“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




ΦΙΛΟΤΙΜΟ: THE GREEK SECRET


Friday, September 21, 2012

MATH IS THE LANGUAGE OF GOD'S UNIVERSE

I am sorry to say that even the makeup of the current parish council which I ratified demonstrates a clear division between those who identify with the Holy Trinity Cathedral and those who identify with Prophet Elias Church. Some responsibility regarding this sad reality also rests with our Archdiocese in New York.
- Metropolitan Isaiah, Letter to the Greek Orthodox Community of Greater Salt Lake, dated September 4, 2012 
His Eminence is "sorry" about a misconception he has concerning the current elected parish council. However, his sorrow does not make his observation accurate.


It is a really funny thing about free elections: their outcomes tend to reflect accurately the wishes and aspirations of those voting. As opposed to appointed parish councils, where appointees and clergy sought constantly to stack the deck against the vast majority, this parish council quite accurately reflects the will of the parishioners in this community.

To illustrate, let us return - once again - to the original 2007 survey which showed just 13% of respondents in favor of splitting this community.  At present there is only one vocal parish council member who favors splitting the community. There may be one or two more who might favor splitting, depending on the circumstances surrounding such an action.

Stephen Hawking, the renowned astrophysicist once famously said, "Mathematics is the language of God's universe."

So, let's do the math.

If only one parish council member favors a split, that amounts to 7% of the council. If we're being generous and consider that three parish council members might favor a split, that would be 20%. And, if we take the average, and consider two members favor this split and we come up with, lo and behold, THIRTEEN percent!

Math is, indeed, the language of God's universe!

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

AND SO THE GAMES CONTINUE!

On a spring day a few months ago our Metropolitan finally allowed us what was, even under the oft-cited, cherry-picked and highly flawed UPRs, our right and our due. He deigned to allow a open general assembly and then free elections. He also said, “no restrictions” on WHO could run, or WHO could be elected. We were of course pleased. We figured everyone involved was exhausted and finally understood it was time to turn “swords into plowshares”.

It is really nice that our Metropolitan starts out his August letter thanking the community and its elected parish council (with still one member yet to be sworn in, despite the assurances that "anyone" could run and could be elected!) for its attempts to reach out to all in a spirit of unity, understanding and forgiveness. He further offers prayers that such a spirit will continue to grow.

Strangely, (or, perhaps not so?), he then proceeds in that same letter to offer a highly tortured, utterly inconsistent, explanation as to why HE instructed three parishioners to, yet again, establish a separate corporation – for Prophet Elias only!

In regard to the other letter of the same date, which requests information about the renewal of the Prophet Elias Corporation, please know that as the hierarch of the Metropolis of Denver, I am obligated to oversee all the parishes which are officially under the Archdiocese through the Metropolis. The community of Salt Lake is reincorporated from 1974 as an independent corporation solely under the State of Utah. The Prophet Elias Corporation on the other hand, is recognized as a legal name under the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. This was my decision in order to conform to the Uniform Parish Regulations. In making this important distinction I am able to recognize the greater community composed of faithful stewards as being an integral part of the Archdiocese.
Establishing a corporation for only ONE of the two churches in this community in no way conforms to the UPRs. Nor, of course, is it applicable to the well-established exception this community legally enjoys, and has upheld by vote last November, despite dire threats from the hierarchy of what could happen if this community did not foreswear that exception.

Further, in making what he says is “this 'important' distinction”, the Metropolitan claims that he is recognizing what he calls “the greater community composed of faithful stewards”.

Your Eminence, the greater community in this valley, is composed of faithful stewards, who have proven, time and again, that, whichever church they might attend here on any given Sunday or holiday, they all belong to the Greek Orthodox Community of Greater Salt Lake, comprised of TWO ekklesies that our forebears built, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral and Prophet Elias Greek Orthodox Church, both under the aegis of one Greek Orthodox community. We know you don't like the arrangement, but this has worked for us, and this is what we still want. After all we have been through, the excuse that yet again establishing a separate P.E. corporation “protects” that particular church from a takeover by a charlatan clergyman is both dishonest and absurd.

In no way can there be a recognition of Prophet Elias Greek Orthodox Church as a separate corporation under the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. Archbishop Demetrios and the Holy Synod were highly specific in a letter to our community in March 2011:
"The ecclesiastical charter that was issued on April 10, 2010 is to be considered inapplicable and consequently withdrawn. 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." (emphasis added)
We have before pointed out that this passage by our Archbishop seems utterly unclear to Mr. Shand et al. Additionally, these explicit statements seem to have confused our Metropolitan and his counselors as well! Of course in his September letter our erstwhile Metropolitan throws the Archbishop under the bus, along with everyone else. He himself accepts no blame in causing any of this strife.

In the Metropolitan's August letter, he goes on to state:
Moreover, from your letter you state that the renewal of the Prophet Elias Corporation is divisive in nature. In regard to divisiveness, what can I say about parish funds which must be under the direct custodianship of the Parish Council, but are under separate corporations such as the HighTower investment firm in Chicago, the separate Hellenic Cultural Foundation and the Greek Orthodox Trust Committee? Are these not equally, if not more, divisive than the Prophet Elias Corporation which has no funds?

Question: How does the community even know that there are no funds? Are we to believe that the unelected principals of the renewed corporation do not know how to open a checking account?

The metropolitan's assertion also poses a false equivalency. The HCF and the trust committee are entities overwhelmingly approved by general assembly VOTES, and one of the trustees of such, is always the parish council president. Obviously this fact gives the Parish Council OVERSIGHT! The situation is set up in a manner quite similar to Leadership 100, or is the Metropolitan now disapproving of that institution as well?

Conversely, no general assembly in this valley has ever approved any initial establishment, or any renewal, of a separate Prophet Elias Corporation. This latest action is in direct contradiction to the Archbishop's revocation of a separate charter for Prophet Elias. It also runs counter to SEVERAL directly expressed votes and surveys by the overwhelming majority of members of this community over the past several years. Moreover, it should be remembered that the Metropolitan said he would honor those votes!

Where in the UPRs does it state that two or three members can simply take a church’s identity and claim it as a corporation in their names, without any election or grant of authority by the general assembly? This is, simply put, yet another putsch by a minority, who have the Metropolitan's ear, with tacit approval by at least one of the local clergy, to split this community and take over the church on behalf of the wishes of, again, a TINY MINORITY.

Furthering the false equivalency, there is absolutely nothing divisive about the separate accounts designated for specifically allocated projects for this community. These were voted on and approved by the general assembly. Just as funds were collected and donated for the pavilion and prayer garden at Prophet Elias (and, at a time when the dome and roof still leaks!), so funds have been collected and dedicated for various other projects for the community. It is not up to the Metropolitan, or the very few, to claim that these allocated funds can be diverted to other purposes. It would be dishonest to do so when these funds were gathered for specific purposes and upgrades. In fact, the Metropolitan's freezing of said funds has limited the interest those funds could be collecting; it has also put the specific projects for which they were gathered on an indefinite hold. It would be tragic if people who had hoped to see projects completed in honor of loved ones’ memories, may not live to witness such, due to the freezing of these funds by the Metropolitan. Surely it is past time that this situation be rectified! And, since he is so fond of bringing up the afterlife, … συγνὠμη, δἐσποτα, αλλά τι ψυχή θα παραδὠσεις εσὐ σε αυτή την περίπτωση;

It is unfortunate, yet not surprising, that during these past years, when this community had no voice in its own governance, that stewardship dried up. A repressed and unrepresented laity had no other way of making its despair known. If the problem ended up in the courts, the Metropolitan and his cronies are to blame. Pleas and entreaties to the appointed - not elected, to the clergy and the hierarchy, for too long fell on deaf ears. This community has not forgotten that the Metropolitan, in attempting to force a split before the Archdiocese's letter in 2011, was simply demanding that all funds be split, regardless of their original intended use. The Metropolitan is now clearly insinuating that these funds ought to be part of repaying past due allocations for the Archdiocese. There is no doubt that it is unfortunate that the other parishes were forced to shoulder that burden on our behalf. This unfair system portrays yet another travesty to be found in the current Uniform Parish Regulations that were rammed through the supposedly representative Clergy-Laity Congresses.

The Metropolitan blames six individuals who, on behalf of a very large majority in this community, and AS REPRESENTATIVES of that great majority, sued the intransigent appointed parish council members who would not hold an open general assembly, would not provide lists of members that were legally requested, would not provide any sort of transparency, would not conduct audits as they were legally bound to do, and did not have the guts to tell the Metropolitan that they would not betray their own community! Now the Metropolitan asserts that the six "who consider themselves members" (THEY ARE MEMBERS!!!) who represented hundreds, should themselves pay the legal costs of the appointed parish council members. This is nonsense. That lawsuit only occurred because the appointed parish council members themselves were in violation of civil law, AND, of the UPRs. If anything, your intransigent appointed should pay their own legal bills. Yet the elected parish council, in the spirit of forgiveness and unity, is, instead doing so. How we do it is our business. Instead of gratitude for the spirit of forgiveness, we see belligerence.

Our Metropolitan ought to consider that if this community finds itself struggling today, that struggle is directly attributable to his ongoing interference in non-spiritual matters, to his high-handedness in acting on behalf of the very few, to his continuing to seek means by which to split our community on behalf of that very few – despite the majority’s objections, and to his allowing this situation to endure far too long, even after the Archbishop and the Holy Synod asked that it stop. It is long past time that this miserable situation he himself created cease!

The Metropolitan made a step in the right direction last spring. (He refers to it as "bending over backwards".) He allowed a parish assembly, followed by free and open elections, supposedly with no restrictions as to who might be nominated and elected. He then, once again having given his word, reneged, and disallowed two members until such time as the lawsuit was withdrawn. It was withdrawn and in the meantime one elected member withdrew his name. The other still awaits swearing in, and NOW the Metropolitan says that the appointed parish council's attorney's fees must be paid - and how they must be paid - before such can occur.

In taking these bizarre actions, in making these absurd claims, as well as in insinuating himself into the minutiae of governance in this community, the Metropolitan simply is setting a poor example to his flock, and most particularly to our youth. He is our spiritual leader, yet it is he, not we, who confuses the spiritual with the temporal; and, it is he, more than we, who is consumed with money. If nothing else: surely a spiritual leader's word ought to mean something? Surely a spiritual leader can guide, can encourage, without resorting to pettiness, insinuations, back-door machinations? In his own words, "is this not a demonstration of separation and divisiveness?"

Your deeds speak louder than your words, Your Eminence, and neither have always been loving nor kind. You say you "bent over backwards?" No. You go backwards and you go back on your word. Time and again you seek to drag this community back with you. We are not going back.

In your letter you said, "please let us be sincere and forthright, since we are serving our Lord." We can all progress together, unified, in a spirit of cooperation and love. We really can forgive and forget. Or, we can have the disharmony, discord and stagnation of the past few years. You can either guide us, with Christ’s example of the good shepherd, or you can continue to throw out roadblocks and obstacles.

We can move forward if we all set our egos aside, or, the games can continue. The choice is yours, but we are not going back!

Sunday, September 9, 2012

John Saltas Responds to Metropolitan Isaiah's Letter

After reading the latest nonsensical and divisive letter from the Metropolitan, the obvious becomes even more so:

The single common thread of 50 years of confusion in the Salt Lake City Parish is the Metropolitan himself.

  • This community has behaved honestly and ethically--he has not.
  • He disavows fair elections.
  • He makes excuses and false rationale. 
  • He sets a bar, then moves it. 
  • He orders secret acts (establishing Prophet Elias as a corporation for dubious reasons) from parishioners then seems amazed at what comes. 
  • How many good people--our friends and neighbors--have left due to his behavior? 
  • How much has that cost this community in hurt feelings? Hurt our image? Hurt this community financially? 
This is not a Salt Lake City problem. This is not a problem of the people comprising this parish. This is a problem of the clergy and leadership of the Greek Orthodox Church and it is rooted in the Metropolitan seat in Denver.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Nick Colessides Responds to the Metropolitan's Latest Letter to Our Community

Dear All,

During the Watergate days Senator Sam Ervin was right.  He said “follow the money."

Once again the Denver Metropolitan, by his latest correspondence proves that in his mind “it is all about the money.”  He wants to get his greedy hands on the Parish’s money.  All the money that our Parish/Community has, in the accounts he has referenced, belongs to the Community.  The money belongs to the Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake.  That money can ONLY be disbursed by the commands of the community's General Assembly; not his.

We have only one answer for him:  Μολών Λαβέ!  It is the answer that the Greeks gave to the Persians.  It is the reason that the 300 Spartans sacrificed themselves against tyranny.

The Denver Aghios flip-flops on his word.  He prevaricates.

We need immediate action to repel the aggressive, unchristian actions and words of the Denver Metropolitan.  This fight will never end until the Denver Metropolitan is replaced by a caring and loving man of God.  And, the sooner the better.

Filakia to all.

Nick Colessides

P.S.  Please distribute as widely as you can, and ask our parishioners, and those in other parishes, to join the fight against the Denver Metropolitan's inequities and offensive conduct.

Metropolitan's Letter to GOCGSL, September 4, 2012

The following letter was sent to Father Kouremetis and distributed by him to Father Gilbert and to the Parish Council during our Greek Festival Weekend. In keeping with their promise to keep the community informed in these matters, the Parish Council distributed this letter to the community via e-mail on September 8. The Metropolitan's original correspondence may be viewed here.


GREEK ORTHODOX METROPOLIS OF DENVER

September 4, 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
5335 S. Highland Dr.
Holladay, UT 84117

Beloved in the Lord,

I am in receipt of a letter signed by Mr. Dimitrios Tsagaris, the Parish Council President dated August 23, 2012. The letter informs me that there was a final resolution regarding the attorney fees owed by the community pertaining to the recent lawsuit filed by five individuals in October, 2011 against eight members of the previous parish council.

Mr. Tsagaris' letter requests that I now ratify the election of the final candidate who was elected, Mr. Yannis Armaou, the rationale being that a final resolution of the lawsuit had been achieved. In this legal action five individuals who consider themselves members of the community sued the eight former council members. The total financial cost against the parish in the form of attorney fees was originally $56,467.10, with the spiritual cost being far greater. Your insurance carrier paid $25,000 of the debt leaving the balance to be paid by the community. After being given a discount the community is obligated to pay $28,000 to the attorney who defended the eight council members.

Reflecting back these past two and one-half years, I became aware of the fact that a vocal group of parishioners preferred to believe the un-Christian gossip and accusations against other parishioners, against the office of a bishop in the Church, and even against our Ecumenical Patriarch. Adding to this detrimental behavior, many parishioners were encouraged to give nothing or a mere token stewardship commitment so that they would be able to vote at the ensuing general assembly and to vote at the recent parish council elections. As you know, I relaxed almost all the requirements to allow this to happen.

Yet the fact remains that your community has four separate accounts, which are not under the current Parish Council, clearly in contrast to the Archdiocese Uniform Parish Regulations which state that all funds of a parish must be under the custodianship of each current parish council. The separate funds in your community are the HighTower investments, the Greek Orthodox Community Restoration Fund, the Skedros Memorial Fund, and the Hellenic Community Foundation.

In the face of this reality, and due to a cash flow problem in the community, you are now taking the current stewardship of parisr..ioners in order to pay the attorney fees of the lawsuit. Furthermore, the sequence of events following the lawsuit has caused increasing financial instability, including the community's inability to pay its commitments to the Archdiocese. These important points force me to pause in regard to ratifying Mr. Armaou's election to the Council given his role as a plaintiff. Until all problematic financial matters related to this have been resolved, Mr. Armaou's status will remain pending.

In my letter of ratification to the previous parish council, dated May 29, 2012, I called to attention the words of Saint Paul found in his first epistle to the Corinthians (6: 1-8) which prohibit church members from suing their fellow members. On the basis of this Scriptural exhortation, it appears most logical and correct to expect the five individuals who filed the lawsuit against their fellow parishioners to pay the $28,000 to the attorney. After all, the debt is a direct result of their action in opposition to Holy Scripture. This would eliminate the need to use the stewardship funds of the parishioners to pay an invoice which does not rightly belong to them. To compound this anomaly, the statement is made in the recent letter sent out to the parishioners that no management fees were paid to one of the individuals who sued along with the other four, who controls the largest amount of community funds. Undoubtedly the $28,000 in legal fees negate any benefit gained in this regard.

One positive statement I discovered in the letters sent to me in reference to the operating accounts of the parish was that, "We were assured to know that none of the accounts have been mishandled .. . " Obviously, this clears the names of the members of the previous parish councils.

Please know that this whole affair saddens me greatly. In my fifty years in the holy priesthood beginning at the Holy Trinity Cathedral in Salt Lake City in 1962, I have never encountered so much anger and animosity and division in one parish. Attempting to analyze this whole tragedy, only one common string stands out; money! Are we a church or a secular business?

I am sorry to say that even the makeup of the current parish council which I ratified demonstrates a clear division between those who identify with the Holy Trinity Cathedral and those who identify with Prophet Elias Church. Some responsibility regarding this sad reality also rests with our Archdiocese in New York.

My exhortation to all of you is to consider all real estate and all funds secondary to who we are. We are Greek Orthodox Christians who are members of Christ's Church because we believe in His words that our eternal condition will be either with Him in His glorious Kingdom or we will be in the eternal darkness with the devil and all of his fallen angels.

When we came into this world, we found His Church for our salvation, and after we are gone, His Church will remain for those who seek Him and His unchanging truths.

With paternal love,

/s/

+Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver

Sunday, September 2, 2012

Metropolitan's Letter to GOCGSL, August 20, 2012

The original of this letter may be viewed here. The letter was also distributed to the community via email by the Parish Council.

GREEK ORTHODOX METROPOLIS OF DENVER

August 20, 2012

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

Beloved in the Lord,

I thank you for your three letters which I received last week, two dated July 27, 2012 and one dated August 13, 2012.

In regard to your letter pertaining to the state of the Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake, I am most pleased that it conveys a positive spirit. The focus on unity and progress, rather than the negativity of expressions these past two years is most encouraging. I pray that this spirit will continue to grow and to prevail among you and among all the parishioners.

Allow me to cite one point in the letter. You mention that the Parish Council has chosen to develop leadership centered on parishioner involvement through committees. This is very good. However, please keep in mind that every committee of the parish must have a member of the Parish Council as chairman of that committee. Furthermore, all decisions of all committees are considered recommendations to the Parish Council for discussion and acceptance or rejection. This process guarantees that it is the Parish Council which officially represents the parish membership, which ultimately makes all decisions.

In regard to the other letter of the same date, which requests information about the renewal of the Prophet Elias Corporation, please know that as the hierarch of the Metropolis of Denver, I am obligated to oversee all the parishes which are officially under the Archdiocese through the Metropolis. The community of Salt Lake is reincorporated from 1974 as an independent corporation solely under the State of Utah. The Prophet Elias Corporation on the other hand, is recognized as a legal name under the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. This was my decision in order to conform to the Uniform Parish Regulations. In making this important distinction I am able to recognize the greater community composed of faithful stewards as being an integral part of the Archdiocese.

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. It will continue to be identified with the Greek Orthodox Church. This is important in that we see an increasing number of self-appointed clergymen beginning to use the word "Orthodox" as well as the names of the saints to maintain their congregations which are slowly eroding.

Unfortunately, the 1974 reincorporation recognizes the community solely as a secular organization, rather than as a religious entity. The recent decision of the judge who presided over the litigation against parish members shows the confusion, since he never once referred to the matter as a religious issue involving the inner governance of a religious institution. He obviously knew that secular courts cannot involved themselves in the administrative affairs of churches.

Moreover, from your letter you state that the renewal of the Prophet Elias Corporation is divisive in nature. In regard to divisiveness, what can I say about parish funds which must be under the direct custodianship of the Parish Council, but are under separate corporations such as the HighTower investment firm in Chicago, the separate Hellenic Cultural Foundation and the Greek Orthodox Trust Committee? Are these not equally, if not more, divisive than the Prophet Elias Corporation which has no funds?

I urge all of you, as members of the current Parish Council, to work in this vital direction, which has divided the income of the community and consequently divides the current membership of the community. The fact of the matter is that it is the way that the money of the parishioners is divided among those other separate accounts which has created this divisiveness among the membership. A direct consequence of this reality is the fact that the community has paid nothing to the Archdiocese for the year 2011 and very little for 2012. And it appears that there is no thought or willingness on the part of those in control to correct this problem. The forty-eight other parishes of this Metropolis have paid the financial obligation of the Salt Lake community for 2011, and there is no concern by the Salt Lake parish to assume its responsibility and obligation to show that it is a vital member parish of the Denver Metropolis. Is this not a demonstration of separation and divisiveness?

As all of you know, I bent over backwards to allow all the parishioners and others among them to vote and to be voted upon for the sake of assisting your unity. Can I not expect some kind of reciprocity from the community through you, the elected council members?

Please let us be sincere and forthright, since we are serving the Church which our Lord established through the Cross and through His Resurrection. We are responsible first to Him and then to one another.

I remain positive in my spirit that you, as the current Parish Council, will do whatever is necessary to please our loving God and to bring unity, peace, and love to God's people, whom you have accepted to serve in His holy name.

With paternal blessings,

+Metropolitan Isaiah of Denver