Karloutsos, The Early Years: A Biography

By Nick Stamatakis

I received this interesting biography of Fr. Alex Karloutsos almost the same time it was published two days ago by its author, Matthew Namee, and many others.  Matthew Namee (who operates the specialty website orthodoxhistory.org) has given us many samples of excellent work on the (mostly modern) history of Orthodoxy, and he has done a very good job in this one, too. He explained that he would present at least three more parts but had no schedule.

Let me start with an interesting fact. Matthew Namee doesn’t seem to have decided which name to use: “Fr. Alex”, Fr. Alex Karloutsos”, “Fr. Karloutsos,” or plain “Karloutsos.” I made a rough count, and I think that in the end, the plain “Karloutsos” or “Fr. Karloutsos” prevailed in this first part of his biography.  I faced the same issue early, a few years ago, when I started writing many articles related to Karloutsos. Soon, I decided that the proper way to do this was to use plain “Karloutsos.” We may have different opinions on evaluating his personality and life, but very few would disagree that Karloutsos has repeatedly proven that he has very little connection to the “priesthood,” especially the Orthodox priesthood.

Someone who thought it was a good idea to have the sign “CEO of Religion” on his desk does not deserve the title “Father” before his name, not to mention the reports of handling loads of $$$ cash (some in that same desk seen in this photo) that have reached my ears.

Other than this observation, this first part of Karloutsos’ biography has many interesting facts:

• The tragedy in the origins of the family, with the loss of both his father’s mother and, later on, his mother.  The tragic twists and turns in his early life are truly worth noting, although these days, life was tough, especially for women who have had many births, sometimes under challenging conditions.
• Karloutsos is undoubtedly endowed with abundant “sociability” charisma, a trait pictured best by his first mentor, Father Byron Papanicolaou’s report to AB Iakovos in 1974: “This young priest has certain gifts that I’ve never seen before. One of them is opening doors. I don’t want him ever to leave my parish, but if he has to leave, it would be a big mistake if you did not take him into the Archdiocese.”
• Karloutsos was the shadow of AB Iakovos for many years but this biography seems not to stress enough how important it was to be next to someone with natural leadership qualities.  Iakovos was a natural-born leader and was able to plow forward against “group think,” – as he proved in supporting Martin Luther King and on many other occasions.  Did Karloutsos learn anything from such a unique teacher and mentor? Unfortunately, he chose to be a “shadow” for the rest of his career and life.  This is precisely why I chose the nickname “The Prince of Darkness” for him. He decided to follow others’ paths and, above all, to serve others’ interests, but he never developed a “vision” for this Church other than exploiting it to enrich himself. Having grown up in poverty, making money in any way possible, even out of the Church, was okay with him.
• Example: Why doesn’t he mention that when he arrived in Chicago, he was penniless and that the Parish bought him his first car? Are there other dark things he doesn’t say about his days in Chicago?
• One sentence is of particular noteworthy significance: But at Holy Cross, for Karloutsos, “all of a sudden, our minds were expanding,” Professors introduced him to existentialism, to “a world outside of Orthodoxy,” as he says, and he was particularly drawn to the work of Carl Jung. Since when does Holy Cross turn into an indoctrination center to “draw” the young aspiring priests away from Orthodoxy?
• Since when does existentialism get taught in a manner that “draws” future priests to a philosophy most antithetical to Christianity?  Friedrich Nietzsche’s blasphemous quote still reverberates in an ugly way: “God is dead.” So why would Karloutsos be “drawn” to the philosophy of an existentialist, a philosophy whose groundwork was set by people who would claim such a thing?  Did he also believe “God is dead”, if it is a true admission that he was drawn to Carl Jung’s works, who in turn was influenced by the pioneer existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche?  Who taught existentialism to prospective clergy in Holy Cross in the 1960s, and for what purpose exactly?  How can a clergyman admit being “drawn to Carl Jung” instead of being totally “drawn to Christ” during his tenure in an Orthodox Seminary?
• Another interesting quote in the article: After seminary, Karloutsos studied at the Bossey Institute in Switzerland, an ecumenical institute run by the World Council of Churches. Why, exactly? So, after being “drawn to the work of Carl Jung”, what’s the purpose of being trained at an ecumenical institute run by the WCC? Something isn’t adding up, except that among the multiple paragraphs in the article, these two excerpts above seem to shed some light on where the “straight narrow path” may have originally been side-stepped.

We will wait for the following parts of this biography to complete our evaluation.  If Karloutsos wanted this to paint a good memory to leave behind in our community, he would be very disappointed.  There are other ways to reverse the vicious cycle of moral and doctrinal decline he himself set in motion with his acts.  Not only does he seem not to be conscious of them, but he is too arrogant, filled with pure “hubris”, to employ them.

BELOW, YOU CAN READ THE FIRST PART. YOU WILL BE LED TO ORTHODOXHISTORY.ORG FOR THE REST – DO NOT FORGET TO READ THE INTERESTING COMMENTS.

=================

source – orthodoxhistory.org