“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


Monday, September 2, 2013


... 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.


No comments: