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?