Comments Posted By Jason
Displaying 1 To 30 Of 46 Comments
Pere LaChaise says:
March 12, 2013 at 1:15 am
The OCA never was part of ROCOR. In fact, the Metropolia was castigated by ROCOR leaders for remaining in communion with Moscow and the rest of Orthodoxy while ROCOR was not. The histories and identities of OCA and ROCOR are distinct.
The OCA was never part of ROCOR, but the American diocese that was later called the Metropolia and eventually became the OCA was indeed under ROCOR.
Met Platon of America was appointed by ROCOR in 1922 at the recommendation of Patriarch Tikhon. Regarding the appointment of Met Platon, ROCOR decreed as follows:
“May it stand: in view of the expressed desire of His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon
of Moscow and all Russia, that Metropolitan Platon of Kherson and Odessa accept
the administration of the North American diocese, communicated by V. Rev. T.
Pashkovsy who had arrived from Moscow in the report of July 1/14, 1922, No. 1,
and in view of the consent of Archbishop Alexander to the temporary transfer of
the administration of the diocese to Metropolitan Platon, Metropolitan Platon is
considered temporary administrator of the North American Diocese.”
In 1924, Met Platon expressed his confidence in and obedience to the ROCOR Synod in
the following words recorded in the “American Orthodox Messenger” (No. 6 of 1924):
“In the circumstances amid which the Russian Church in exile has begun to live,
her one comfort and consolation is the possibility of calling Bishops’ Councils,
composed of the hierarchs who by the will of Providence find themselves outside
the borders of Russia. A Council of Hierarchs is morally of such a magnitude,
that before iteven an energetic unit, accustomed to willfulness and
stubbornness, must bow… We shall therefore expect that, even in America, they
who say that they are authentic `bishops’ will carefully examine the essence of
the discord in the church which they create, and will show their Orthodox
disposition in the spirit indicated by the Bishops’ Council in Karlovtsy”.
The same year, 1924, Met Platon participated in the ROCOR Council at Sremski
Karlovtsky, was elected to be a member of the ROCOR Synod, and he expressed his
full submission to this Council. However, in 1926, there was a council of the
American diocese in Detroit wherein those who attended attempted to grant
themselves autocephalous status under Met Platon. When later in 1926, Met
Platon returned to the ROCOR Council in Sremsky Karlovtsy and reported on the
outcome of the Detroit Council, ROCOR responded by stating that the Russian
diocese in America had no canonical right to declare its own autocephaly and the
Synod would certainly not acknowledge such an uncanonical declaration. Met
Platon then left the Council along with Met Evlogy and it was then that both
bishops separated from ROCOR and went into schism. Of course, the American
diocese (Metropolia) came back into communion with ROCOR in 1935 of their own
accord, affirming all the more that they recognized the authority of ROCOR.
Sadly, however, in 1946 the Metropolia again went into schism from ROCOR without
any canonical justification.
» Posted By Jason On March 13, 2013 @ 8:42 am
V.Rev.Andrei Alexiev says:
March 1, 2013 at 6:07 pm
As a ROCOR priest,I take great exception to what appears to be a reference to Metropolitan Hilarion of ROCOR.Who has made any accusations towards him?
He clearly was referring to Met Herman. It was an unfortunate error in a shameful post.
» Posted By Jason On March 5, 2013 @ 9:40 am
I am not as scandalized by the commercials and half-time show that Fr. Peter describes as I am that a hieromonk is watching all of this garbage in the first place. He says, “America, when are we going to wake up?” It is no secret that the Superbowl is a prime venue for the exhibition of this smut. When are we going to wake up and realize that we have a choice not to support, watch, or participate in such things? I was happy to have not watched this garbage, until Fr. Peter so kindly introduced all of the sleazy details to my imagination through this article.
» Posted By Jason On February 6, 2013 @ 11:38 am
If Met Jonah is release by the OCA to ROCOR, I’m sure many in the OCA will follow him. Perhaps the OCA Synod is reluctant to release him because of this fear, but if any do depart it will be because of the OCA Synod and their mishandling of his situation.
Those who criticize Met Jonah for having financial needs are ignorant of his current situation. He is not a simple monk in a monastery, but rather a bishop who has been placed involuntarily in ecclesiastical limbo. He agreed to resign as Metropolitan, but his fate in the OCA beyond that has not been made clear. He has not been assigned to another diocese, he has not been called to spiritual court, he has not been removed from the episcopacy, etc. Surely the OCA can at least support him until his fate is decided, whether that fate involves assignment to another diocese of the OCA, transfer to ROCOR, or reducing him to the rank of priest. As a bishop, he cannot simply return to the monastery he founded without the blessing of the bishop of that diocese.
I think it would be a great blessing if he could be transferred to ROCOR, regardless of what that would mean for the OCA. The OCA has been digging its own grave since it went into schism from ROCOR in the 1920s.
» Posted By Jason On January 23, 2013 @ 9:32 am
I agree with you, George. We need more genuine monastics as bishops, and experience as a parish priest is not essential. My main point was that ‘Whether or not Fr. Gerasim has been handled fairly by the Synod, it is important to make clear that he has not been accused of any transgression from which he must be “rehabilitated”.’ In other words, I don’t necessarily agree with the Synod’s decision, but wanted to point out that they didn’t make that decision in order to “rehabilitate” him after some moral transgression.
Regarding bishops being taken from the monastic ranks, I could only imagine what the GOA would look like if bishops were recruited from the Athonite monasteries within its jurisdiction. No doubt there will be many on this list with no real experience of these monasteries who would balk at the idea, and I don’t think the GOA is ready for such a thing, but I think this could be a great blessing for the GOA. My understanding, however, and please correct me if I’m wrong, is that the GOA guidelines stipulate that only celibate parish priests can be made bishops, so monastics without parish experience are not eligible.
» Posted By Jason On November 15, 2012 @ 9:54 am
Not at all, George. The GOA recognizes the OCA as part of the Church, the GOA and OCA are in communion with each other, and all local Orthodox churches recognize both the OCA and the GOA as belonging to the same body and the same communion. It is only the “autocephalous” status of the OCA that is disputed by the GOA and others. The Anglican Communion has never been in communion with the Orthodox Church and has never been recognized as part of the same Church. Rather, the Anglican Communion came about as an attempted compromise between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. Schism and apostasy/heresy are two sides to the same coin. So, to ask “who are the schismatics” regarding the ECUSA and the Anglican Communion is a strange question from an Orthodox standpoint, since the Anglican Communion and the ECUSA were schismatic from the very beginning.
» Posted By Jason On November 15, 2012 @ 9:45 am
“Gerasim may be the odd man out because of his previous ties with +Jonah, however he too is undergoing rehabilitation under the tutelage of +Benjamin so his litmus test will be if he will be a synodal team player.”
“Rehabilitation” implies that there was some wrong doing on the part of Fr. Gerasim that he needs to be rehabilitated from. The Synod wants to get to know Fr. Gerasim better by having him serve as a priest in an OCA parish where his pastoral abilities can be demonstrated. While he certainly has experience as a monastery Abbot, confessor, and spiritual father, he previously did not have any experience as a parish priest in the OCA and so his current placement is not completely without reason. Whether or not Fr. Gerasim has been handled fairly by the Synod, it is important to make clear that he has not been accused of any transgression from which he must be “rehabilitated”.
» Posted By Jason On November 15, 2012 @ 6:48 am
The Anglican/ECUSA problems are attributable to the fact that they were all schismatics by origin and nature, and schism begets schism. Neither the Anglicans nor the ECUSA are concerned solely with faithfulness to Apostolic Tradition and maintaining the purity of the Apostolic faith.
» Posted By Jason On November 15, 2012 @ 6:27 am
Just wondering, is anyone aware of any person or group attempting to compile documents such as the one above and the compilation of Chrstine Fevronia to be mailed to every OCA parish, to the attention of the priest and parish delegates, prior to the convention? It would seem like a good strategy.
» Posted By Jason On November 1, 2012 @ 12:09 pm
“How about Fr. Heckman? Do you think a suspension is an appropriate punishment for someone walking around the halls of St. Tikhon’s seminary asking seminarians if they’d like a massage?”
Having met Fr. Heckman on a number of occasions years ago when he substituted for our priest when our priest was away, I am surprised to learn that he has been suspended and of the allegations made against him. Are “massage offerings” the only thing he has been suspended for and accused of, or is there a lot more to the story?
» Posted By Jason On October 31, 2012 @ 12:04 pm
Face-it said: “Jason you have posted twice that +Met Jonah obtained and was under some sort of blessing from Elder Ephrim. He was Never with the Greek church of the Elder. Where did you get such a distortion?”
The claim that Met Jonah (while still a priestmonk) sought the blessing of Elder Ephraim to establish his monastery is something Met Jonah has always stated. It used to say this clearly on the monastery’s website, but you can still read this on the OCA’s main listing for the monastery:
The Spiritual Foundation: The Blessing from Valaam and Elder Ephraim
The Monastery was founded by Hieromonk Jonah (Paffhausen) as its spiritual father and confessor, in obedience to his spiritual father Abbot (now Bishop) Pankratiy of the Valaam Monastery of the Transfiguration, in Russia. This direction was given following a meeting between Abbot Pankratiy and Elder Ephraim of Philotheou, where they blessed Fr. Jonah with the obedience to establish a monastery in California. Fr. Jonah then requested the Diocese to establish a monastery. At this same time, Elder Ephraim was beginning the establishment of St Anthony Monastery in Arizona, and the many other communities under his guidance throughout the Greek Archdioceses of America and Canada. The first brother at Pt. Reyes was sent from Arizona, by Hieromonk Gregory who was then at St Anthony, to help Fr. Jonah…
As I said above, the monastery would have benefitted greatly by remaining under the continued guidance of Elder Ephraim.
» Posted By Jason On August 27, 2012 @ 8:49 am
George said: “Jason, let’s be careful here. Although HB started this monastery, he hasn’t been there guiding it for at least four years now. The responsibility for any irregularities that may exist lies firmly on the shoulders of the Abbott and his diocesan ordinary.”
Yes, but wasn’t it Metropolitan Jonah who appointed him as his replacement, a parish priest and psychologist who had never lived under monastic obedience?
I would prefer to think the best of Met Jonah, but he did have a role to play in Met Meletios taking over as abbot. Met Jonah also did not have much experience under monastic obedience before becoming abbot himself. My point is that after receiving the blessing of Elder Ephraim to establish the monastery, it would have been profitable for Met Jonah and the other fathers to maintain a spiritual connection with Elder Ephraim, an Athonite abbot for many decades and experienced spiritual father whose monasteries in this land are thriving.
Almost every monastery disaster in this country can be attributed to the fact that the monastery was founded and led by monastics and abbots with no extensive experience under traditional monastic obedience in a reputable Orthodox monastery. This is the cause of every problem. For this reason I thought very highly of Met Jonah’s plan to establish more monasteries here by bringing over experienced monastics from existing monasteries abroad. I thought at one time the plan was to bring monks from Valaam, which would certainly make sense on account of Met Jonah’s connection with this monastery and the OCA’s Russian heritage. Unfortunately, this plan did not proceed as hoped, and the one monastery he was able to establish since becoming metropolitan has caused a lot of controversy.
» Posted By Jason On August 22, 2012 @ 9:12 am
Fr. Peter said, “This falls along the same lines as the stories we hear about Elder Ephraim, but actually might be worse!”
Father, this is a very unfortunate comment. I have known many people who have gone to confession with Elder Ephraim, and I have confessed at some of his monasteries. From my experience, and from those I know, there is nothing at all improper about the way in which Confession is handled at Elder Ephraim’s monasteries. Some clergy oppose the fact that epitemia’s are given (usually abstention from Communion for a period of time), but this is done only for serious sins and the length of abstention is extremely short compared to what is prescribed by the disciplinary canons of the Church from the Ecumenical Counsels and Church Fathers. Neither Elder Ephraim, nor his monasteries, can be fairly accused of the kind of spiritual abuse and disorder that is being alleged regarding this monastery.
Met Jonah claimed to have established his monastery with the blessings of Elder Ephraim and his spiritual father from Russia. I can’t help but believe that many of these disorders would have been prevented had the monastery remained in spiritual obedience to Elder Ephraim.
» Posted By Jason On August 21, 2012 @ 9:59 am
I can’t wait for the “theosisometer” upgrade which tracks your progress on the path of theosis as you swipe your finger accross the screen!
I also can’t wait to use the “support” feature to get advice from a real Athonite hesychast!
But seriously, I initially thought that this was the worst idea I have ever heard of, but then I changed my mind. Perhaps most people have a prayer rule where a 100 knot prayer rope is sufficient. Some people, however, have a rule of saying several hundred or several thousand prayers in the morning, evening, and during the day. St. Paisius Monastery sells a beaded rope used to keep track of the number of prayer ropes you say, but some use a little tally gizmo to keep track of the number of ropes completed. This can be challenging, so this app really may come in handy for those who have a rule to say the prayer 100s or 1000s of times but who may not want to walk around town with a 300 knot prayer rope in their hands and dragging along the sidewalk.
I think it is a nice feature that it clearly indicates how many times to say the prayer in place of various services, in case something comes up and one is not able to attend a service. The number for each service can be hard to remember.
» Posted By Jason On August 17, 2012 @ 10:32 am
Not sure if anyone posted this yet, but this is the announcement made by the monastery on their website today:
» Posted By Jason On August 13, 2012 @ 11:20 am
I do not doubt the authenticity of the letter, but I do wonder why the godmother didn’t wish for her name to appear with the letter, as this certainly would carry more weight. Perhaps she is trying to protect the identity of the victim?
» Posted By Jason On July 19, 2012 @ 1:55 pm
George: “How come he never says anything about me? I’m hurt!”
You are not among the dreaded konvertsy.
Apparently there is a new moral standard according to which one is justified in converting from one sex to another, but not from one faith to another.
» Posted By Jason On July 19, 2012 @ 12:02 pm
Isnt’ this the same Elder Dionysios of Somonopetra that Elder Philotheos (Zervakos) specifically requested to hear his final confession and serve his funeral?
Your account calls into question a number of details from Elder Dionysios’ biographical sketch. For instance,
Tonsured Great-Schema Monk, by his Elder Archimandrite Aemilianos. in the Holy Monastery of Simonos Petras.
Called from his Elder Archimandrite Aemilianos, by letter of the blessed Abbot Philotheos Zervakos to become his successor in the Sacred Monasteries of Longovarda and of Thapsana, on the island of Paros, Greece.
This sketch linked above indicates his very close relationship with the great Elder Aemilianos and so your critical comments do come as a bit of a surprise.
» Posted By Jason On July 17, 2012 @ 2:08 pm
Reg. No. 67
13 December 2008
Minutes Section II
Today, Saturday 13 December 2008, at 09.00, after the Divine Liturgy in our Holy Monastery of Petra of the Sacred Diocese of Thessaliotis and Phanariophersala of the Most Holy Church of Greece, the Elders’ Council of our Monastic Brotherhood convened in the Council Chamber, with our Abbot and Spiritual Father, the Elder Archimandrite Dionysios, presiding. The matter set forth was the venerable Letter of His Beatitude His Beatitude Jonah, Archbishop of Washington and New York, Metropolitan of all American and Canada (sic) of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA), on 8 December 2008, requesting from us release papers of fathers and brethren for the needs and prospects of his Church, and in particular that of our Elder’s spiritual son since 1982, whom he tonsured a great-schema monk, the very reverend archimandrite Fr Melchizedek, secular name Thomas Pleska, son of Alexander and Joanna-Eugenia, holding American Passport No. 140930591. He holds register no. 13 in the Monastic Roll of our Sacred Monastery, a man tested upon our Rock like Peter, undergoing hardship with us for a whole decade, ministering to the Lord like the God-receiver in the Temple night and day for the fathers and sisters, with the Lord’s word in his mouth and silence of the desert, also demonstrating most recently through his letters, that his heart was never distanced from his spiritual father, our Elder. Thus, persisting in prayer, with one mind surrendering to the Holy Spirit, we herewith send the canonical release paper of the aforementioned brother, ratiﬁed through the good will of our Eminent Metropolitan, Kyrill of Thessaliotis and Phanariophersala, to His Beatitude, the aforementioned Archbishop, who is applying like that man of Macedonia; likewise we make known his Letter, referenced above, to the Monastic Communities of “Karaiskake” and “Red Church”, as well as that in Thebes, of which our very reverend Elder is the Builder and Father, making peace in pain.
The Abbot of the Holy Monastery of Petra, Chairman
The Elders’ Council
•Treasurer, Monk Agapion
•Oeconomos, Hieromonk Porphyrios
•Secretary, Hieromonk Symeon
Exact copy from the Book of Minutes maintained in the Sacred Monastery
For The Sacred Monastery of Petra, the Secretary
» Posted By Jason On July 17, 2012 @ 10:49 am
The entry above from the novice of St. John’s was from 3 days ago, on July 9th. The following entry was from 4 days ago, on July 8th:
A rumor was circulating the monastery this morning about Metropolitan Jonah of the OCA resigning. The Internet has just confirmed this (EDIT: Link added 09 July 2012). Metropolitan Jonah, formerly Archimandrite Jonah was the abbot of St. John Monastery until about 4 or 5 years ago when he was nominated to lead the entire Orthodox Church in America. There is hope by some that he will return to the monastery and set things back in order rather than let things continue as they have been.
From this point on, I won’t be posting anymore on this blog concerning the events occurring here at the monastery. I only hope and pray things settle correctly rather than quickly here. Although there is still some question as to whether things will be changing here at all like they should be… I should also emphasize how unordinary and atypical this trip has been has been for me. It’s completely lax here in so many ways. However, the experience (and many of you know what I am referring to) has certainly been a blessing because I know now what I didn’t know before. I’ve experienced many things that I would not have otherwise experienced and for that, I am grateful. I’ve made good friends that will most surely last a lifetime and I have a better understanding of what I am looking for in a monastery that I can call home.
I also would like to make a public apology for those that I have offended in past posts that have since been removed. We were only getting one side of the story here. Now I understand and everything has been confirmed in round about ways by multiple individuals whether they realized it or not. This includes Fr. Meletios. This monastery is spiritually toxic!!!
I leave tomorrow, but it isn’t soon enough. Godspeed and God bless you all.
» Posted By Jason On July 12, 2012 @ 8:25 am
I just thought I would share the following comments from a novice who also just left St. John’s:
Away and Safe
I apologize for those of you that I have confused from contradicting various claims that I have made personally on the phone or in writing and now with what I have recently posted in my last post. Things will become clear as time and events progress.
Don’t worry about me for now, though. I left this morning and now I am safe from them. However, prayers for that monastery are needed now more than ever. They’ve lost their focus and need some drastic change among other things. I shan’t say more than that since it isn’t really my place to say anymore than that publicly. Just stay away from the Monastery of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco until they make the proper changes that they need!
Thank you all for reading. I’ll continue my life someplace else at a different monastery, but blogging on a regular basis has officially ended for me.
» Posted By Jason On July 12, 2012 @ 8:13 am
The quotation that Fr. Martin refers to in his post (Fr. Meletios’ endorsement of the hypnotist) is still visible on the Internet Wayback machine (web.archive.org), for those who know how to use it.
» Posted By Jason On July 11, 2012 @ 6:43 pm
Just for clarification, since the question was asked about unusual deaths linked to Elder Ephraim’s monasteries, I just wanted to point out that the monastery that Fr. James is referring to above was not one under Elder Ephraim.
» Posted By Jason On June 16, 2012 @ 9:59 pm
Not unless you consider “unusual deaths” those who have died at the monastery and whose bodies did not display the typical signs of rigor mortis at the time of burial. In his recent comments on YouTube, Scott claimed that the bodies of those burried at the monastery were supple because monks were being burried alive (!), but those familiar with monasticism know that monks who repose on Mt. Athos also do not show signs of rigor mortis.
» Posted By Jason On June 16, 2012 @ 9:56 pm
What a very sad tragedy indeed. May God have mercy and may all who are affected by this horrible news find consolation and strength from the Lord.
Over the previous 6 months, Scott has posted a number of comments to various YouTube videos concerning the monastery and Elder Ephraim, saying that the Elder is “a satanist”, “is from satan”, and “is demonized”; that the monks he buries do not experience rigor mortis because “the monks get buried alive”, that the Elder is “on drugs”, and other such wild assertions that are indicative of a greatly troubled mind. Scott started his own anti-Elder Ephraim website as well, and solicited testimonials to help “expose” the Elder, but either he didn’t receive any testimonials, or perhaps he didn’t have time to post them before his tragic demise.
God alone knows what took hold of Scott and led him to such a tragic end. We must certainly pray fervently for all who are impacted by this tragedy, and all who may find themselves in a condition similar to what Scott has experienced these past months since departing from the monastery.
» Posted By Jason On June 13, 2012 @ 9:54 am
I’m sure that it is necessary to actually be deceased in order to qualify for inclusion in Trisagion prayers for the deceased.
» Posted By Jason On March 26, 2012 @ 10:58 am
Samn!, I thank you for making such a valuable contribution to this thread. I found Minas’ story and the interview with Dr. George Bebawi both to both be very enlightening and informative when I first read these accounts, and your words have corroborated many things they have said while offering valuable additional information as well.
I wonder if the Orthodox and the Monophysites understood each other much better at the time of Chalcedon than they do today?
» Posted By Jason On March 30, 2012 @ 1:32 pm
“Sociological interest” in what, exactly, Mike? Is there a certain hypothesis or theory that you or Fr. Patrick would like to share? Or, based on my responses, are you interested in offering a diagnosis regarding what ailments or baggage must lay beneath my concern about the Copts and other Non-Orthodox being referred to or spoken of as though they are members of the Church?
I’m sure you understand that one data point has little statistical value, so perhaps you can share here what you have observed, accross a wider spectrum, for the interest of all?
» Posted By Jason On March 30, 2012 @ 1:22 pm
Regarding my words above about responsibility, Fr. Andrew Phillips of ROCOR said it best (though with characteristic bluntness):
“All I can say is that the day that Local Churches, such as the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioch and the Churches of Greece, Romania and Bulgaria, return to the Orthodox Calendar and Orthodox practice as regards ecumenism, Old Calendarism will disappear. But as long as those Churches are influenced by freemasonry and modernism, Old Calendarism will continue and even prosper. If they continue thus, Old Calendarism has a great future before it. The fact is that the Old Calendarists will not return to their Mother-Churches, for as long as their hierarchies wallow in freemasonry and therefore modernism and ecumenism.
“To all you ecumenists and modernists, I say: You have brought this on yourselves. Worse still, it is written that, although ‘schismatics’ (as you claim the Old Calendarists to be) sin, those who cause schism are to be judged more severely. Tremble then, if you insult Holy Orthodoxy and break the hearts of the faithful, causing the little ones to fall. As for me, I shiver when I hear the words:
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea (Matthew 18,6).”
» Posted By Jason On March 30, 2012 @ 1:18 pm
Back To Stats Page
I’m not sure what false testimony you are referring to. I quoted briefly the story concerning those that left the Antiochian parish that you were apparently serving as a deacon at that time, not to say that they were justified in departing into schism, but as an example of the fact that many people have left the Church and do leave the Church over aparent compromises of the Faith; such as words and deeds which seemingly affirm that the non-Orthodox are members of the Church, that the Fathers of the Church were mistaken, that the canons are no longer relevant, that the Seven Ecumenical Councils were not guided by the Holy Spirit, that the church is led by academic research rather than by God-bearing Fathers, that fasting and Confession are no longer necessary, that that the body of Christ is divided or dismembered, etc.
I provided a few examples, but I personally know many people, and have heard the stories of many people, who have left different jurisdictions because they have become convinced through the words and deeds of their priests and bishops that the Ecumenical Councils and Fathers are quite simply no longer of value.
When the bishops and clergy do not uphold the traditional Faith and praxis of the Church, then the faithful become easy prey for the schismatic wolves who do appear to uphold the true Faith and traditional praxis of the Church while standing on a rotten foundation of distorted and misapplied canons and patristic principles.
From what I have said previously, it should be clear that I am not asserting the innocence of those who lose their faith and depart into schisms when they perceive a betrayal of the Faith, nor am I solely blaming the words and deeds of clergy and hierarchs for such reactions among the clergy and faithful who depart. I do wish, however, that the hierarchs and clergy would be more aware of the fact that people do fall away when the Faith and praxis of the Church is compromised, and would speak and act more responsibly with this in mind.
I’m not sure what you are referring to when you accuse me of “passing judgment on the canonical decisions of Orthodox bishops”. What canonical decisions have I passed judment on that require certain “credentials” from me? What is even meant by the phrase “canonical decision”? Is every decision made by a canonical bishop a canonical decision, or one that automatically is guided by the Spirit?
I’m sure we could come up with a lot of decisions, words, and deeds that have been made by canonical hierarchs that simply should not have been made and are frankly a betrayal of Christ. I have been wishing to avoid naming specifics because doing so would only scandalize and would not edify, though it seems that you are pressing me for more and more specifics.
Of course, not every priest or bishop is guilty of such betrayals of the Faith, thank God, nor has there ever been a time in the Church where such betrayals could not be found. This fact is important to realize when people appear advocating schism, but this fact does not render innocent those who commit such betrayals to the scandal and falling away of many.
» Posted By Jason On March 30, 2012 @ 1:02 pm