“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


Thursday, December 5, 2013

Latest Clergy Correspondence

We have been fortunate to receive two separate communications from our two esteemed proistamenoi.  The first is their letter to the Metropolitan outlining their reasons why parish council elections cannot take place this coming Sunday.  They repeat the words of the Metropolitan in which he, "declares the assembly meeting invalid along with any decisions which may have been passed."  Declarations have been made but citing references for those declarations are lacking.  NOWHERE in the UPR does it state a general assembly meeting invalid should the clergy choose to walk out. 

We then learn that "there cannot be anyone in canonical good standing at this point without a canonical general assembly."  An interesting statement for our two esteemed proistamenoi to make.  If this is the case and NO ONE in this community is in canonical good standing, the clergy should be prepared to refuse communion to ANYONE who approaches.  With regard to referencing the canons, specifically which canons from which council have been violated rendering a parish general assembly invalid? 

Their second communication explains again an imagined violation of the UPR saying, "elections cannot proceed according to the UPR since nominations for Elections Committee members and Parish Council candidates occurred at Parish Assembly deemed non-canonical by His Eminence."  They further explain that "candidates have not been qualified by the priests nor have they attended a Parish Council seminar."  They fail to mention that they were asked to conduct the necessary seminar never responding to the request.  

Their final objection is the issuance of absentee ballots by the parish council in violation of the directive of the Metropolitan.  Let's be clear, such a directive is a direct violation of UPR Article 25, Section 6.  Is the Metropolitan asking us to violate the same UPR that he continuously cites and holds dear?  You can't have it both ways. 

We thank our esteemed proistamenoi for their correspondence and encourage everyone to vote this coming Sunday.     

No comments: