Harry – well said. It would indeed be unjust to lay this at the feet of the entire monastery. And, as you note, the article’s depiction is focused on the two, er, “robust” monks. The potential misuse or abuse of confession (which is clearly implied) was – as I noted above – heartbreaking, if true. And the endeavors described are indeed difficult to square. Even so, it is my prayer that this, too, will prove to be a slander to these two. Either way, we grow only through truth. And whether though vindication or purification, may humility bloom, repentance deepen and may God be glorified.

Chris, from the Vanity Fair article it’s pretty clear there are two in the monastery who have real estate and other agendas on the one hand, and everyone else in the place on the other. I’m not ready to lay misdoing (if any) upon ‘the venerable monastery’ because of a couple of per the article) ‘not so narrow’ monks there.

May it be so. I sure hope that such a venerable monastery is exonerated after this distressing affair. I understand the defensiveness of many of the monastery’s friends, since I would count myself among them. However, whenever someone we love is slandered, it is natural that we who love them will rally to their defense. What is difficult but important to realize at such times is that a full hearing (at least one not driven by partisan interests) will do more to restore the honor of those slandered than a hastily closed investigation. It is unfortunately painful – but in the end, we rely on the Truth to set us free.
This is hardly unique to the monastery, since we have plenty of examples – to both the good and the bad – much closer to home. Yet out of all of this pain, there may come considerable blessing: not only the renewed honor of the monastery, but humility for all (including the accusers, we hope), and a rich reward for those who have suffered unjustly yet remained faithful. In God’s hands, our greatest cross always becomes our greatest blessing. May it be so here.

Following a request by the government, the judiciary has launched an investigation into the conduct of former Supreme Court prosecutor Giorgos Sanidas during his probe into the Vatopedi real estate exchange, although sources told Kathimerini that it has yet to be established that taxpayers lost out in the deal that saw public land end up in the hands of the Mount Athos Monastery.

Justice Minister Haris Kastanidis instructed the Supreme Court to investigate whether Sanidas was guilty of any wrongdoing in the way that he handled the original probe into claims that the state had transferred prime real estate to the Vatopedi Monastery in return for land of a much lower value.

It was confirmed yesterday that the task of investigating Sanidas has been assigned to Supreme Court deputy prosecutor Roussos Papadakis.

In April last year, then outgoing Supreme Court prosecutor Sanidas prevented the Vatopedi case file from being resubmitted to Parliament for the House to decide whether any politicians should be investigated, insisting that no new evidence had been uncovered.

However, Kathimerini understands that the entire Vatopedi affair may be based on a misconception. The initial probe into the real estate deal was launched after it was suspected that the property the New Democracy government signed over to the monastery a few years ago was worth at least 100 million euros more than the land it received in return. Some estimates have indicated an even larger discrepancy.

The state’s official evaluators have delivered two reports on the property swap and neither was able to establish that the deal had left taxpayers worse off. The evaluations were both scrutinized by independent property evaluators, who found that the state officials had got their sums right. The parliamentary committee investigating the swap has now ordered a third evaluation.

“Wherefore, not those that are slandered, but the slanderers, have need to be anxious, and to tremble, for the former are not constrained to answer for themselves, touching the evil things which are said of them, but the latter will have to answer for the evil they have spoken, and over these impends the whole danger.” — St. John Chrysostom

Thanks for the translation…it was much better than Google’s.

I hope you do not mind that i used your translation in posting the story at http://members5.boardhost.com/STANDREWHOUSE/msg/1285174044.html

And thank you for calling the story to our attention. This may be only the first of many actions.

Best Regards,
Dean

Ilya, thank you for bringing this to our attention. My first thoughts are somewhat along the lines of “well, what could we expect.” Allow me to explain: I don’t mean to imply that the closing of the Chambesy center will ipso facto invalidate the protocols that were worked out there (although it can’t help but leave a sour taste in the mouths of many).

More to the point, we Orthodox have been placing all our eggs in the upcoming pan-Orthodox council when there has never been any real need to do so (after all, we are guided by the Holy Spirit, not men).

So, what will happen if and when Chambesy closes? Will the “Great and Holy Council” take place? I don’t know. We should instead ask cui bono? (Who benefits?) In my estimation, it would be the Church of Russia, after all who would have the resources to fund and host such a conclave? Or the ROC could ride to the rescue and supply the funds needed to keep it going (although at a paltry rate, constantly reminding the Phanar who it is that’s paying the bills).

In order to stave off this eventuality, the Phanar might turn to its friends in the globalist community for help. That wouldn’t set will with the Russians and the more conservative patriarchates.

We shall see…

Surely, as Greek state sponsorship for the Church weakens, many Greek Church projects are going to suffer, and the ripples will be felt by all. Material supports are being knocked out, especially from under the Patriarchates of Constantinople and Jerusalem, as well as the Church of Greece. But it concerns all Orthodox globally – here is some news from Switzerland (translated from Russian by me, original article at http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=37489):

<<

Greek authorities refuse to finance the Orthodox Center of the Constantinopolitan Patriarchate in Switzerland

Sophia. September 22. INTERFAX – Due to the economic crisis and difficult situation in Greece the Greek government terminated the financing of the Orthodox Center of the Constantinopolitan Patriarchate in Chambesy (Switzerland).

Thus, the Patriarchal Center is on the verge of closing: formally it continues to exist, but in fact it is already not functioning, its staff has been sharply reduced, the Bulgarian web-site “Двери в Православие” reports.

Meanwhile the employees of the Center had been busy with preparing the Pan-Orthodox Council, of which Patriarch Bartholomew often spoke lately. Many of them had extensive experience in the sphere of inter-Orthodox cooperation and participated in preparatory committees of the Council.

The Chambesy Center also housed the theological post-graduate program, which, together with theological faculties in Lausanne and Geneva, used to prepare specialists in the Orthodox theology. Among its graduates were prominent Church figures.

The Chambesy Center included three churches, a chapel and five Orthodox parishes (Georgian, Arab, Greek, Romanian and Francophone).

>>

Just thought that the AOI readers might find this instructive. Hopefully, such material shocks will serve to reinvigorate spiritual life.

de Rugy is terrific. As the link I posted above shows, there are plenty of other countries (our own included) that have dangerous levels of debt.

That said, the lead article makes it clear that the economic disaster that is happening in Greece is the consequence of a corrupt – or at least unworkably dysfunctional – social system. There is nothing wrong with being an Emerging Economy, if that is what you are. The article points out that the fraud was trying to pose as a Developed Economy, when Greece is- in many ways- far from it. The institutions are far from professionalized or transparent in the manner the Eurozone required. This apparently isn’t news in Greece. As the article notes, the individuals are likable, yet all view their institutions with something between distrust and disdain. In that light, the monastery scandal was a shock because the Church (and especially Mt. Athos) was one of the few trusted institutions.

My (admittedly American) concern is that State sponsorship may ultimately engender a dependence and fealty that undermines the proper mission of the Church. Of course, the vast number of Saints and Church Fathers through the centuries were exemplars of that mission despite the relationship with the state, so this fear may be overstated.

Good article that points this out:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/09/20/austerity-agonistes

If we need to focus on Greece on anything, it would be on the Church-State conglomerate they have created and human rights. If hypocracy lies anywhere, it is here.

The clear implication of the article was that the monks either traded on what they learned in confession

This was the utterly heartbreaking implication of the article.

As for the 1/4 million per, if it is used to underwrite consumption without meaningful production (also clearly implied by the article), it is very possible to generate a massive debt over time without anything much to show for it. It is one way to “measure” the deficit of productivity – or the surplus of consumption – by which one gradually erodes wealth. Lest anyone indict the Greeks too quickly, one can find plenty more of the same elsewhere.

I’m still trying to understand in whose pocket $250,000 for each of 10 million Greek residents the government spent ‘for them’ landed.

Does any article speak to that?

Chrys thanks for that article. It restates much including the extensive lack of paying taxes. The thing it doesn’t touch, the thing I want to know about is this: 11 million people there each have had about $250,000 spent in their name. So, in whose accounts is that money to be found? Spent money isn’t like electricity that leaves the wires and is gone when it is used. It moved from the government’s accounts to, well whose? Plainly the 11 million people there don’t each have $250,000 in their piggybanks. Where is that money now?