BishopAccountability.org
	We Ought to Agonize About What the Future Holds By Theodore Kalmoukos Orthodo Reform November 2, 2007 http://orthodoxreform.org/news/we-ought-to-agonize-about-what-the-future-holds/ From all indications, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America has been treading on a similar path as Roman Catholic Church has been walking on for the last 4-5 years because of its clergy-pedophilia scandals. The story published in this week's edition about Holy Trinity Church in Dallas' special solicitation of funds to cover an expected $250,000 in legal fees – to defend the parish from a lawsuit brought against the parish due to allegations of sexual misconduct with minors against its former pastor, Nicholas Katinas – should concern everyone in the Archdiocese, especially the laity. After all, it is the laity which is struggling to find the money to support and sustain our parishes. All faithful who go to church on Sunday morning are volunteers, including parish council members, but not the clergy, starting from the Archbishop, the Metropolitans and the priests, all of whom are salaried – and some of whom enjoy extremely lofty salaries. How does the Archdiocese justify a base salary of $200,000 for a priest, plus benefits? The most disturbing aspect of the letter sent to Dallas parishioners is the alarming concern that the very property of the parish, "most notably its land and buildings, could be seized to satisfy the judgment." Have we even begun to realize the magnitude of the dangers which have reared their ugly head and threaten the very existence of both our parish communities and the Archdiocese as a whole? The situation can not be allowed to continue as is. Our parishes can not continue to constantly ask for, or demand, money from their faithful members. It's fairly clear that the well is beginning to dry up, and we are probably approaching a time when a growing number of parishes are unable to afford a priest. There are at least 15 parishes in the Metropolis of Boston which can not sustain a fulltime priest, for example. My question is simple: Where do we go from here, and what type of a Church are we going to be 25-50 years from now? Our hierarchy at the Archdiocese is of advanced age, well past the technical retirement age of 65. Archbishop Demetrios is past 80; Metropolitan Iakovos of Chicago is approaching his 80th birthday; Isaiah of Denver is in his late 70's; and Maximos of Pittsburgh is 72. The younger bishops are approaching retirement age: Methodios of Boston is approaching 61; Gerasimos of San Francisco is 62; and Alexios of Atlanta is 64. Only Nicholas of Detroit, 54, and Evangelos of New Jersey, 46, could be considered "young bishops." It would definitely be a good thing if at least some of the older bishops decide to retire. What can the Church expect from an aged hierarch? I am fully aware of that "bishop for life" applies to all hierarchs, but sensitivity and self-respect should also prevail. After all, the canons of the Church were also written for philanthropic purposes. What can an 80-90-year-old man offer the Church from an administrative standpoint? Generally speaking, not much. The next question which naturally arises is also crucial: Who is going to replace today's Archbishop and the older hierarchs after they're gone? For the sake of discussion, if Archbishop Demetrios relinquishes his position tomorrow, I'm afraid that the Church in America will find itself in much the same position as in August of 1999, when Archbishop Spyridon was ousted. In other words, unless it has already started thinking about these things, the Ecumenical Patriarchate would be completely unprepared. Bartholomew will panic once again, and he will start searching left and right due to a lack of strategy or proper planning for an alternative solution. Moreover, the next archbishop would have to be a weak leader in order to be kept "under control." Rev. Alex Karloutsos who, in the name of the Patriarch acts as the "real Exarch" in the United States, and will most definitely try to install his "own guy" in order to simply continue doing "his thing," which is technically to advise the Archons and manage the Church's big-money foundations, as he has been doing throughout most of his career. I don't believe that a strong and decent hierarch, under these circumstances, would accept an invitation to become the next Archbishop of America. Who in his right mind would want to have Karloutsos undermining him day and night? One more thing: If we read the list of the candidates for the Episcopate carefully, meaning those who will someday replace our existing hierarchs, we can shed a few tears, or start pulling our hair out. Are we genuinely concerned about the Church's future? Are we agonizing over what the next decade might bring, what the leadership of the Church would be tomorrow? If we're not, we ought to be.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.