BOSTON – The obstacles, difficulties, and risks related to the inclusion of the Dependencies of the Patriarchal Monastery of St. Irene Chrysavalantou in Astoria within the Archdiocese of America are revealed in a confidential report by the Monastery’s legal advisor, Nikiforos Mathews.

The report does not exclude the possibility of legal complications for both the Archdiocese and the Monastery, involving the New York State Attorney General’s office and local authorities where the Dependencies are located concerning issues of ownership, security, and more.

According to the report, there is a lack of understanding regarding the decision of the Phanar and the Archdiocese of America. The report also mentions two lawsuits pending against the Monastery and what may happen if the Monastery or the Archdiocese are required to pay compensation.

The report, dated June 7, 2023, is written in English by attorney Mathews and is addressed to the president of the Monastery’s Trust, Archbishop Nikitas of Thyeateira and Great Britian, who, in turn, is expected to convey it to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. Archbishop Nikitas previously headed the Phanar’s Exarchy, which investigated the issues of the Chrysavalantou Monastery when he was then Metropolitan of Dardanelles.

It is worth noting that on October 7, 2023, The National Herald had revealed that there is a legal dispute regarding the inclusion of the Dependencies of the Chrysavalantou Monastery in the Archdiocese.

In the aforementioned article, among other things, it was reported that “a legal dispute has arisen regarding the inclusion of the Dependencies of the Patriarchal Monastery of Chrysavalantou in the Archdiocese of America, resulting in both ecclesiastical and administrative issues pending for months.”

The Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, during its session, decided to include the Dependencies of the Chrysavalantou Monastery in the Archdiocese of America, despite the contrary opinion expressed by the competent Committee for Foreign Institutions of the Patriarchate.

It is emphasized that the Eparchial Synod of the Archdiocese was informed of these developments through the publications of The National Herald.

The key points of the confidential report follow:

“Property Issues

“We are in the process of determining (i) whether each of the Dependencies is separately formed as a legal entity, (ii) what the articles of incorporation of each Dependency provide, (iii) what properties each Dependency owns, (iv) in whose name each of the Dependency property deeds is in and (v) whether any of the Dependency properties are mortgaged or otherwise leveraged and, if so, in what amount.

“Disposition of Properties.

“The communication received from the Ecumenical Patriarchate suggests that the properties are to remain with the Monastery.  However, we understand that the GOA had understood and expects that the Monastery properties will be transferred to it as well (more accurately, the Uniform Parish Regulations of the GOA (the ‘UPR’) may contemplate property being held in the name of the parish, but upon dissolution of non-viable parishes any assets or proceeds being transferred to other parishes in the same Metropolis).  As a threshold matter, it is important to get clarity on this point to be in a position to proceed. As noted above, some or all of the properties may currently have property deeds in the name of the relevant Dependency itself; in such a case, the transfer of the Dependency could result in the transfer of the property as well, absent some conveyance to the Monastery. However, for property currently held in the name of the Monastery:

“If the title of such property will transfer to GOA, then we will need to consider (i) the documentation by which that property will transfer from the Monastery to the GOA and (ii) what consideration will be paid for that transfer.  Such a conveyance in the State of New York requires the approval of the Attorney General, and we will need to consider whether a transfer for nominal value (as opposed to actual value) would be problematic with the Attorney General’s Office. (Of course, the States of Florida and Illinois may have similar or other requirements and the proposed transfers may raise additional issues to consider and address in those jurisdictions. Local counsel licensed to practice in those States may need to be engaged and consulted.).”

The report revealed that, “there are currently at least two lawsuits naming the Monastery as defendant. If damages arise from these cases, the transfer of significant assets from the Monastery (e.g., the Dependency properties) may be viewed by U.S. courts as a fraudulent conveyance, and as a result would not be given effect. In addition, absent an indemnification from the Monastery, it is possible that the GOA itself could absorb liability under cases relating to Dependencies coming under its jurisdiction.”

Regarding the ecclesiastical issues, the report states: “The contemplated transfer of Dependencies is not a situation that is addressed specifically in the UPR. One approach being considered to bring the Dependencies under the jurisdiction of the GOA and subject to the UPR as parishes is to treat each Dependency as a ‘new parish’. Among other things, this would require an organizational committee on behalf of the parish deciding to apply to join the GOA.”

The report concludes: “Please note that the summary above is not exhaustive, and additional issues may arise as the process progresses.”