Strikes

Published by The National Herald, February 4, 2005

Spiritual Court Strikes Delicate Balance

The Spiritual Court of the Archdiocese refrained from excommunicating Basil Livanos (member of the Transfiguration Church in Corona, Queens) on January 26, as reported in this newspaper last week.

The Court stated that it recognizes Mr. Livanos’ "dedicated past service to the Church and (the Transfiguration community’s) school," and acknowledged that, in Mr. Livanos letter of January 25 to the Archdiocese, "he speaks of love and forgiveness."

But the Court has nonetheless directed Mr. Livanos to abide by the Archbishop’s directives and meet with the Archbishop; but still withdraw from the Corona church’s parish council:

Mr. Livanos must "withdraw from further involvement in the governance of the parish and school; and return records, keys, funds and the assets of the parish to the legally constituted parish council. Secondly, that he devotes his energy and talents in consultation with, and under the guidance of, the Archbishop to return the parish to proper order. The Court asks the Archbishop to accept the sincere and good efforts of Mr. Livanos in fulfillment of these recommendations," members of the Court wrote.

The Spiritual Court of the First Instance was convened in the Chapel of St. Paul at the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese at 11:10 AM on Wednesday, January 26, to consider charges brought by the Archdiocese against Vasilios Livanos, a communicant of the Holy Transfiguration of Christ parish in Corona, New York and former member and president of its parish council. The charges are essentially based on violations of the Oath of Office taken by Mr. Livanos when he was elected to the parish council, and his subsequent refusal to abide by the May 12, 2004 decision of His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios of America. This decision relieved Mr. Livanos of his presidency and membership on the parish council, and prohibited his candidacy for elections and any involvement in parish and school activities before January 2006. These decisions were taken in response to Mr. Livanos’ disregard of the Uniform Parish Regulations in the exercise of his duties as president. Consequently, there was division and conflict among the parishioners and priest. A growing deterioration of the situation resulted in ten of the 18 duly elected council members on May 3, 2004 formally requesting Mr. Livanos’ removal from the parish council.

To consider the charges, the Spiritual Court received the evidence presented to it by the Archdiocesan Chancellor, His Grace Bishop Savas of Troas. The evidence included correspondence from the Archdiocese to Mr. Livanos; correspondence between the Archdiocese and the parish; and a letter from Mr. Livanos to Bishop Savas received today, in which he stated that he would not attend the Court hearing, and so his letter "should serve as my defense."

Having reviewed the evidence, the Court then questioned Bishop Savas as to events leading to the May 12, 2004 decision; as to the events and situation in the parish since then; and as to the procedures and actions taken by the Archdiocese.

Regretfully, Mr. Livanos had chosen to be absent from this hearing, so the Court could only consider his aforementioned letter as his testimony.

Mindful that faith and order are at the foundation of our Orthodox Christian life and ethos, and upon having studied the evidence, the Court determined that, certainly, the order of the Church is seriously and dangerously disrupted at the Holy Transfiguration Parish. The court finds a growing negative impact on the spiritual life and wellbeing of the parish, and of its individual communicants. There is a realistic possibility of an even more serious and devastating division in the community, a disruption in the fulfillment of the sacred mission of the parish. Consequently, the Court resolved to consider the charges and evidence presented.

First, the Court considered the justification of the Archbishop’s decision of May 12, 2004 to remove Mr. Livanos from the Transfiguration Church’s Parish Council. Considering the events in the parish of the preceding months, the Archbishop’s decision was certainly a rightful and most justified exercise of his sacred responsibility to maintain the order of the Church for the spiritual welfare of the communicants and their parish. The record shows a consistent disregard of proper parish governance, with flagrant violations of the procedures established by the UPR on the part of Mr. Livanos, whose actions included unproven accusations of financial mismanagement against the former parish priest, accusations discussed widely in the community to the detriment of the priest’s ministry. These accusations were subsequently determined by formal inquiry to be false and unfounded.

The essential issue in the charges before this Court is this: Did Mr. Livanos adhere to his sacred oath to follow the discipline and regulations of the Archdiocese during his presidency, and according to accept the May 12, 2004 decision to remove himself from the presidency, the Parish Council and the organizational structure of the parish and parochial school?

He did not. Plainly and simply, the fact is that he did not withdraw, as a sworn member of a parish council should have done in response to the discipline of the Church, and to ensure order in the life of the parish. Consequently, the parish has continued to suffer spiritually. There is confusion among the faithful as to the legitimacy of meetings, and elections, activities which Mr. Livanos was specifically directed not to initiate, for he had no authority, and they were in violation of the discipline and regulation of the Archdiocese. Their outcome is null and void. There continues to be anxiety about the future viability of the school and parish; continued disruption in the proper and orderly governance of the parish; and justifiable concern for the assets of the parish.

Indeed, the Court is concerned with the evidence that Mr. Livanos, and those cooperating with him, continues to collect funds without any authority to do so, without an accounting to any properly ecclesiastically and legally responsible people of authority. These funds are deposited in newly created bank accounts without authority and, apparently, with the sole purpose to avoid the regularly and properly established accounting of the parish. The financial sacrifices of the people of God are holy gifts, and are to be cared for and administered as a sacred responsibility only by those duly elected to do so under proper procedures and traditional accounting principles, with a required full accountability to the people. This is not being done. The situation has deteriorated to the point wherein the persons duly authorized to collect and receive the funds are intimidated from exercising their duties by fear of provoking physical confrontation in the church. Mr. Livanos’ behavior and interference in the conduct of church services on January 1, 2005 signal the prospect of such confrontation.

The charges brought before this Court by the Archdiocese are found fully justified.

This Court has the right to impose spiritual sanctions to maintain the faith and order of the Church. At this time, it will not do so, but it does reserve for itself the right for future action.

At this time, however, the Court looks appreciatively upon Mr. Livanos’ letter. He speaks of love and forgiveness, states a willingness to see order in the parish, and expresses a desire for resolution. The Court certainly agrees and values his written testimony. To reach these goals, the Court urges Mr. Livanos to accept the following:

First, that he respond to the directive of May 12, 2004; withdraw from further involvement in the governance of the parish and school; and return records, keys, funds and the assets of the parish to the legally constituted parish council. Secondly, that he devotes his energy and talents in consultation with, and under the guidance of, the Archbishop to return the parish to proper order. The Court asks the Archbishop to accept the sincere and good efforts of Mr. Livanos in fulfillment of these recommendations.

We are mindful of Mr. Livanos’ dedicated past service to Church and (Transfiguration community’s) school. He has offered his time, labor, resources and leadership capabilities. In that spirit, we urge him to accept the findings of the Court, and its recommendations, and to respond in a spirit if reconciliation, completing this holy effort by February 28, 2005.

Members if the Court: Rev. George Stavropoulos (Holy Trinity Church, Hicksville), Rev. Emmanuel J. Gratsias (Church of the Resurrection, Glen Cove), Rev. Dr. Robert Stephanopoulos (Archdiocesan Cathedral of the Holy Trinity), Rev. Demetrios Moskovites (Annunciation Church, Manhattan), Rev. Nicholas Anctil (Holy Trinity Church, New Rochelle).



Volume 7 Number 6 - Tuesday, February 8th, 2005	A Publication of the ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN LAITY