💨💨 blow some more💨💨

This article is. So true. Try harder, Reet!

Well someone blew a piston. Listen Honey, it is NOT about you, what you think (how you frame your argument) what you rabidly want to control or your past service to this lovely little church (thank you). The panel of Heritage Protectors for the City of Toronto knew ex-actly what they were speaking to, the “human condition”. The Estonian People have a great story and others want to tell it even if you and your ilk have lost your bearings. No one gives a rat’s ass about the 70 holes in the roof, ART trumps all, doncha know?

To the person saying that the "friends" can't read, there's no need to be insulting, that does nobody any good. Isn't the community divided enough already without this nonsense?

Interesting article, definitely food for thought and I thank RMS for providing some facts, knowledge is a good thing. That said, it's clear RMS wants the church to be sold and this piece is biased in that direction and that's fair, after all if that's her POV then she's entitled to argue for it. Her words also carry weight as she's not a random bystander, but someone who's had ties to the church for a long time as stated in the article. Having said that, it would be nice to see an article presenting the opposing POV with some facts to back it up and then perhaps an objective piece that considers both sides equally. I have no doubt that RMS is sincere in wanting the best for the community, but that doesn't necessarily mean that what she thinks is best, is indeed best.

There are a few things in this article that don't seem quite right, and paint a picture that is at best incomplete. Let's start with this:

"The church copper roof has numerous leaks and an unaffordable substantial replacement cost"

Unaffordable and substantial are vague terms, some estimates would be helpful.

"HVAC and AC are 50+ years old"
and
"The electrical system is out of date"

This is again vague, and leaves me wondering how big an issue this is.

"Donations have been on a downward trend for years and don’t come close to covering costs, which are approximately $200,000 plus per annum"

This seems like it's probably accurate, but also misleading at the same time. After all, donations compared to costs isn't what counts, it's revenue compared to costs and donations are only one part of revenue. The article makes no mention of other revenue streams (ie. Salvation Army lease) that exist, and that the potential exists for new revenue streams as well. It also ignores that the possibility exists for cutting costs and this makes one wonder why she is ignoring such important pieces of the puzzle.

"The church will be bankrupt in 2 – 3 years"
and
"There will be no money to maintain a congregation, if the church building isn’t sold"

Perhaps labelling this as a lie is too harsh so I'll just say that this is just wrong. Had RMS said something like the church will be bankrupt in 2-3 years IF NOTHING CHANGES, that would be one thing but who's to say things can't change? The "friends" have presented a number of ideas for increasing revenue and cutting costs, not sure how realistic/viable all of them are but some of them seem logical and reasonable. Surely RMS is aware of what they've proposed, if she has issues with their proposals why not address them instead of just ignoring people who want to save the church? If the facts on the "friends" website are correct, then just the one change of having visiting pastors instead of having one full-time pastor would save 50K and renting out parking spaces could bring in another 42K. And if it's true that as the website says, "we have an impending shortfall of $96,000 in 2023", then wouldn't those changes alone come close to bring the shortfall down to zero? Maybe I'm missing something here but again, assuming the numbers presented by RMS as well as the "friends" are correct, then stating that the church will be bankrupt in 2-3 years seems like a gross misrepresentation of the facts. It seems to me that with a bit of initiative to make a few changes, the overall financial picture could be dramatically improved and perhaps the church can even be saved. Perhaps the purveyors of doom and merchants of gloom are right and the church can't be saved, but there's certainly not enough facts in this article to convince me of this sad inevitability.

RMS says that "I love the church building. I don’t believe there is a congregant of St. Peter’s who doesn’t."

I would only add that there are at minimum hundreds, and perhaps even thousands of people who are not part of the congregation but who nevertheless, also love the church. It's never been just a church, it's also always been something of a community centre. I know I spent my Saturday mornings there for many years as part of the Boy Scouts, I also know it has been a place used for choir practices and I assume a number of other things as well.

It's true that our community is more secular. It seems to me that the only way for the church to survive, is for it's future to be "re-imagined" and going forward there needs to be less emphasis on the being a church part, and more emphasis on it being a community resource and a source of revenue via renting it out.

RMS says that:
"In my opinion: If sold, the congregation should donate remaining funds to our numerous charitable organizations, with a focus on youth, thereby ensuring a long-lasting legacy for the church founders whose primary goal was sustaining Estonian culture in Canada."

What if the church could be saved? Wouldn't that be a more appropriate "legacy"? If there are people with ideas and energy who are willing to help out in this regard, wouldn't it be in the best interest of everyone for the congregation to welcome input from these people? It seems clear that the congregation is now so small, that keeping the church afloat is beyond their capabilities. So why not accept help when it's being offered and explore all avenues to save the church before selling? To quote RMS herself:

"Our community’s strength, vibrancy and future are reflected in these volunteers, who assume leadership roles in our established organizations, and create a positive vision for the future in new and innovative ways."

Wouldn't it be wonderful if a positive new and innovative vision could save the church for future generations? Surely it's worth giving it a try before giving up and selling, what is there to lose by letting people try?

RMS also says that: "There is no doubt in the minds of many, that the current turmoil around St. Peter’s is a “proxy war” for the Estonian House and KESKUS conflict. Both situations, have wreaked havoc with our valuable volunteer resources."

I have no doubt that this is a proxy war for some people, however thinking it is that for everyone is very wrong. There are many people who love the church, it's a beautiful place and precious community asset and there's no reason to assume that everyone is basing their opinions on what's happening (or not happening) with the Keskus. And maybe I'm being too optimistic here (is optimism a sin?) but what if the congregation and the "friends" were to come together, work together and re-imagine the future of and save the church? And what if this resulted in healing (if only partially) the rift in the community caused by the conflict over the sale of the Esto House? Maybe I'm hoping for too much, but one can dream and as the saying goes, "lootus sureb viimasena".

Hope springs eternal.

Great job, way to go! What’s next? It must be Tartu! When do we start? Let’s start the ball rolling now!!

Quoting Scripture to benefit yourself is known as bearing false witness. Go back and re-read Ms Sehr's article and then re-examine your heart.

It’s all about the money for the author. And I’m guessing most of it is already earmarked for some charity. Casting lots already, council and minister? More pastoral care and teaching is needed in this congregation for it to survive in any form.

How does that Bible quote bear "false witness"? To outsiders, it definitely appears that some larceny and chicanery (with voting) is going on at St. Peter's. Were not all board members and the organist going to resign as the last vote was not carried?

So the money has been earmarked, with a fraction going to the church. How kind of you to arrange all this! With all the talk of saving the congregation, it just proves the point - it’s not about the congregation or the building! Not at all! It’s about the bottomless pit on the subway that will serve these organizations. So give them Tartu as well, why not?

To: Dead cat

as in “dead cat bounce”

A dead cat bounce is a temporary, short-lived recovery of asset prices from a prolonged decline or a bear market that is followed by the continuation of the downtrend.

Frequently, downtrends are interrupted by brief periods of recovery—or small rallies—during which prices temporarily rise.

The name "dead cat bounce" is based on the notion that even a dead cat will bounce if it falls far enough and fast enough.

https://www.investopedia.com/t...

Correction to Freida.
"Friends looking like angels. Like they always have been".

You must have selective listening- RMS totally misconstrued what was said at the hearing- that’s disinformation. That’s serious. And her followers are deaf- wake up! This church can and should be saved- it is the house of God, no matter what RMS thinks.

Seems that aome churches like to embellish their activities to the CRA.

Thank you. Really thank you. Thank you for proving RMS point. You and the rest of the extreme minority that are wishing the end of our community. You wish it so at least once you would be proven correct. But as pointed out in the article, and evident to those in touch with reality, this is not correct. Our community is thriving. Growing. Next generation of children participating. This mob of naysayers(“aka the friends”) are determined to destroy anything not created in their vision. On a more ironic note, most of them are childless. As for the rest of us, the majority, we will carry our traditions, we will move our community forward. You are welcome to join to. Our hand ins outstretched. All you have to do is take it.

You are tone deaf! The community is divided. What is it about that you don’t get? This shows just how much we are divided - take off your blinders! Reach out to the Friends, they are really nice, contrary to what you think.

The community is divided…in your opinion. The reality is not so. You have a very vocal minority spewing misinformation and practicing character assassination. What RMS is doing here is pointing all this out. Community decisions have been made by elected community leaders. You’re never going to please everyone. But as life teaches us, things will not always go your way. Sometimes you need to go along to get along. Trust me, you will thank us later.