metropolitan area, with a far greater ratio of professionals, business people, companies and workers, where there are higher incomes than those to be found, per-capita, in Salt Lake City. While the number of families might now be similar, per-capita income in Houston is, on average, higher. In contrast to Utah, Texas also has no state income tax. His Eminence is comparing apples and oranges.

Further, the funds that our Metropolitan references in this community's separate accounts have been properly allocated - by General Assembly votes over the years - for specific projects. Considering that one of his appointed parish councils once held a quickly announced a special general assembly in the dead of winter in 2009, on a school night, and managed to wrest the funds from festivals - which were prior to that time NOT to be used as operating funds - his ongoing reference to these other restricted funds is more than disturbing.

QUESTION? If the separate accounts currently existing were to be suddenly transferred solely to the purview of the Parish Council, what would stop the Metropolitan from, yet again, disbanding an elected Parish Council, and later instructing yet another appointed council to reallocate those specific funds in order to suit his own purposes and those of his favored minority?

At the time when you, the current parish council assumed your responsibilities, I was assured that you would work together to bring peace and unity among all the people. Are the recent newspaper articles about the community part of this process? When do you plan to start in being faithful to your word?

That a bishop, who has never been troubled by going back on his word, has something to say of a parish council trying desperately to revitalize a community, that our Metropolitan had a huge part in sundering, and is apparently continuing to thwart, is accused of not being faithful to its word is simply galling! The only thing one can say about the Metropolitan's final sentence can be discussed in terms of pots calling kettles black.

Just WHO Is Not Keeping His Word?!

"I was waiting until this month of November to make a final decision regarding the ratification of the parish council candidate, Mr. Yannis Armaou, to the Parish Council, on the basis that final payment to the attorney who handled the recent law suit against the previous parish council would be paid."

On August 2, 2012, the Metropolitan writes in part, "Therefore, I must know if the attorneys involved in this matter will have been fully paid.  Thereafter, I will gladly ratify the name of Mr. Armaou." (emphasis added)  On September 4, 2012, the Metropolitan, apparently forgetting what he previously wrote offered the following, "Until all problematic financial matters related to this have been resolved, Mr. Armaou's status will remain pending." The financial matters referenced by the Metropolitan were the same on August 2, 2012 as they were on September 4, 2012 yet he mentions no condition on finances.  If, as he writes in his most recent letter, he was waiting until November to make a final decision, what are we to make of the August 2, 2012 letter?  You gave your word, Your Eminence, in that August letter and now you have gone back on it.

"Unfortunately, however, the recent letter sent to His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and to His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios and attributed to Mr. Armaou regarding Father Michael Kouremetis forces me to not ratify his election.  The reason for this is because the contents of the letter go against the Uniform Parish Regulations, Article 30, Section 4."

Section 4 of the Uniform Parish Regulations states, "If a problem should arise between a Priest and the Parish Council, the matter shall not be brought before the Parish Assembly. The Priest or the Parish Council shall have the right to refer the matter to the respective Hierarch"  How exactly does this apply to a letter written to the Patriarch or the Archbishop?  Mr. Armaou's letter was not brought before a parish assembly.  Certainly Your Eminence isn't arguing that Mr. Armaou was a member of the parish council since, in spite of his election by this community, you have refused to ratify him.  You gave your word in that August letter and now have gone back on it.  

"If much of the stewardship monies of the Salt Lake community did not go to one of the four independent accounts, which are not under the custodianship of any current parish council, as has been happening in the community, the parish would easily have more than enough funds to submit its 2011 obligations, as well as its 2012 obligations to the Archdiocese."

How much is "much" and from where does His Eminence derive his facts?  A quick review of recent history reveals it was under his "appointed" parish councils that this community ignored its obligations to the Archdiocese.  It is certainly worth noting that the current parish council, since being elected and taking office has remitted nearly $135,000 toward this community's Archdiocesan obligation.  An accomplishment the "appointed" parish councils failed to meet throughout their entire tenure.  Further, His Eminence's independent accounts argument is nothing more than a red herring - those monies and entities have been designated as separate by General Assemblies, and the Parish Council President has oversight of them as one of the signatories.

"At the time when you, the current parish council assumed your responsibilities, I was assured that you would work together to bring peace and unity among the people.   Are the recent newspaper articles about the community part of this process?  When do you plan to start being faithful to your word?"

Since taking office, this current parish council has worked diligently for the betterment of the ENTIRE community.  The referenced newspaper articles are a result of the poor clerical leadership that has plagued this community for over TEN years, and the insistence on making a miracle out of an accidental spilling of oil on glass covering an icon, despite the evidence to the contrary. 

Responding to His Eminence's final question:  When do you plan to start being faithful to your word, Your Eminence?

Ecclesiastical Corporation?

Your All Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew and Your Eminence Archbishop Dimitrios,

 On March 24, 2011 as part of the decision of the Holy Eparchial Synod, Your Eminence, Archbishop Demetrios,  wrote a letter to Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver regarding the withdrawal of an ecclesiastical charter issued on April 12, 2010.

I believe that Your Eminence was deceived by the Metropolitan of Denver in issuing the charter in his endless quest, along with Fr. Kouremetis, to split the community of the Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake.

In addition, Your Eminence's letter states, "Similarly, the Prophet Elias corporation will be formally dissolved and no separate trade names will be filed with the state of Utah for Holy Trinity and Prophet Elias.

It is certainly no secret that problems have continued with Fr. Kouremetis especially in declaring an accidental spill on an icon a miracle.

Sadly, Your Eminence's directive stated above has not been followed and to this date, a corporation in the name of the Prophet Elias is active with the state of Utah. Not only has this directive been ignored, the corporation was renewed THIS YEAR. What is the point of having an appeal process in the Uniform Parish Regulations if the decision of the Holy Eparchial Synod, which is to be FINAL, is ignored?

Furthermore, Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver writes on August 20, 2012 to the community: "Furthermore, the updating of the corporate record with the name, Prophet Elias, guarantees that no other entity in the future can legally use this name."

Since the building of the Prophet Elias church in 1969, no other entity has attempted to legally use this name. It appears that the Metropolitan in conjunction with Fr. Kouremetis continue to operate in defiance of the decision of Your Eminence and the Eparchial Synod.

Your All Holiness and Your Eminence, the people of this community have endured a great deal due to the Trojan Horse tactics and at the hands of the Metropolitan and Fr. Kouremetis. A quick and drastic solution is needed to bring peace to this community. At the very least, the immediate removal of Fr. Kouremetis and the withdrawal of the Prophet Elias corporation is necessary.

I have attached all letters referenced along with the Articles of Incorporation of the unethically formed Prophet Elias corporation. I thank you for your time and consideration.

Reverencing your right hands, I remain, faithfully yours,

/s/

Yannis Armaou

Metropolitan's Letter to the Community - November 2012

Moderators' Note: the original document sent by the Metropolitan may be viewed here.

---

November 26, 2012

Rev. Michael Kouremetis, Proistamenos
Rev. Matthew Gilbert, Proistamenos
Mr. Dimitrios Tsagaris, Council President
The Esteemed Parish Council
The Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake
Holy Trinity Cathedral
Prophet Elias Church
279 South 300 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84101


Beloved in the Lord,

I was waiting until this month of November to make a final decision regarding the ratification of the parish council candidate; Mr. Yannis Armaou, to. the Pairsh Council, on the basis that the final payment to the attorney who handled the recent law suit against the previous parish council would be paid.

Unfortunately, however, the recent letter sent to His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and to His Eminence. Archbishop Demetrios and attributed to Mr. Armaou regarding Father Michael Kouremetis forces me not to ratify his election. The reason for this is because the contents of the letter go against the Uniform Parish Regulations, Article 30, Section 4:

It must be known by all the members of the Archdiocese, clergy, monastics, and la:ity, that the Uniform Parish Regulations have been reviewed and. approved, as they appear today, by the Ecumenical Patriarchate years ago. See Article 3, Section l,P. Our Patriarch would never go contrary to the official approval of the U.P.R.'s; neither, consequently, would the Archbishop.

I have gotten to know Mr. Armaou in my several visits to the community, as well as his parents and have even had the occasion to share a meal in their home; and I have considered them fine people. I suspect that Mr. Armaou may have been used as a pawn and projecting someone else's thoughts and desires. Even so, I cannot, nor wish to go, against the Patriarchate; and therefore am unable to ratify his election because of the letter attributed to him.

Finally, please know that the Salt Lake community is the largest parish in the Denver Metropolis, Your recent parish council elections proved it. Know that the parish in Houston, Texas is immediately second in size, and it consistently has had four fulltime priests. If much of the stewardship monies of the Salt Lake community did not go to one of the four independent accounts, which are not under the custodianship of any current parish council, as has been happening in the community, the parish would easily have more than enough funds to submit its 2011 obligations, as well as its 2012 obligations to the Archdiocese. Moreover, the parish would have ample funds to cover the full compensation of four or five fulltime priests, which would be appropriate to serve the spiritual needs of all the Greek Orthodox people in greater Salt Lake.

At the time when you, the current parish council assumed your responsibilities, I was assured that you would work together to bring peace and unity among all the people. Are the recent newspaper articles about the community part of this process? When do you plan to start in being faithful to your word?

With paternal blessings,

/s/

+ Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver

IT'S TIME

It is now time for the blog, “Take our Church Back” to be discontinued. No question, it has served its purpose over the time it has operated and all of the articles posted in it were mostly accurate; however, now is time that our community must show some compassion and allow healing to occur. As was pointed out in the General Assembly on Sunday, November 17, it is now time for all of us, Clergy as well as parishioners, to bury the hatchet and forgive one another for the good of the community. It serves no purpose to allow negative comments to appear on the blog. We must strive for unity and the time to begin is now.

One of the primary reasons for the blog was and is to provide accurate information to all parishioners concerning events that are happening, both presently as well as in the past. The blog served a useful purpose in that regard and over 264,000 hits since its inception show that our parishioners, as well as others, reviewed it and made their comments.

At the General Assembly on Sunday the Parish Council did a good job of presenting the agenda and allowed parishioners to express themselves appropriately. Thanks must be given to President, Mr. Tsagaris and his Parish Council members for the work they are doing, but more work needs to be done as was pointed out by the auditing committee chairmen, Mr. McGrath and Mr. Kapos. The need for an Operations Manager for this parish is great and this position must be filled as soon as possible. As was pointed out in the meeting, we must get control of church finances and run our parish as a business.

Now I will discuss the two churches, Holy Trinity Cathedral and Prophet Elias. Whether we like to admit it or not, the two churches have been separated for years. There should be no hard feelings on this matter, but the two churches are separate. We have two Proestamenoi, as they are called, two Philoptochos Societies, two choirs, two Sunday Schools, etc. Both churches are presently governed by one Parish Council and for keeping the community as one, this should continue until such time as the need arises in the future for two Parish Councils. At the appropriate time, a committee could be established by the General Assembly to totally separate the two churches, but presently we must operate as one UNIFIED parish. There should no bickering from parishioners and we must show some love, compassion and unity toward one another. We have shown that we can unite as one by the beautiful work that has been done at our annual Greek Festival.

As to the Uniform Parish Regulations (UPRs), these should be examined carefully by the Parish Council and as changes are necessary, they should be brought up for discussion at the Clergy-Laity Conference which is held annually and attended by the appropriate people from the Clergy as well as the Parish Council. In my opinion and I served on many Parish Councils in the past as well as the President in 1968 when ground was broken for the Prophet Elias Church, changes are necessary in the UPRs but I will not go into details at the present time.

Regarding stewardship, Mr. George Pappas, Chairman, eloquently stated his position at the General Assembly and he is correct that we must increase our church members as well as each family should give an extra amount of money in order for the Parish Council to balance the parish budget for the year 2013.

With love and humility,

/s/

Nick P. Sefakis

Dissing the "Cradle Orthodox"!

As our Metropolitan once said, "thank God for our converts!"

First of all, to every latest convert to our faith who calls those of us who grew up in this church community "cradle Orthodox": you cannot imagine how OFFENSIVE we find the appellation. If you want to fit in here, DO NOT USE THAT TERM! If you dare say it to our face, our first inclination might well be to deck you. Since most of us do not condone violence, we will simply walk away from you and ask you to NEVER speak to us again if you choose to continue using the term.

We are PROUD to be what you term - too often, derisively - "cradle Orthodox". Our parents and grandparents simply told us from the time we knew what language meant - in both Greek and English - that Orthodoxy meant - "correct faith/glorification".

We understand that if you have converted to our faith you are engaged in something wondrous. There is, however, more to those of us who grew up with this heritage than just that wonder. We are the PROUD cultural descendants of a group of immigrants who strove, starved, suffered, endured and prospered.

We understand that legacy and continue to feel it in our marrow. We do not expect you to understand it. However, we will not allow you to denigrate it, or to tell US it is not significant - even if our so-called "spiritual fathers" deem it convenient to ignore or subsume that legacy, whenever it suits their purposes, and use YOU to help them attack it as it suits their purposes.

Don't tell us we have too much time on our hands. Don't tell us to go to confession. This is beyond your right and scope of responsibility. We know who we are; we don't need you to remind us. We have been brought up to know this, and we know WHO our true spiritual fathers are! Moreover, we know who they are NOT!

We are glad to have you join us, but before you throw yourselves into a fray that you really do not understand, please at least have the courtesy to ask a variety of others of us - the "cradle orthodox" who you obviously disrespect - what our point of view might be.

Then, if you still wish to hold an opposing viewpoint, so be it.

"The Oil Did It!"?

This week, many of us attended Con Skedros' Trisagion  and Burial Services. While at the "makaria" luncheon after the funeral, we learned that our erstwhile Proistamenos-of-Prophet-Elias-only had indeed been busy attempting to refute an earlier article from the "Faith" section in the Salt Lake Tribune. The text of the latest article (Paul Rolly, Salt Lake Tribune, "Utah " Section) can be viewed in this Website's sidebar.

Everyone has the right to their opinion. However, historians such as Con knew and know, no one has the right to the facts. The facts just are THE FACTS. Opinions surrounding those facts can be evaluated on their merits in how closely they conform to, or explain, the facts.

Metropolitan Isaiah never said, or even implied, that the "phenomenon" that he accepts as a "miracle" was a sign to keep the two parishes unified as one under the Greek Orthodox Community of Greater Salt Lake. In fact he said, in a letter to the community dated October 20, 2010, the EXACT OPPOSITE! (The original letter may be viewed here.)

It is not usual for an icon of Christ the Lord to exude oil or even tears. I truly believe that our Lord heard our prayers to make His presence known and to resolve the situation of the two parishes.

Now there can be no question in the minds of any of His people. Our Lord recognizes His parishes as monogamous and independent, each with a Proistamenos representing Him through the local bishop. Both parishes can now proceed to grow and to develop for His greater glory and the salvation of His people. [emphasis added]

Using parts of the Metropolitan's letter, Father Kouremetis has subtly misrepresented to Mr. Rolly, and to the Salt Lake Tribune, the intent of that original letter.

There can be no doubt of the intent of Metropolitan Isaiah's letter. He chose to interpret the "miracle" or  now, the "phenomenon" as a "clear sign" to DIVIDE our community and its assets in 2010. Father Michael cannot at this point in time go back and rewrite that history. Nor can he proclaim that either the Metropolitan's words, or the charade that he played in proclaiming a miracle, now points to maintaining unity - not even the type of "unity" he has in mind! He does, however, try, and has apparently convinced Mr. Rolly to write the following:

Here is the rest of the story. The miracle of the oil, which the priest and metropolitan still insist is true and say it has actually healed parishioners, was discovered right at the time church members were vehemently protesting the church’s decision to split the congregations of the Prophet Elias Church in Holladay and the Holy Trinity Church in downtown Salt Lake City into two parishes.

There was even talk of suing the church, and several hundred members stood in protest outside the Prophet Elias Church.

Several hundred members stood in protest outside the Prophet Elias Church? When? The only people who stood outside Prophet Elias Church were five of six faithful stewards last year about this same time (the sixth who was ill and had to remain home in sub-freezing weather, ironically, was CON SKEDROS) that the Metropolitan banned from the church they had helped to build!

The church was sued? When? The only persons sued were appointed Parish Council members, as individuals, who refused to follow the Uniform Parish Regulations that they usually hid behind, and in doing so violated civil law. It was under civil law that they, again as individuals, were sued.

The ultimate outrage of this article is the statement that, "the oil 'settled it'!" The "it" was not the non-existent protest of "hundreds" outside Prophet Elias, nor the potential for the church to be sued. Neither happened.

The "it" was the "vehement" reaction to Metropolitan Isaiah's decision to split this community, and "the oil" did not thwart that decision! In fact, "the oil" was used by the Metropolitan to justify it!

This is sheer sophistry - not history! The omissions are glaring. The "oil" did nothing! It was spilled due to a maintenance accident. If someone chooses to believe that the "phenomenon" of Father Michael's charade, and the Metropolitan's enthusiastic espousal of such, healed them, we have no problem. But let's not claim that this charade "healed" or "settled" the real damage that has been done to this community by the continuation of such deceits and conceits.

Con Skedros - A Good and Faithful Servant

Today we are burying Constantine James Skedros.

Con was a quiet, unassuming man of letters – an historian who knew the importance and the value of documenting the world he lived in. He was a man who understood that what might seem commonplace or mundane to most, was, in fact, unique and important in the larger scheme of things.

I had the singular opportunity and the great honor to meet with Con, one-on-one, last year a few days before our November Special General Assembly where our hierarchy was demanding that we foreswear the special agreement (the 1964 Accord) we had in place that gave this community control over its own assets. This was, in fact, the same assembly that our hierarch had also forbidden this good and faithful steward, along with five others, entrance into HIS OWN CHURCH! This, because he was willing to put his name on a lawsuit, representing hundreds of others, in opposing a construct that kept those same hundreds from proper representation in their church’s affairs and governance!

Con’s quiet and wise counsel, his extraordinary documentation, were not only enlightening in light of the events about to take place, but provided an insight into the history of our community. They also explained the thought processes of those who gave the community its unique legacy.

To enumerate all the roles this GREAT MAN took upon himself, humbly, without complaint, in our community, and in the community at large, not only in this city, but in this nation, would probably take years and fill volumes!

Con achieved the status in our Church of Archon Depoutatos. No big deal, perhaps? Others have done this as well. I would tell you that Con achieved that status through time and through talent - not only as a stalwart Sunday School teacher, but as a tireless servant to this community and to Orthodoxy throughout this country. Further, he was a faithful schoolteacher to thousands of public school students in this valley, and as a responsible civic leader in his field on various civic and charitable boards and committees. Con did not have the means – the treasure - to achieve this status in the manner that many, if not most, Greek-Americans in this country have done so. It is to our faith’s great credit that it often looks beyond a person’s means to elevate someone so entirely worthy as Con Skedros, counselor,  friend, mentor, husband, father, grandfather, uncle, godfather – TEACHER– so many titles!

Axios – kai ΠΑΝΤΑ AXIOS!

It is so often said when someone so illustrious and accomplished passes, that we shall not see his (or her) like again. It is my fervent hope that we SHALL see his like again. His example should be a shining light to us, to our children, to our grandchildren and to generations beyond!

Αιωνία η μνήμη του! Καλὀ ταξεἰδι, ἁξιε και αγαπημἑνε δάσκαλε!

- Barbara Billinis Colessides

Fallacies as Facts, Yet Again!

How surprising is it, that having requested letters about "miracles", the rabid minority that still demands our community be split, is complying by sending letters attesting to "miracles"? And, they are "following the Lord's example" by keeping them "secret"! (Surely, there is an admonition in the commandments about bearing false witness?) Further, complaints regarding the "allowing" of Mr. Tsagaris' letter to be distributed to the community are rather ineffectual and silly since His Eminence did not "allow" the letter to be distributed via e-mail; rather, he demanded it. Interestingly, he did so with no explanation other than it be sent. Fr. Michael took it upon himself to "clarify" that the Metropolitan's demand was "not an endorsement" - for which, apparently, he was chided by the Metropolitan.

For a hierarch who is now convinced that the "miracle" is a  true "phenomenon", doesn't it strike anybody as strange that the community has a "miraculous" icon, but that no hierarch - including Metropolitan Isaiah - ever came around to witness it and conduct services, didn't send a representative, didn't inform the Archdiocese or the Patriarchate? None of the monks from the monastery in the next state over came to witness it, or to pray. None of the other Orthodox prelates in the city, nor any other clergy from other faiths came to check it out, either. We have had visiting Archons who have never mentioned venerating that particular icon. 

It was simply yet another ruse to confuse. It was mentioned only as a further justification for splitting the community, especially when the minority knew that the community was planning to resist at all costs, to appeal to the Archdiocese and to the Holy Synod. And, the issue had been dormant for a while until it was discovered that the maintenance person who had accidentally spilled oil on the glass of the icon, while filling an oil lamp nearby, was coerced into signing a document attesting to a miracle, and did so, for fear of losing his employment. That the Metropolitan and Father Michael, our Lord's Apostolic successors, continue to justify this sham is truly sad!

As for the community's relationships with several priests, the Metropolitan's assertions continue to be flawed and problematic. First and foremost, Father Katsaris did not, as he himself attests, leave this community under any pressure from the community. He was, and is still, highly respected. He is, to this day, in contact with many prominent parishioners here. He has firmly denied such an allegation, though the Metropolitan seems highly content to perpetuate the myth. Subsequent priests left due to retirement, promotions, a desire for better remuneration, and what we will charitably call problematic behaviors. No one in this community denies that some parishioners have sometimes been hostile toward certain clergy; the converse, unfortunately, is also true.

Fr. Michael's appointment here has been described as an appointment to "resolve existing problems which obviously came from the former priest". This is a rather simplistic generalization for a highly specific problem that involved that former priest's personal life and not the community as a whole. To suggest differently is highly disingenuous.

Father Michael has had every opportunity to minister to this community with love. He is a highly gifted and talented man, who conducts beautiful services. He can be both articulate and charming. He sadly also has an unfortunate, almost pathological need to exert complete control, to only work with and minister almost exclusively to those he likes and can control, and to squelch any point of view he deems inimical to his personal interest. He refuses to accept that the majority in this valley do not wish to split their community, and assists in every effort to thwart that will, which has been expressed over and over again. If he cannot accept it, he should leave. This community does not need an Ephialtes in its midst. We have enough to do to try to repair the damage he, and the unelected, appointed minions he kept installing as "leaders", have created.

And, of course, we are always returned to the specious argument that TAKE OUR CHURCH BACK is literal and not metaphorical. For the umpteenth time this blog's contributors and writers know the Church was built, belongs to, and exists for the greater glory of the Lord and for our salvation. As with the clergy, we, too, have a responsibility to our Church and our Faith. It is both disappointing and disheartening to see our Church's clergy succumb to arrogance, hubris and condescension. It is further disheartening when the hierarchy promotes a rigid, unresponsive view of the relationship between the apostolic priesthood, and what St. Mark called "the royal priesthood" - the laity. Finally, we know what our forefathers were seeking, and we will not foreswear that legacy. Along with you and the clergy, Your Eminence, WE are also the Church. Blind obedience is not an absolute requirement in the face of high-handed leadership and poor judgment by the clergy. If it were so, our Lord would not have confronted the moneylenders in the temple, nor would he have challenged the Pharisees.

The fact is, as has been pointed out to our Metropolitan, most certainly by more than one person, Father Michael is no longer effective; he is a divisive force in this community who will not work with all the community. He is this community's servant, but behaves like its feudal lord and master. More time will not change that fact, and this community should not have to continue to suffer for it, or to pay for it, no matter what the highly flawed UPRs say.

Metropolitan Isaiah Responds to Recent Correspondence & Articles

MODERATOR'S NOTE: Metropolitan Isaiah's original letter may be viewed by clicking here.

---

GREEK ORTHODOX METROPOLIS OF DENVER

November 5, 2012

Rev. Michael Kouremetis, Proistamenos
Rev. Matthew Gilbert, Proistamenos
Mr. Dimitrios Tsagaris, Parish Council President
The Esteemed Parish Council
The Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake
Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral
Prophet Elias Greek Orthodox Church
5335 S. Highland Drive
Holladay, UT 84117

Beloved in the Lord,

Please accept my apologies for my unintentional delay in responding to your latest correspondence to me. I was away for the past week.

As you may imagine, I have been inundated with much correspondence from an increasing number of parishioners from the community at large, most of whom attest to healings that have been attributed to our Lord Jesus Christ through His icon at Prophet Elias Church. I have also received some complaints that I allowed the letter of the council president, Mr. Dimitrios Tsagaris, to be distributed to the membership of the community.

Please know that parish councils represent the total membership of parishes within our holy Archdiocese. Therefore, transparency is appropriate and necessary in regard to the life of our parishes. Due to the chronic problems within your community, which are exacerbated by continuing misinformation, especially to the New York Greek newspaper time and again, I felt that it was necessary for all the membership to know what is hoped for or expected by the parish council, their representative leadership.

At the same time, please know that no one speaks for me regarding both serious and trivial situations. Having served our Lord and His Church for more than fifty years, I do not need anyone to speak for me. My priests know my usual saying; "If you did not see it in print, I did not say it." I have been diligent in documenting my decisions in the Church, so that there may be no room for rumors or falsehoods.

As I attempt to reflect on the sad situation in your community, I see an uninterrupted continuity of the false notion that the current priest is the cause of the problems facing the community. In Salt Lake City it appears that the priest is always to blame when troubles arise. The priest is always to blame? Really? God blessed my life in allowing me to begin His holy priesthood at Holy Trinity Church in Salt Lake City in March 1962. My proistamenos, Father Steve Katsaris, was my mentor in regard to how parishes are administered or should be administered. Since that time, a parade of priests has passed through the community like an unending procession. How strange this is when I realize that one of my classmates from seminary has served the same parish for the past fifty-two years. And he is not an exception regarding many of our dedicated priests.

In the Salt Lake Tribune of November 6, 2002, a major article was written about the assignment of Father Michael Kouremetis to the parish which included a large picture of him. The article stressed that the reason for his assignment was for him to resolve existing problems which obviously came from the former priest. Now it seems that he is the problem. How strange!

Is it logical to assume that every priest from Father Katsaris to your current priests are the only ones to blame for problems in the community? Is there no sharing of the responsibility by any lay members of the Church as well? A realistic self examination must reveal accountability from more than one direction.

It is clear that an attitude exists among some which is contributing to the problem. Consider those who poison the minds of others simply with the name of their newsletter, "TAKE OUR CHURCH BACK!" as if the Body of Christ has no cosmic significance, but rather is their own personal possession. Whose Church is it that all of you found in Salt Lake City by being born there or by migrating to Utah from other places domestic and foreign? Whose Church will it be after all the current members have died? What mere mortal can claim ownership over the Church which was established by and belongs to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Not even archbishops, metropolitans, or patriarchs can dare to declare the Church as their own, for certainly this is blasphemy against Christ.

You, the members of the parish council, are correct in referring to Article 30, Section 4 of the Archdiocese Uniform Parish Regulations as the only process to be used whenever there is any disagreement between the priest and the council. Since priests are assigned by their metropolitans, having been ordained by the Holy Spirit through hierarchs, this is the only procedure we can follow. There is no other way and I commend you as a parish council for referring this matter in accordance with the U.P.R. regarding the position of an assigned priest in a parish. Due to the emotionalism among you which is so strong at this time regarding the community, I caunot consider any single decision as proper in order to alleviate the problem. Therefore, I will take some time to prayerfully study the matter.

Again I reiterate, please allow tempers to subside, so that everyone who loves our Lord's Church may begin to see the life of the parish more objectively. This will help all of us come to a positive perspective regarding the local church, so that we can continue to glorify our Lord Jesus Christ Who established His Church on earth for our salvation.

With paternal blessings,

/s/

+Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver

WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION: Letter for the Hierarchy!

Moderator's Note: We are asking all faithful supporters of this community to support our beloved community and its elected Parish Council. Please download the note of support below and send or deliver it as soon as possible to Yanni's Greek Express.

The letter to be signed may be downloaded by clicking HERE. 

We encourage everyone who wants a united community, with open assemblies and fair elections, to please show their support. We have had word that the members who, behind this community's back, once again established a SEPARATE PROPHET ELIAS CORPORATION, are now gathering signatures to keep Fr. Kouremetis here, despite his demonstrable and ongoing support to divide our community. If they are so anxious to keep him, they can pay his salary and benefits THEMSELVES and BUILD THEIR OWN CHURCH!

---

His Eminence Metropolitan Isaiah
Metropolis of Denver
4550 East Alameda Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80246-1208 

November 2012 

Your Eminence, 

As a faithful member of the Greek Orthodox Community of Greater Salt Lake, I would like you to know that I stand firm in my support for our community's elected Parish Council. 

In a very short time since their election, the community has witnessed positive steps in restoring the vibrancy and dynamism that exists in the Greek Orthodox Community in the Salt Lake Valley. This community asks that you keep your word, and you allow this elected Parish Council to continue in its efforts, without any fear of removal or sanction. 

Further, I join others in respectfully requesting the immediate reassignment of Father Michael Kouremetis from his position as a Proistamenos in the Greek Orthodox Community of Greater Salt Lake. Sadly, Fr. Kouremetis has proven to be a divisive force, seeking to undermine lay leadership efforts in efficient and transparent governance, and at a time when this community is seeking to heal and to unify. His reassignment will allow this community a fresh start. 

I ask that you, along with His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios, the Holy Synod, and His Beatitude, Patriarch Bartholomew, honor the efforts and wishes of their faithful flock in Salt Lake City. We ask that all would follow Christ's example of the good shepherd who leads his flock with love and good will. 

In His Name,


_____________________________________________________
Faithful Member, The Greek Orthodox Community of Greater Salt Lake 

cc: His Eminence, Archbishop Demetrios & the Holy Synod
His Beatitude, Patriarch Bartholomew

Additional Comments:

UNIFORM PARISH STRANGULATION

MODERATOR'S NOTE: The original of this protocol, issued by Metropolitan Isaiah, may be viewed here. It was also published, as demanded by the Metropolitan, in the recent issue of "Theologia", our community's newsletter.

---

October 10, 2012

Protocol 12–16

The Esteemed Parish Council Members, and
The Faithful Laity of the Metropolis of Denver

Beloved in the Lord,

In response to several questions recently received from the parishes of this Metropolis regarding clergy salaries, please allow me to call your attention to the following provisions of the Uniform Parish Regulations.

According to Article 29, Section 1, Subparagraph E, of the UPR, it is a duty of the Parish Council to "Provide for the Priest's remuneration and benefits in accordance with the Clergy Compensation Plan of the Archdiocese."

This means that the Parish Council members are obligated, as a fiduciary responsibility to the parish, to do everything that they can to develop and implement a stewardship program to afford the proper compensation for their assigned priest(s).

It also means that they are also accountable for providing that the priest's compensation is paid in regularly, in full, and on time.

According to Article 17, Section 8, of the UPR, "The Archdiocesan Council and the Archdiocesan Benefits Committee will establish remunerative standards for the Clergy."

Further, according to Subsection A of this same Section 8, it is the Hierarch of each Metropolis who reviews and approves the specific remuneration package for each individual priest he assigns to a parish.

It is therefore not within the capacity of a General Assembly, nor of a Parish Council, to debate or determine the priest's compensation package.

You received information regarding the individual minimum compensation package of your priest in my recent Protocol 12-13, dated September 21, 2012. This information is to be included in your 2013 budget, and is to simply be relayed to the General Assembly. It is not subject to debate or revision by the Parish Council or the General Assembly.

With Paternal Blessings,
/s/
✠ Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver

TO BE PRINTED IN ALL PARISH BULLETINS AND NEWS LETTERS

LEAD WITH CHRIST'S EXAMPLE OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD!

We Won't Endure Another ELECTED Parish Council's Dismissal!

For some STRANGE reason the Metropolitan recently asked that the elected Parish Council president's follow-up letter, regarding problems brought forth by Mr. Tsagaris - in an open and forthright manner - be sent to the entire parish via e-mail. As a further note, Fr. Michael had one of the administrative assistants send out a "clarification". In the correspondence, Fr. Michael took it upon himself to point out that the demand by His Eminence to email the note to the parish was not an "endorsement" of Mr. Tsagaris' letter.

Mr. Tsagaris followed the Metropolitan's directives to keep the issues, discussed between them in a recent meeting, quiet, in order to give the Metropolitan time to address them. The result of that admonition, which Mr. Tsagaris honorably kept, was the recent letter the Metropolitan, along with Fr. Michael's e-mail, sent out to the community. Instead of dispelling a ruse, the Metropolitan and his Proiestamenos-of-Prophet-Elias-only made a further mockery of a purported "miracle" by soliciting testimonials, none of which were made public. Furthermore, none of which have even been heard of within the community prior to the Metropolitan's recent correspondence referring to such in glowing terms. Following this, we now have the Metropolitan's latest "directive" that Mr. Tsagaris' letter to him be made public to the community.

And the problem is ... what? Is this supposed to be some sort of a "shame" game? Considering the letter's contents and the Metropolitan's prior and subsequent actions, shame most certainly does not lie with the president of this community's Parish Council!

We do not feel we're exaggerating here - especially since Fr. Michael refused to attend last Monday night's regularly scheduled parish council meeting, calling it a "witch hunt". He further pointed out that the UPRs stipulate that he is assigned by the Metropolis, not employed by the community. If ever an absurd situation existed, such an arrangement defines it. We do not "employ" him, but are required to pay him, and pay him not according to this community's means, but according to a schedule determined by the Archdiocese and its Metropolises. If he has outlasted his ability to be effective in the community, and the Metropolitan chooses not to reassign him (or more than likely cannot find anyone to take him!), it is simply our tough luck. In what other entity does such a ridiculous arrangement exist? Again, shame on the laity who pushed this nonsense through at Clergy-Laity meetings! Couldn't anyone envision the lopsided consequences of such a vile construct? Unlike Fr. Michael, who simply refused to attend, Fr. Matthew was instructed, by the Metropolitan, NOT to attend.

It is quite clear that our Metropolitan seeks to "invalidate" any discussion and/or decisions that may have been made. This, of course, will be based on the questionable and onerous UPRs that the Metropolitan sometimes follows, and sometimes does not, as suits his fancy and/or purpose.

We surmise that our Metropolitan views the correspondence he demands we all see as some sort of prima facie "evidence" for a justification to attempt an action he has become rather fond of in several parishes, including this one, in the last few years - that is to disband councils of elected lay leaders, then appoint his own group of more pliable laity.

THIS PARISH COUNCIL is an elected entity (επι τέλους!), though such considerations have never troubled the Metropolitan. Time and again, he has sought to scuttle and thwart our newly elected leaders at every turn, despite his assurances he would let all eligible parishioners run and be ratified, and despite offers to help and support in revitalizing the community that he and his minions keep attempting to sunder these past years.

Contrary to his notions of his own leniency and largesse, it is the members of this elected council, and, in fact the great majority of the congregation, who have "bent over backwards" (his phrase, not ours), hoping to put the dismal past behind them. We have had a well-attended, successful Prophet Elias nameday celebration, followed by a highly successful Greek Festival. We have tried hard, despite the obstacles thrown at the community, to show the Metropolitan, and the local clergy the true worth of our community and our elected leaders. These leaders chose to begin their leadership in a spirit of duty, forgiveness and respect. Sadly, this spirit of goodwill has not been reciprocated by Fr. Michael or our hierarch.

We have seen, far too often, that the hard work of those who do what is best for this parish face removal from office if they challenge any action of Father Michael. For far too long this community has been forced to endure ongoing pettiness, Machiavellian mind games, and Byzantine machinations. If the Lord has relied on the type of "spiritual" leadership we are currently witnessing to lead His Church and His Flock, He surely must be appalled by the cowardice and the banality!

WE WILL NOT ACCEPT -- EVER AGAIN -- THE CONTINUATION OF THESE TYPES OF ACTIONS! The actions of this elected Parish Council reflect our wishes for a construct of MUTUAL respect and governance, instead of this top-heavy structure where the clergy can do as it wishes, with far too little recourse left to the laity if the clergy usurps its power. We demand that this elected Parish Council be allowed to continue in its efforts, without fear of removal or sanction, to do its job.

Finally, it is now painfully obvious to almost the entire parish that it is time for Father Michael to leave. Even his supporters will state privately that he is no longer effective and can be divisive. His detractors, who constitute a large percentage of the Parish, see him as one who engages in actions that harm our faith, our sense of unity and our love for service to our Parish. With his departure, we firmly believe that we can meet our financial obligations to our members, our ministries, our Archdiocese and our future. More importantly, we will start to heal and unify.

Therefore, to ALL the clergy and hierarchy, here, in Denver, in New York, in Constantinople:

HELP US! Work in the Lord's vineyard with us and you'll get the deference and respect you are due. Lead us with Christ's LOVE and you will maintain that respect. And we will HONOR you for it! Foreswear the need to dominate and control, and LEAD WITH LOVE, with Christ as your example.

Parish Council, Current Matters - Part 2 of 2

Dimitri Tsagaris notes about his meeting with His Eminence on Sep 27th, 2012 in Denver,
Colorado.

(Attachment to the official Parish Council minutes of October 1, 2012)

• I thanked him for seeing me and requested to have a respectful, frank and honest conversation. He encouraged  me to do so and he wanted to hear me "exso apo ta dontia".

• I started asking. "What has the P.C. done to you and you wrote to us those letters?"
(!pointed at a complete package of the FROM and TO correspondences).  We were elected and came to you with an olive branch, letting you and the community know that we are ready to do work to heal wounds and unite the community. We have a sense of you being ready to dismiss us in "our first misstep."

We already have done quite a bit of work and we see measurable results such as parishioners talking to each other and constantly approaching us to thank us for the spirit and the direction we are taking the community. Stewardship  during the summer months is measurably up and our financial records will verify that. We can see a positive change among the parishioners and hope for the future. Clergy could give him input and verify.

We talked about the wonderful Greek Festival experience and how parishioners were happy to work together. We talked about the roofing and dome work that is about to start at PE, and also the HT Sunday school good problem of having quite a few students and renovation of some rooms to accommodate all the students.

He has quite the knowledge about the Sunday school rooms above the Gym and their limitations. (He was assigned to our community in 1960, I believe he said, when the classrooms were built). I was clear that the classrooms are not proper for our kids and we should tear them down and rebuild. I said something like "We are ready to proceed and we should discuss why we have not done so."

• At this point His Eminence responded before we continue the conversation by giving me the perspective  of the situation in general.

After Mr. Strike and others completed the PE Church, a notion started that at some point PE should be a separate parish. In his 2010 letter His Eminence, based on the separation notion that continued, asked the P.C. since they are in charge see how to separate the community.

At this point the Archbishop was involved (since a group of parishioners went to him), and his Eminence was accused of ordering the separation. The Metropolitan repeated that he never ordered the separation. It was a P.C. issue to handle.

As a result a conflict between His Eminence and the Archbishop arose.
He never ordered anyone in any of his parishes to do something they do not want to do. As far as the money in general, he wanted to make it clear, it belongs to the parish, to the olomelia and not to anyone else.

• Dimitri at this point expressed that it was very unfortunate that a conflict between the Archbishop and His Eminence arose. The damage of such public conflict was very damaging and confusing to the parishioners. Dimitri gave the example of a Father-Mother situation arguing, who is the boss, in front of the kids.

• Dimitri presented his thoughts on the division issue. He stated that he understands from an ecclesiastical perspective the reasoning as stated by both His Eminence and the Archbishop. However the way of going about it, the tactics and the mechanics used to arrive at a noble idea are on the one hand unacceptable and on the other hand will be very damaging since the community has not the proper infrastructure at this time to have two viable parishes. The demand for separation is premature and is made by a small minority.

In final analysis, instead of certain clergy looking at the viability of two parishes and improve upon the existing infrastructure  and make it ready for the separation, they tried to enforce a noble idea by forcing it down the throats of parishioners and further erode good infrastructure and parishioner relationships.  Parishioners resisted and will continue to resist if those practices will continue. The only clear explanation, we the community, received for this madness was "the Metropolitan asked me, asked us, to do so." So much energy wasted to do harm, when it could have been used for good.

• At this point Mr. John Johns dropped by to deliver something to His Eminence.
We had the opportunity to talk for about 20 minutes. He asked me a question in regards to the signatories on the High Tower account. Specifically  a couple of years ago he was in a P.C. meeting along with the two signatories of the account, Manoli Sargetakis and George Metos. At this meeting he said that the most recent change of the U.P.R's called for all money to be under custody of the P.C. and asked them to withdraw their signatures.

Dimitri thanked him for giving him the opportunity to provide his perspective. Dimitri has been involved with the H.H.C. and also the H.C.F. since their inception and served as a Chair of the Finance committee on the first, and a Member of the finance committee of the second. He provided short history of the creation and accomplishments of the H.H.C. and explained that the three signatories were authorized by the General Assembly. Mr. John Johns agreed that it was fine then however the U.P.R's changed afterwards. Dimitri replied that the issue was very simple. A General Assembly authorized the mechanism, the General Assembly was not informed about the U.P.R's change, and a General Assembly can change the directive given that there is a control mechanism. Since then the following have transpired.

His Eminence did not authorize a General Assembly for this discussion to take place and on top of this the community kept having one interim (appointed) P.C. after the other.

The Greek Orthodox Community is incorporated in the State of Utah. As such they asked the P.C. for a membership list so they can have a meeting of the members. Refusal of this list resulted in the lawsuit.

This lawsuit was not done by individuals, but by the community's request to the individuals to do so. This Lawsuit was not against the church but against certain P.C. members refusing to produce the list. The P.C. attorneys and Mr. John Johns made a very simple matter so complicated. There was no reason for any of this.
J .J. agreed that it should not go that far.

Dimitri further explained that at this time under the current P.C. the community could direct the change of signatures and control of the funds to go to the P.C. However, with all due respect to His Eminence, the trend shows that who knows for how long this P.C. will be on and not be replaced by His Eminence or by someone else that assumes his position in the future.

Mr. John Johns explained to me a mechanism that all restricted monies go to a "fund for development  specific account" and they can only be used for that specific purpose. Then I talked about the H.C.F. and its role. I recommended that he looks at their web site. He mentioned something about the bylaws saying that the H.C.F. will manage the project..... I told him that if there is something in the by-laws that needs to be refined, let us talk.

• At this point l discussed our "elephant stifado priorities list". Any by-laws or amendments are not anywhere near the top of our list, and separation is not on the list. I repeated again and pointed out that the roofing at P.E, the dome issue, (possible removal and reinstallation followed by iconography), H.T Sunday School classrooms, Gym and in general the development  of the H.T campus is our priority now as it has been for several years.

We talked extensively about the separation issue and repeated what I had previously discussed with his Eminence. I also mentioned the expression that I heard from someone, (during the period that we received specific instruction of how the properties will be split between the two parishes), "let us take the deal­ we have the better end of the bargain". That statement made clear to me on how low our morale was at the time and the extent of the damage done by clergy to this community due to the forced separation. I replied that statements like those are improper and I continued by asking a simple question. What am I going to tell Mr. S.K or J.C or others, (real parishioners that attend P.E church and have giving their lives to the Church and community and still do), I got you? I got the better end of the bargain? I told His Eminence that even though he suggested for a "task force" to examine the issue the fact that he states how the properties will be divided insinuated his desired outcome. That was not proper.

I also mentioned that because of actions like those we have lost many parishioners to other churches, a fact that his Eminence agreed that he has knowledge about.

I told Both Mr. J.J. and His Eminence that the community has funds, has architectural plans and a mechanism in place, to move forward with raising additional funds for the PE dome and start building the new Sunday school rooms along with the rest of the HT campus development.

In a nut shell I said "Your Eminence, if you want this to take place it will happen, if not, a solution will never be found." What are we waiting for?

I also suggested to His Eminence  in a funny way to "Lock the attomeys and others involved in a room, and not let them out until they find the way to make it work."

I also suggested to Mr. J .J. to talk among others to Harry Souvall, (member of our legal committee), who I have a lot of respect for, and I feel that he has the best interest of the community at heart. J.J. said that be already had contact and discussions with Harry and will continue to do so. At this point J .J. left.

• The Metropolitan told me that he has his clergy and his attomey(s) to work with.
He receives feedback from them. Many times he receives one-sided information. He thanked me again for a different perspective and information.

He understood my perspective and the community's perspective and he feels that under the circumstances since the U.P.R's  are an obstacle he will improvise, something that he has already done for other things.

I will contact him in one or two weeks or he will get back to us.

He brought up the statement in his last correspondence in regards to composition of the current P.C. being from HT. He now understands that we represent the entire community.

He also brought up Yannis situation, and I told him that I personally do not believe that he will ever ratify him. I told him my perspective about Yannis as I've known him since day one that I came from Greece 37 years ago, and we left it there.

He really wanted to get my perspective for many community issues in general. I did and he was really appreciative and for him many issues were different than he had heard before.

He kept saying that he receives so many letters from different people many with complaints. Many times, absent other input, he makes decisions based on those letters.

I made clear to his Eminence that this P.C. has the best interest of the community at heart, and will proceed to do things as committed and will keep him appraised as we see appropriate.

• I also made clear to him the obstacles that prevented us to move forward (gave him a list for his consideration)  and I was firm saying that those obstacles have to be removed, the sooner the better.

All along I had his attention and of course he had mine. He was very happy that I visited him and we had a face to face conversation and most importantly he heard things that he did not know. He will visit us at some point later on. However he is encouraging us the P.C., or collectively the P.C. and Clergy to meet with him at any time. He invited me to dinner. We enjoyed the company and then we left.