I am not sure I understand what "statements" Archbishop Spyridon has made since no effort was extended by the author of the above article to quote him, and thus the very title of the piece is more than a little misleading. The irregularities of the Patriarchal Synod, which are listed in the article, seem like problems enough and wanting of correction, however.
Yet, I am still confused as to why Archbishop Spyridon was forcibly retired. The inpenetrability of the topic smacks of petty intrigue. On the other hand, the people most concerned with it seem happy enough with Archbiship Demetrios, or whomever their new elective master may be if they did not stay in the GOA Church. Either way, it seems apparent if only to me that not many cried their eyes out when Archbiship Spyridon was ousted [which on its face seems strange, but perhaps just to me].
For some reason, and it may just be me inasmuch as I am not Greek myself, but I felt at the time it was happening that it was almost as though by being born in America, Archbishop Spyridon was somehow just not Greek enough for the post. But that would be a truly insane reason to have forced him from his throne! So, I began to wonder about it recently, hoping to find a genuine explanation. I nearly detect that whatever the pivotal conflict(s) may have been, it was not meant to be published for public scrutiny at any rate.
Thank you all.
Sincerely:
Joseph