UNITY, ACCORDING TO DIVIDERS

It is with no small amount of amusement, and an overarching sense of irony, that we learned of the former anointed appointeds' efforts to close down, or at least marginalize, this site.

Having succeeded in suspending another blog that irreverently, and quite often cleverly, lampooned the anointed appointed, along with our then-striking clergy and our ever-vindictive poimenarchis, they wish to stifle this site.

In a recent parish council meeting, the former(?) dividers, now posing as "uniters", demanded that our Parish Council denounce the blog as "unhelpful" in not promoting what they call "unity". They also accused the blog of "lying". 

(It seems quite clear that "unity" to this bunch means that they must get their way, and, to them, "lying" is anything that negatively impacts their efforts to get their way.)

Is it not more than just a bit ironic that, during their dismal reign of error and deceit, the plethora of lies that the anointed appointed and the clergy accepted, did not - to their way of thinking - cause any of the disunity and discord this community is still desperately trying to overcome?

It might be possible to "forgive and forget" if their actions to split the community were not continual and ongoing. The "unity-seeking" dividers would have us believe that it is not their actions, past and present, within our beloved community and Church that prevent reconciliation. Rather, according to them, it is the publication and documentation surrounding facts and events, along with editorial analysis of such, that promotes what they call "divisiveness". They further criticize the elected Parish Council in that it won't reach out and "collaborate" with the former anointed appointed and allow their "best practices" approach to governance to be discussed! (Γιἀ όνομα του Θέου!)

Isn't the solution obvious? If those "unifiers" were truly interested in unity, they would cease trying to split the community, stop creating a separate corporate identity for Prophet Elias, and there would be no reason to have a blog! We've been told by them to stop writing - it's not helpful. We say, stop trying to divide the community - it's REALLY not HELPFUL!

Until then, we will continue to call it like we see it! If the dividers and former anointed appointed don't like it, they can express such in their own writings. Blogs aren't difficult; they're time-consuming! (Funny, isn't it, that the satirical blog offended their ultra-sensitive, holier-than-thou, sensibilities, but the mindless, vitriolic and crass Facebook rants of their own are never mentioned?)

The splitters were, and still are, castigating those who dare disagree with their backdoor dealings, their covert efforts with Denver, and their deceits of omission and commission. They now are attempting to insinuate themselves back into decision-making roles by baiting the elected Parish Council into behaving just as they did. 

(NEWS FLASH: It is not the job of this Parish Council - or any Parish Council - to be scolds or nannies, or to limit free thought and free speech! And, this Parish Council was elected because the majority in the entire community had had quite enough of the anointed appointeds' "best practices"!)

Having these so-called "unifiers", whose ongoing divisive efforts and deceits have been well documented, lecture ANYONE on unity, collaboration or best practices is simply laughable.

SEMANTICS 101: Typo Tempests in Teapots

Moderator’s Note: We were recently treated to yet another disparaging letter by His Eminence. Click HERE to read the original.

---

Exaltation: to be raised up high, glorified or honored.
Exultation: to be joyful or jubilant, especially due to triumph or success; to show or take delight in the defeat or discomfiture of others.

Source: dictionary.com

---

His Eminence was quite correct in pointing out that "exaltation" and "exultation" have different meanings.

The two sentences below are illustrative:

• Greek Orthodox parishioners in the Salt Lake valley were recently informed that someone brought to our exalted Metropolitan’s attention typographical errors in the September 8 Church Bulletin.  

• The Metropolitan was exultant in that the errors provided him yet another opportunity to chastise our community.

GAME OF "THRONES"

Moderator's Note: to read the Metropolitan's latest letter, CLICK HERE

---

Well, well, well! Once again you "move the goalposts", your Eminence. One would think that by now we would know you don't intend to take your heavy boot off this community's throat. Yet, apparently, hope springs eternal!

We had a General Assembly recently that VOTED, barely, to succumb to your blackmail, pay your striking priests backpay for not working, and keep the three we cannot afford; we did vote for TWO priests' salaries, asking that you transfer one as soon as possible.

Prior to this assembly, you came here and told us, according to those damnable UPRs, that WE decide. We know, and you prove continually, it's not true.

But, we keep playing by your rules that continue to set up an utterly uneven playing field, and no longer wonder why the results are so predictable.

And we are further involved in your "Game of Thrones" with the Archbishop, the Synod, and for all we know, the Patriarch. Tragically, we, and especially our kids - their future - are but pawns in this game.

In this game of thrones you say:

To heck with Patriarchate, and of course, to heck with your supposed "first among equals" whose representatives told our leaders, "oh, bring back the striking priests and it will be easier to get this "straightened out"." Again we followed that advice, forgetting of course that you are always there to thwart any reasonable solution from any source that might get this community back on its feet.

And now, surprise, you're demanding (read, BLACKMAILING - AGAIN) that before you will even consider removing the third clergy salary, we MUST return the HCF funds back into sole oversight of the Parish Council. 

What guarantees us in your ongoing cat-and-mouse ploys that should we do that, you will not, yet again, dismiss still another elected Parish Council not to your liking, and yet again put in your favored anointed appointed, and do as you will with those funds? We certainly do not believe you when you say that the purpose for which they were donated will be honored. Too many of the splitters at the last parish assembly suggested that the original donors should allow them to be used for emergency purposes, such as paying for overpaid striking priests if money is tight.

Finally, when you say to us that even the devil can quote scripture:

ΕΞ  ΙΔΙΩΝ ΚΡΙΝΕΤΕ, Δέσποτα?

***UPDATED***: JUST HOW "SENSITIVE" WERE THE "ANOINTED" APPOINTED ...

... to the "needs" of the community's clergy, or to the "sacramental life" of their most observant co-religionists?

In our last Special Parish Assembly we were treated to an array of "supporters" of the STRIKING clergy. These were folks who were "terribly worried" about their "spiritual fathers", and upset at the curtailing of "sacramental support" for the "faithful".

Like spoiled children, saying it's always "someone else's fault", these people vilified the current Parish Council for "taking away their spiritual and sacramental 'life'."

Of course, these "hyper-observant" (they made it a point to indicate that they were such) did not, for one moment, blame their own craven "spiritual fathers" who were too cowardly to stand up for THEM, their own flock, in the face of a vindictive Metropolitan who demanded that Apostolic services cease. No! It is so much easier to blame the "secular" Hellenophiles, is it not?

Given this, can we just backtrack to a little over one year ago?

The ELECTED Parish Council took over on a day, again, over a year ago, where the then appointed President, before he left office, took one significant action.

Knowing full well what a dilemma he would leave to his properly elected successors, he made sure that the attorneys who represented him and his former fellow appointees - IN THEIR EFFORTS TO DENY THE MAJORITY OF PARISHIONERS IN THIS COMMUNITY A MAILING LIST OF MEMBERS - (yes, THAT was what the lawsuit entailed) -  PAID his own lawyers, with the community's money, FIRST!

Did he or the others care then that the priests could not be paid? Did he or they consider the impact on the "sacramental support" of the "faithful"?

Obviously NOT. He, and they, were far more interested that this entire community pay the lawyers' fees to save his rear and those of his cronies.

Where was the concern for their "spiritual leaders" or the "sacramental life of the parish" on that day?

NOWHERE! He and the others cynically left it to the newly elected Parish Council to figure it out.

The hypocrisy is nauseating.

---

A FOLLOW-UP POSTSCRIPT: The elected parish council members - instead of throwing their hands in the air and saying, wow, no money! - immediately took the RESPONSIBLE action, and stopped payment on the check to the "anointed appointeds'" attorneys.

More urgent obligations were paid; employees were paid; priests were paid.

It would have been so easy then to point to the "anointed appointeds'" cynicism.

The ELECTED Parish Council tried MIGHTILY to make a fresh start, only to be thwarted at every turn by their Metropolitan, by the Proistamenos-of-Prophet-Elias-ONLY and by the "old guard, anointed appointed"!

As a further follow-up: The "anointed appointeds'" bill WAS settled!

This ENTIRE community - WE ALL - (whether we agreed with their actions or not) paid for their NARROW and SELF-SERVING interests.

THE HYPOCRISY IS STUNNING!

Thoughts, A Week Later

It’s been a week since the Special Parish Assembly held last Sunday, August 25. Several people have let us know some thoughts and observations.

It was odd to hear, more than once, that the Parish Council was responsible for denying to many their sacramental prerogatives. No one with this childish attitude bothered to think that, a) the Metropolitan had been informed – several times in the past months – that this community has been struggling financially; b) that, while the Metropolitan may have been angry that the Parish Council finally had to reduce clergy base pay by 30% overall since he would not reassign a priest, he did not have to react as he did – one can discuss possibilities without resorting to blackmail; c) that our priests could have tried to convince their “boss” not to suspend their services to their FLOCK, despite the cut in pay. (Keep in mind they did still minister to their “favored few”.)

It is not unreasonable that the clergy were not pleased with the situation; it is, however, unprofessional for clergymen, who continually claim to be educated “professionals”, deserving of professionals’ salaries, to strike.

Granted, the assembly voted, by an extremely narrow margin, to return the clergy, restoring their salaries, along with back pay, but the damage by the “strike” is sadly evident. Even many of those wanting the priests back in church have expressed disgust at their clergy's and hierarch's actions, and at the regulations that enable such behavior.

Along with the claims that sacramental prerogatives needed restoring, it was odd to hear a judge – an officer of the court – tell us that we do not need large edifices, gymnasiums, youth programs, festivals and the like. He objected to the distribution of Festival tickets while the priests were striking. (Whether he likes it or not, for years now, this is part of the way they’re being paid!) He claimed we can do without staff, but no one has seen him yet come and volunteer to clean floors and tables while souvlakia are skewered, or baklava is being made, it's hard not to say that his claims ring hollow. Most incredibly, he said the community should not worry about fixing the P.E. dome! Really? One would assume that anyone who went to law school would understand the concept of “liability”!

We also heard from a former appointed Parish Council member that “the blog isn’t helping”. This is an odd statement coming from a former appointed PC member, who was hugely instrumental in a FINRA/SEC action against an outstanding member of our community – an Archon, a long-standing member of Leadership 100. This person and others, along with our priests and Metropolitan, in a fine demonstration of “true Christianity”, threatened a gentleman’s and his family’s reputations and livelihood. Was this action "helpful?" Further these people’s actions resulted in the freezing of funds, hence interest gains, intended for specific purposes in improving the Holy Trinity campus. We were told by other speakers that these funds, that are thankfully now unfrozen, need to be released by the persons who donated such for specific purposes in order to pay for striking priests and for the vision a small portion of parishioners have for the community. Interestingly, none of the priests’ ardent supporters made any similar suggestions for the PE Dome funds, the PE Pavilion funds, or the PE Prayer Garden funds.

Are we to assume these people’s past actions and present attitudes have been “helpful”? Hardly!

The fact is the Charter and the Uniform Parish Regulations, as they now are implemented and enforced, are a prescription for ongoing inertia at best, further outrages at worst. Such large and small disasters are currently occurring, or will occur, with ever more frequency. We were told by the same former appointed that we can work within the framework of these regulations. It is becoming more and more evident by the actions of our clergy and hierarch that we cannot. The blog remains committed to this end.