Not a few of my correspondents and acquaintances have asked me to weigh in on the matter of Fr George Passias and his mistress, Ethel Bouzalas.
So far, I’ve avoided it. Monomakhos has long prided itself on exposing corruption in the Church that is a more criminal nature. Felonies, embezzlement, conspiracies, gross canonical irregularities (such as bishops “marrying” their deacons) and pedophilia.
The case in question falls under the rubric of the merely salacious and, as there are many innocent victims (i.e. the families of the illicit lovers), I chose to steer clear of it. I’m sure they’re probably going through their own private hell right now and they don’t need me to pile on. As far as I’m concerned, when a clergyman falls like this, Church discipline should take over and that should be it.
However, it was just reported that there were criminal elements involved. According to The New York Post, the priest’s mistress absconded with some $30,000 in parish funds. As such, our initial reticence to cover this scandal has been set aside.
Permit me to explain.
This sordid episode reveals a systemic culture of corruption, not unlike what transpired during the Catholic pedophile scandal several years ago. In other words, cover-up.
The cover-up was basic: knowledge of the affair was known to the Chancellor of the Greek Orthodox Archiocese at least two years ago but nothing was done, given the popularity of the priest in question. It pains me to say this, but at the end of the day, there is a premium on how much money each parish can give to the central administration on 79th Street.
What other reason can there be given that all the red flags of immoral behavior were in place? The woman in question was baptized by Passias while wearing a bikini. (Seriously? Is the GOA so ignorant of proper baptismal attire for adults? They’re available most anywhere.) They were always seen together in different venues. The jilted husband had complained. And so on. Only when video tapes of the affair became available and the story was picked up by the Post, was action taken. By then it was too late.
In another case, a former Greek Orthodox priest, Alex Prodes, is suing the GOA because of molestation he suffered decades ago at the hand of Fr Stanley Adamakis. The charges against Adamakis and the Archdiocese’s handling of his transgressions, more accurately resemble the Catholic pedophile debacle. As in the case of the Catholic hierarchy, Adamakis was serially transferred every time he got caught.
Prodes, who is now in his fifties, was first molested by Adamakis when he was seventeen, therefore his case is going nowhere, given that the statute of limitations has expired. (Adamakis was shot to death by his young lover in 1992.) In the meantime, Prodes removed himself from the priesthood and attempted suicide a number of times. Like most molestation victims, he will bear the scars for the rest of his life.
The GOA is not alone of course. In the OCA, the case of the former archimandrite Isidore Brittain is a black mark. He of course was caught but rumors abound about other, more well established priests. ORSMA, the Office for the Review of Sexual Misconduct Allegations, has been unable to ferret out these cases because some of these priests are on the “right” side of the Syosset Apparat. Hence the very real suspicion that ORSMA is not an impartial, event-driven operation operating in good faith but merely an accommodation for appearance’s sake.
Other jurisdictions seem to not be plagued as much. In the Antiochian jurisdiction, a priest was summarily deposed after he was arrested by the Los Angeles Police Force on child molestation charges. The alacrity with which then Archbishop Joseph acted left no one in doubt that there really was zero-tolerance policy in that jurisdiction. (Although even here there seem to be exceptions based on the diocesan bishop.)
These are merely the tip of the iceberg. Another GOA priest was caught providing anonymous sexual favors at truck stops in New York. A bishop was hastily transferred from one overseas post to a sinecure here in the States. In the OCA, it has long been known that one particular cathedral has been the venue for priests who have led scandalous lives. And so on.
At the end of the day, the question that comes to my mind is why there seem to be two sets of rules for the clergy. Favored clergy (such as Passias and Brittain) seem to get a pass until things blow up, while everybody else cringes in fear that some misunderstanding can be used against them –especially if their respective bishops are not well disposed to them in the first place.
And of course there is the literal free pass given to bishops who transgress. But that’s a whole other story.
Still, I’m saddened by these events. Just “as the Lord desireth not the death of a sinner”, so should we pray for these fallen men’s repentance. And for their families and congregations.
Perhaps something good can come out of this sordid mess? Like a true zero-tolerance policy that is truly impartial? And one that would apply to bishops as well?
We must be realistic. This is not a matter of “foreign” bishops who have jurisdiction over their American branches. The uneven distribution of justice in the OCA proves this. Something more is needed than true, canonical autocephaly. And that is that the Scriptural prescriptions for the election of presbytersoi as elucidated by St Paul must be minimum bar necessary for ordination. And that bishops should only be nominated from a group of local men who are known quantities in any given diocese. Simply put, the people of God must be involved in the election of bishops.
Needless to say, the people of God must themselves be spiritually inclined. But under the present circumstances, where they have no real say in the matter, there is no incentive for them to be more spiritually adept. And let’s be honest, many lay leadership organizations like having compromised men in the episcopate. Nevertheless, a true revival is necessary. However, until the people of the various jurisdictions demand such a renewal, then we can expect more of the same.
‘Cake-porn’ priest allegedly asked mistress to get an abortion
By Isabel Vincent and Melissa KleinOctober 18, 2015
The New York Post
‘Cake-porn’ priest allegedly asked mistress to get an abortion
Priest George Passias and Ethel Bouzalas seen leaving St. Spyridon Greek Orthodox Church.
He’s also a heretic: The kinky Greek Orthodox priest allegedly asked his mistress to abort their baby.
Ethel Bouzalas told Bishop Andonios Paropoulos, the chancellor of the Greek Orthodox church in the United States, that her lover wanted her to get an abortion, according to an interview with the bishop in The National Herald, a Greek-American daily.
But Andonios said Father George Passias denied he made the abortion request and said he wasn’t sure if the unborn child was his.
Abortion is against the teachings of the Greek Orthodox Church.
The affair between Bouzalas, the former principal of the St. Spyridon Parochial School in Washington Heights, and Passias, the church pastor, rocked the Greek Orthodox world when it was revealed last month by The Post.
Sex tapes obtained by The Post showed the pair indulging in a fetish known as “cake crush” or “cake sitting.” Bouzalas, 45 and married, sat on a piece of banana bread while the 67-year-old married priest looked on.
George,
You have raised some great questions here. I believe that the issues are much deeper than most people truly consider. Why do so many clergy fall? I honestly believe that it is because they feel completely trapped. What seemed like a great idea 10, 20, or 30 years ago when you were an idealist seminarian ready to set the world on fire with the flame of Christ changes radically over a lifetime. Many people who enter the priesthood in their late twenties or thirties have barely begun to figure out who they are. It’s great to talk about sacrifice but tell that to your dentist when you bust a tooth, or to your kids who haven’t had a new pair of shoes or new clothes for a year, or your wife when you can’t afford to let her go and get a new dress for church feast day.
Unlike almost any other profession, the priesthood is a job for life. By job I simply mean work (obviously it is more than just a job in the traditional sense of the word). Most people change jobs several times in their lifetimes. If you have a disagreement with your boss or co-workers you always have the option of leaving and looking for another position. With the priesthood it is entirely different. There is very little wiggle room to find another assignment and it is even more difficult to change jurisdictions unless you happen to be fluent in a couple of languages. It reminds me of the haunted mansion attraction at Disneyland. As you enter and go into the first room, a ghoulish voice asks you to “find a way out.”
For people who are struggling mentally with the priesthood, they often find themselves without any sort of assistance. Most bishops don’t really care that much (they have their own mental health issues to worry about), there are very few people a priest can actually confide in (especially in the parish), and there are no real solutions other than a possible temporary leave of absence (with no way to pay your bills in the mean time) or simply leaving the priesthood altogether.
Yes, for some the priesthood works very well. They have the skills and personality to deal with everything that comes to them. However, in my opinion that is the minority. If you peel back the onion on many of the tragic falls of bishops and priests over the last few decades, almost all of them have recurring themes of loneliness and isolation. Why was Bishop Matthias texting a young woman? Hmm. sounds like loneliness to me. Why was Bishop Demetri Khouri up at a casino in the upper peninsula of Michigan? Hmm. sounds like loneliness again. I could go on and go. This doesn’t excuse their actions but perhaps it helps explain it a bit. We need to shift the focus to proactively assisting clergy who are on the verge of doing something stupid and destroying themselves and their families. Seriously, what real mental health help is available to clergy? Not a whole lot from any of the jurisdictions. After the happy days of ordination come many years of slugging it out with parish councils, unruly, unrepentant, and often difficult people, unsupportive bishops, jealous brother clergy, and in the mean time you will live barely above the poverty line. For some people, they handle this very well. For others, it is almost a living hell.
Thank you again, George, for bringing up this issue.
I was told from a reliable source that the reason the Greek Archdiocese didn’t act until it did was because it needed proof. You can’t do much to a clergyman simply based on rumors. The bikini baptism was in poor taste, but not worthy of suspension in my opinion. Why the chancery simply wouldn’t hire a private investigator two years ago to follow them and gps monitor movements would be the question I would ask. New gps monitors stuck under cars have the ability to collect text messages and phone data even. Hence all the proof they would have needed. Maybe since nothing criminal was involved initially they didn’t want to spend money on a private investigator. Private investigators are good at what they do. Spouses and insurance companies use them all the time. The Church could too.
“The bikini baptism was in poor taste, but not worthy of suspension in my opinion.”
Then, in my opinion, you are already off the rails.
Agreed.
Please people, Evangelicals, Pentecostals and your run-of-the-mill Protestants have been (and are presently) baptizing adults all the live-long day. All an Orthodox priest has to do is go to any website and find appropriate adult attire for baptisms. We’re not talking big bucks here. In my own parish, where we’ve had a spate of adult baptisms, godly women have stepped forth to make lovely garments at little-to-no-cost.
It’s not rocket science.
GM:
Serious question. How does one chrismate the breast through a garment?
OOM asks, “How does one chrismate the breast through a garment?”
Not “through.” Slightly above.
George is right about the easy availability of baptismal robes.
Our sacristy has a whole bunch of white baptismal robes (of various sizes) and a standing account at the Baptist book store, whence we purchased our very attractive baptistry (four feet in diameter and 26 inches in depth).
When the early Church baptized adults in the nude, the sexes were always segregated. I am reluctant, consequently, to receive the assurance of Anonymous Priest that he is “not off the rails.”
If he really imagines, moreover, “Their [sic] is nothing shameful about our bodies,” he may want to re-read the Life of St. Mary of Egypt on this point, by way of preparing for his paschal baptisms next spring.
Any priest who would, except in a dire emergency, baptize a grown woman clad in a bikini, should be laicized forthwith. Such a one doesn’t have the sense God gave a goat.
Fr. Patrick,
I said it was in poor taste. I would never do it (Even though it is being done in Russia with priests not being defrocked). Yet, because I don’t think it is a defrockable act you allege I’m “off the rails”. St. Mary of Egypt was a former prostitute and sex addict. She was a hermitess. Fr. Zosima was a heiromonk. Monastic modesty protocol and lay/non-monastic clergy modesty protocol are different (Non-monastic priests who swim in their cassocks and wear them on date night with their wives are weird, but I digress) For example monks will not usually even swim, and if they do they do so in a cassock. Laity wear suits, or in Russia sometimes no suits at all (I know as I witnessed this when I was a layman). Many monastics even wear socks with sandals as to not show their feet. Laity wear sandals without socks. The laity, non-monastic clergy, and monastics are held to different standards of modesty. Comparing the nudity of a former prostitute, sex addict, and hermitess turned saint who stands in the presence of heiromonk and saint to a bikini baptism is not very realistic.
I stand by the fact that their is nothing shameful about our bodies. We were created in the image and likeness of God naked and unashamed. As bodily creatures we can only experience the spiritual world through our bodies. By taking on a body through the Incarnation, God humbly meets us in our physical human state and graces our bodies with divinity. The idea that the human body is shameful is the heresy known as Manichaeism.
The problem with our sex saturated culture is that it fails to see how valuable our bodies and ordered sexuality are. Christianity does not reject the body as shameful. The body is the hinge of salvation. We believe in God who created flesh; we believe in the Word made flesh to redeem flesh; we believe in the resurrection of the flesh; and the fulfillment of both the creation and the flesh in the new heaven and new earth.
We most intimately encounter God through our bodily senses and the matter of this material world: we bathe in baptism; anoint the body with oil; eat and drink the Body and Blood of Christ; we lay on hands to ordain and heal; we confess with our lips; and we join two bodies in matrimony. Our bodies are sacramental. They are temples of the Most High. They are Holy. They are not shameful.
And, I’m “not of the rails” as you allege. I stand by that too. 🙂
Different societies have different standards of modesty. Live according to the one you’re in. Don’t offend the consciences of others just because it doesn’t offend your own. (That’s St. Paul.)
You want to segregate the sexes because some of you priests are perverts and can’t handle the sight of a woman’s body? Bring back the deaconesses. FYI the baptismal robe or garment was worn AFTER baptism. To think that adults must put on clothes in order to be baptized sounds more like Victorian era prudishness than Orthodoxy. Chrismating “slightly above” the breast makes sense only if you people are making up your own religion and rituals as you go. But that IS what you do, isn’t it?
Or better yet, visit an Orthodox parish that is WINNING ADULT COVERTS to Christianity. The priests there will know how to baptize adults of all shapes and sizes in an Orthodox manner.
Honest. There are parishes like that. There are even priests of this kind who do not have Southern accents.
Last I checked in the ancient Church baptisms were done in the nude. Hence, infant baptism in the nude today. Their is nothing shameful about our bodies. Like I said poor taste, but I assure you I’m not “off the rails”, or for that matter, puritanical.
Not just in the ancient church. Even today in many places including Russia, many are baptized naked. a bikini should be considered prudish.
Annnnnnnnnd that’s why you’re retired, Despota.
The ancient church also decreed automatic excommunication for a host of things.
PHR:
PHR is right. Bring back the deaconesses for this type of thing.
Some clergy have adult baptismal candidates wear their bathing suits, since it’s the closest to being naked, as baptisms were historically performed.
However, I prefer an approach that prioritizes modesty over historical throwbacks. Thanks to our modern dissolute age, not even bringing back deaconesses for baptisms of adult women would be an acceptable solution.
In my opinion, anyone past the cultural age where it is acceptable to be nude in public should be fully dressed at baptism. If you can get a baptismal robe, get it double-lined like this one and wear it over some suitable attire. But Holy Baptism should NEVER be an occasion for exhibiting someone’s body. It is a perversion and blasphemy to use it as such.
Helga says, “I prefer an approach that prioritizes modesty over historical throwbacks. . . . Holy Baptism should NEVER be an occasion for exhibiting someone’s body.”
Ah, thank you, dear. A lay voice of sanity to a couple of clergymen who seem to have lost their minds.
And once again!
Visit an Orthodox parish that is WINNING ADULT COVERTS to Christianity. The priests there will know how to baptize adults of all shapes and sizes in an Orthodox manner.
Honest. There are parishes like that. There are even priests of this kind who do not have Southern accents. I’ll bet Father Patrick knows quite a few telephone numbers!
You are ok with a woman coming to Liturgy in just a bikini, then?
Adult baptismal attire, or lack thereof as still practiced in Russia and other places, is not normal Church “attire”. What adults wear or do not wear at a one time baptism has nothing to do with what they will wear day to day when they go to their parish Estonian Slovak.
Nice try, Father. You have been to Russia, then? You have seen women baptized in bikinis, then? Maybe it’s true, because Russian women do seem to like bikinis, even obese mamas who weigh 250+.I do agree with Fr. Patrick, however.
As long as their heads are covered it’s okay Estonian Slovak!
“Nice try, Father. You have been to Russia, then? You have seen women baptized in bikinis, then?”
I have definitely seen photos from Theophany in Russia where a cross is cut out of the frozen ice and men and women line up in their underwear or swim suits to be baptized in these waters. I do not say I agree with this, or that this practice justifies the practice of baptizing a person in a bikini in America, but I have seen it in this example.
It is forbidden to baptize anyone in the Holy Water blessed at Theophany. Baptism requires that ordinary water, not Jordan Water, be sanctified specially during the rite of Baptism. It was a frequently answered question in Russia:”May a Priest use Holy Water tio Baptize. The answer was always NO. Those people Jason describes are mostly grown-ups baptized long ago.
That practice on Theophany in Russia is not Baptism.
Adult women (and men), like babies, are brought CLOTHED to Church to be baptized, They, like infants are to be stripped down before immersion and clothed immediately afterwards in what is called a baptismal gown. I know personally two young American matrons who were thus baptized NAKED in Moscow Churches during my lifetime.
Nakedness was the exact and ONLY reason for the existence of female “Deaconnesses”: to oversee and shield from general view the undressing and nakedness of women being immersed and then rising up out of the font.
I would expect that a LOT of Monomakhos types would dislike learning about traditional naked baptism and about deaconesses. And I’m being proved right in that! The Ashley Nevins Syndrome affects even some Orthodox Christians!!!!!!!
Three books and two websites expose what is really taking place in the OCA and GOC in America.
Books: Toxic Faith, The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, Churches that Abuse.
Websites:
https://restoringtheheart.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/characteristics-of-healthy-churches/
http://www.ministryhealth/mh_articles/025_five_types_dysfunction.hmtl
Denial of what your church structure and system of authority really is will not help you find solution and it will guarantee more of the same to the death of these jurisdictions in America.
Are these two jurisdictions structure and system of authority top down centralized dictatorial authoritarian power and control inside of closed systems? If so, you will have a difficult if not impossible ability to stop their destruction once they become systemically corrupt and abusive. Have they become systemically corrupt and abusive? Are they dying? Do any solutions to their state work?
All church growth and relevancy development principles are found in the Gospels and NT. Lose the authority and truth of Gods Word and it all goes systemically corrupt and abusive. A church can reach a no repentance return to Christ point. The real danger of that is that a church that is not corporately repentant can turn itself into a cult in Christianity.
When a church dies all of the reasons why it died are exposed. Those who deny why it died are why it died. Either you are part of the solution or you are the cause of your jurisdiction dying a slow, ugly and painful death. These resources will help you determine which one you are. That is, what role you are playing in these systemically corrupt and abusive churches.
‘then we can expect more of the same’ is in reality caused by denial of the systemic corruption and abuses killing these two jurisdictions dead. More of the same means worse and worse is coming.
This is not about a difficult period these two jurisdictions are going through that will eventually be worked out and be solved. No, this is all about EOC church life or death in America. Either the Orthodox wake up to the reality of what has and is taking place and do something about it these two jurisdictions die in America. I see no indication that anything of real solution is taking place in them. All solutions fail and take them right back to a systemically corrupt and abusive dying state in America.
Unity by Christ does not lead to systemically corrupt and abusive church, but unity by corruption and abuse does. Who your God is determines much. The evil one is unity by corruption and abuse, its his character. He is a dictator. The character of the person of Christ is life and not death. Christ is servant. Christ in the Gospels was not in unity with systemic corruption and abuse. Systemic corruption and abuse hates you and pushes you down to conform to what its character is, but Christ loves you and raises you up by transformation into the character of Christ. Which one is your jurisdiction?
You get the church you pay the Christ moral and ethical price for, take the Christ risk for and make the Christ sacrifice for. The spiritually immature who are apathetic and indifferent, incompetent, codependent and in denial of the issues are the death of these two jurisdictions. Your church real world outcome exposes what its morality and ethic’s really are as it exposes why it is really in this state. If a church is systemically corrupt, abusive and unrepentant its future is as predictable as the sun rise.
The 16 who dislike my analysis please explain why you do? Did the 16 dislikes obtain and read the resources? What resources like them do the EO have?
Ad hominen is not standards or criterion’s that compare, analyze or measure.
To dislike is to disagree and to disagree means you believe I have it wrong. If I have the analysis and comparative resources wrong please provide the right ones that you agree with and that will lead these two dying jurisdictions to relevancy and growth development that is safe, healthy and functional. If you have the right solution then tell us what it is. If you believe no solution to the state of these two jurisdictions is necessary then tell us why you believe that.
The interesting thing about the 5 resources I provided is that one resource will lead you to other resources. In other words, the resources I provide are starting points to deeper comparative analysis by you. The deeper you look the deeper are the problems and to the point you will see how impossible it is for these two jurisdictions to make a turn-around. If you dislike being told that then tell us what you do like being told.
Well, I dislike your poor use of grammar and punctuation, especially the lack of appropriate apostrophes to indicate the possessive, and the inappropriate use of the apostrophe (as in “criterion’s” immediately above). And the phrase is “ad hominem.” Beyond that, I am deeply distressed and more than a little offended at your implicit—and in places pretty explicit—assertion and aspersion that the Orthodox Christian Faith, the Orthodox Christian Church, and Orthodox Christian people are somehow Christless. In John 7:24 the Lord Jesus tells Pharisees in all ages “Judge not according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” And unless you can peer into the hearts of all the hierarchs, clergy, and faithful of the jurisdictions in question, and know them inside and out as God does, you are not qualified to judge them.
I trust I do not make myself obscure.
Fr. Philip,
Respectfully, a blog forum is not a college essay, or a workplace, or any other social situation where high standards of grammar and punctuation are expected. Indeed, the expectation around here is for folks to be given the room to post “quick and dirty” and not be “graded”. This is the “code of conduct” for most every Internet blog and forum (excepting perhaps, blogs about grammar and punctuation 😉 ) and has been from the beginning of this communication format, oh those many years ago…
WARNING: This post may contain spelling, grammar, and other errors!
Dear Christopher,
As someone fast approaching the boundary of my three-score years and ten, I claim my ancient and inalienable right to be grumpy about “this younger generation” generally, and more particularly about the continuing and vicious North American assault on the Queen’s English. Like, ya know what I, like, mean?
Bah, flu bug! 🙂
Fr. Philip
Fr Philip-Christopher is right.
Reread Ashley’s post.
He is rebuking the hierarchical structure of Orthodoxy/Catholicism et al.
By attacking the hierarchical structure-he is basically constantly slamming the church et al.
The voting is all a high school popularity contest.
Ashley is so anti-Orthodox; he has refuted the nicest, kindest comments.
If you don’t like his writings-you are not alone.
It is the content.
I voted like once. It isn’t worth the effort.
Fr. Philip,
I hear ya. I have noticed an uptick in the “grammar and punctuation” complaints in internetdom & blogdom the last few years. It probably indicates a more diverse “crowd” is using it, more older folks and folks who were not as tech/computer savvy in the past (for whatever reason).
That said, in any social situation one comes into one has to learn what the “norms” are. One would not walk into the white house and say “what’s up dude” (well, maybe with this president 😉 ).
The “norms” for forum posting have always included “loose” or “first draft” standards of writing, grammar, punctuation, etc. Most of us like it that way, as it is all part of the “efficiency” of the format. Those who complain, well to be perfectly honest, are just complaining and trying to impose a standard that we all know about, but consciously reject, and for what we consider good reasons. Yes, we have heard all the arguments before for “good grammar” and the need for “universal” application, etc. I demand it from myself and from my children for example when it is appropriate.
Still, it’s a bit like walking into the local pub or a mechanics garage and complaining about the “colorful” language. The simple fact is if you don’t like it, you don’t have to stay – but don’t expect everyone else to change simply because you are offended.
I hope that does not sound too harsh – I don’t mean it to be, but reality is quite a bit larger than either of us and our own desires. Demanding high standards of style, grammar, etc. from internetdom is simply going to bring frustration for you, and unneeded and undeserved offense to others. Again, no offense intended, I simply have noticed that some folks have not given it any thought…
I’ve heard a lot of stupid arguments on the Internet, but this argument in favor of bad English is the stupidest. If you want to sound uneducated, if you don’t care whether people can actually understand what you write, go ahead and ignore all rules of grammar and punctuation. But don’t hold up your ignorance and carelessness as a norm that others must respect. That’s just stupid.
Nope. My “argument” is based on a reality of what the norms actually are. What is actually “ignorant” is trying to impose an external standard onto a social norm that has a standard of its own. Actually, it’s not “ignorant”, it’s just willful.
Think about it Deacon Brian, how do you talk to your hiearch, to your wife, to your boss at work, and to a child? How about when you are around the poker table (or whatever qualifies as your “man” time 😉 )
Like it or not (and for you obviously not) internetdom/forums have their own norm, and high standards of English is not one of them. It has its pros and cons.
However, if you want needless frustration for yourself , counter productive offense of others, and the “stupidity” and “ignorance” of your own lack of understanding of the world you are in recorded for posterity on the internet, you keep chastising others about “bad English”. Let me know how that works out for ya…
“Christopher (the first)!!!” I totally agree with your whining complaint about Internet language!!
Dear OCA and GOA hierarchs what part of “you hang around with dogs you catch fleas” timeless wisdom don’t you folks understand? How many more scandals, lawsuits, and crises does the Church need to endure before you realize that immature, characterless, abusive, and morally compromised individuals have no business being in any leadership position anywhere in the Church?
“Not only for every idle word must man give an account, but for every idle silence.” – St. Ambrose
“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” ~ Dietrich Bonhoeffer
“And is it not obvious that, just as it is a crime to disturb the peace when truth reigns, it is also a crime to remain at peace when the truth is being destroyed?” ~ Blaise Pascal
“You see, if we don’t begin to make war against evil, to expose those who tempt believers, then the evil will grow larger. If we throw aside fear then the faithful will be emboldened a bit. And those who wage war against the Church will have a harder time.” ~ Elder Paisios
You speak the truth, now what?
Now what? How about the laity of the corrupt jurisdictions taking proactive Biblical action that recognizes the truth and the authority of Gods Word and then applies it?
All church growth and relevancy development principles and what can undermine them, stop them and kill them are found in the Bible.
Here is the Biblical TRUTH of what is taking place in corrupt jurisdictions….
http://www.openbible.info/topics/bad_company
Bad company will corrupt you and bad hierarchies will systemically corrupt your church. How do I know this? I read it in my Bible that is the standard of Gods truth comparison. Lose the authority and truth of Gods Word as Gods moral and ethical standard of comparison and you will lose your church to bad company.
A systemically corrupt church is a church of bad company. Yes, I know, many Orthodox DISLIKE being told this and that means they must LIKE the state of their corrupt jurisdictions. If you cannot handle the truth of Gods Word then you have left the truth of Gods Word and replaced it with what you can handle, lies.
Who is the father of lies? Believing in him (his lies) over Christ (Gods truth) will turn a church into his company and his company is bad. If the state of your jurisdiction is bad the Word of God tells you why it is. Systemic church corruption is telling you that bad company has control of your church and that it will turn you into its character. You can disagree with me but it is really not me you are disagreeing with.
There is no better (GOOD) resource for comparative analysis than Gods Word. God is good all the time and evil is bad all of the time. The more you practice bad the more you lose good. That is the practical reality of the real world.
Christ the armor of God is the solution to the lies of bad company. If a church and especially the leadership don’t wear it and fight spiritual warfare then you can expect lies to believed to be truth and all will go systemically corrupt and abusive. Bad company does not wear Christ the armor of God. A church gone systemically corrupt does not either. Lose the spiritual war and you will lose your church to the enemy of Christ. Lose that spiritual war and the evil one will turn your church into his character. Once he has gained control that means you have lost control of your church and it all goes bad for your church. If you look to what evil has control of to provide a solution what kind of a solution can you expect him to provide? What, you expect evil to provide you with good solution that actually solves the problem and does not make the problem worse?
It could not be more spiritually simple. Satan is death and Christ is life. Which one is the state of your jurisdiction? Does your jurisdiction represent church life by Christ or church death by Satan?
Satan is a liar, thief and murderer. First he deceives you by your belief in his lies and your belief in his lies steals you away from God so that evil can murder your church and in that he makes you powerless by belief in his lies to stop the murder of your church. Are any of you feeling powerless to stop the destruction of your jurisdiction by bad company? Do you deny and dislike this spiritual analysis and comparison to Gods Word?
You have been warned and Gods Word has been warning all of you long before I ever did. Do you deny that the consequences come to your corrupt jurisdictions is not the result of your stopping believing in and heeding the truth of Gods Word by believing in the lies of Satan and his bad company who you follow as your hierarchies you believe represent the authority of good God in your church?
Trace the consequences back to their source cause and you will find lies believed as the truth of the Lord. The consequences are telling you something is wrong and who and what is wrong and why and how they are wrong. Do I have that wrong? Am I lying to you about this?
Thus ends my input into this conversation. The warning has been delivered. Every verse on keeping bad company has been delivered.
Chris, why didn’t some other wiseacre tell Christ about hanging around with dogs instead of murderers and adulterers?
Michalopulos:
Antidoron…. kolyva…. twinkies… who cares? It’s just another excuse to create scandal and undermine the church for the haters at Monomakhos.
OOM:
Get real, holmes. How long would you have the faithful remain in the dark? The perpetrator and the sinner create the scandal. Ethel and George were so busy with their selfie stick that they stepped in front of a bus. So blame them.
I’m pretty sure Fr. George and Ethel made the scandal.
Michalopulos:
Scandal and innuendo. Truly evil. Mr. Mihalopulos, are you the Antichrist?
‘because some priests are on the right side of the Syosset Apparat’
It couldn’t also be that the ORSMA is also corrupt or at the very least highly dysfunctional?
The OCA is systemically dysfunctional and that means the ORSMA that is part of the system is also dysfunctional.
Blaming the Syosset is dysfunctional when the ORSMA could in public expose who and what is stopping it from accomplishing its purpose. Competency can ferret out corruption and incompetency can’t. An incompetent church system creates an incompetent ORSMA. Seems to me that ORSMA is just window dressing, how about you?
The members of ORSMA could resign and in their resignation go public and expose the ‘right’ side of the Syosset Aparat for how corrupt it really is. Those who stay would expose their corruption, bias, delusion, irrationality and dysfunction by the comparison to those who resigned for obvious Christian rational moral and ethical reasons.
If a cathedral is a venue for priests who have led scandalous lives that means the whole church is allowing it and that exposes the dysfunction of the entire system of the OCA. Anyone attending such a cathedral is enabling the corruption and abuses proving their blindness, denial and dysfunction. That enabling is called religious codependency and if you really understand codependency it is idolatry.
Idolatry creates misplaced submission and loyalty that is subjectively biased and not Biblical objective and unbiased when it comes to issues of morality and ethic’s. Idolatry creates and allows dysfunctional incompetency. The OCA is systemically incompetent. That is obvious. So, it should be no surprise ORSMA is also not competent.
ORSMA: Obviously Ridiculous Stonewalling and Meaningless Action
Don’t cut yourself on that edge!
Passias is an Ephremite, why did Ephrem not know his sins if he is clairvoyant?
That’s not entirely fair. We have no idea what Passias confessed to his spiritual father (if anything). To try to hang this joker’s predelictions on Geronda Ephraim is presumptuous to say the least.
If there was a pattern of Athonite pilgrims who are ashen-faced in public but are wierdos in private, and if it became apparent that they received instruction in doing so, then I’d say your assertion has merit.
George, I am not trying to pin Passias’ predelictions on Geronda Ephraim but rather questioning the clairvoyance of Ephraim. On many occasions, I have heard stories about Ephraim’s ability to “see into ones soul” and tell them their sins. I wonder why it did not work with Passias. If Passias confessed those sins surely Ephraim would have told him to leave the priesthood.
Jonkal, your view of the gift of clairvoyance seems to be based on comic books and sci-fi movies.
Grace-filled elders are not autonomous and independent of God. The Lord uses them to lead us to repentance. But when repentance is absent, so too is our Lord. In Greece they say, “Since we don’t intend to listen to our elders, God does not enlighten them.” There are many examples in the contemporary life of the Church that bear this out.
And I would caution you against speculating about someone’s relationship with their confessor.
Because gifts of the Spirit aren’t magic. Clairvoyance doesn’t mean that someone becomes a mind-reader. It means that in some cases God allows the clairvoyant to see things that are hidden, sometimes not. I’ve witnessed an event of clairvoyance with a monk who otherwise wasn’t known to be a spiritual giant. So I’m not surprised that Elder Ephraim would be granted the same gift at different times. But to suggest that someone is a liar (or “See! He’s not what people say!) just because GOD didn’t give him clairvoyance with one man is quite uncharitable.
‘then I’d say your assertion has merit’ Does the website Greek Orthodox Truth and Reform have merit in its assertions about the elder?
The elder and his followers do assert that he is clairvoyant. They also assert that he can astral project.
Many Orthodox are missing something. The GOC in America is systemically corrupt and unrepentant over its corrupt state. Corruption is the set up for and basis of a cult. It is not unreasonable that a systemically church would allow a cult in it or that its systemic corruption would turn it into a cult in Christianity.
When a church dies, and the GOC in America is dying, all of the reasons for its death become obvious. Those who deny the obvious are the reason why it died if they are a majority. The majority of the GO in America are in denial as to what is really taking place in their church and monasteries.
If the GOC will allow a systemically corrupt hierarchy it will allow a cult leader elder. It’s really that simple. How many years was this hierarchy aware of this priest and did nothing? It’s the same with the elder. How many years has the GOC laity allowed hierarchy corruption and done nothing about it? It’s the same with the elder.
A top down centralized church structure of dictatorial authoritarian power and control inside of a highly closed system that is systemically corrupt, unrepentant and in denial would never ever allow a cult inside of it anymore than it would itself turn itself into a cult in Christianity, right? How many Orthodox think never ceases to amaze me. It is no wonder to me why the GOC is systemically corrupt and imploding. How a church thinks determines its real world outcome and the real world outcome of the GOC in America is obvious.
Cultism will destroy a church and it is obvious what is taking place in the GOC regarding cultism and all the other reasons why it is dying.
The state of the GOC in America is indefensible. Only those practicing its corrupt state or who have a delusional idealistic notion of it defend it.
Idolatry of a systemically corrupt church and the corrupt hierarchy that leads it is the end of the GOC in America.
Judas was a close disciple of the Incarnate Lord.
We don’t know whether Fr. George hid this from his spiritual father or whether he has even been to confession since living in this manner. This is information that we don’t know, probably won’t know, and do not need to know; so there is no point in speculating. We would do better to pray for Fr. George’s repentance and look carefully at our own capacity for sin, lest we too fall into great temptations and become a scandal for others.
One wonders whether Fr. George made clean confession to his spiritual Father, Geronda Ephraim, during the time of his adultery and “incest” with his spiritual daughter, Ethel. If Geronda Ephraim was aware, did he forbid Fr. George from continuing to serve as a priest, as the Canons state? Did Fr. George disobey his counsels to cease performing priestly functions? It’s hard to fathom that after so many years in a spiritual Father/son relationship that Geronda Ephraim would not be aware of the blackness in Fr. George’s nous and soul.
St. Nikodemos counsels spiritual fathers, “If you confess any clergymen who committed fornication or adultery or any other hidden sin which subjects him to deposition from the priesthood, you must prohibit him, Spiritual Father, from ever liturgizing again, and from performing baptisms and marriages, from giving spiritual guidance, from conducting the service of the blessing of the water, and any other sacred rite, just as the more distinguished Spiritual Fathers of the Holy Mountain prohibit such clergymen from performing all sacred rites, in accordance with the Canons. If, however, they do not consent to forsake all sacred rites, you should at least, little by little, prohibit them from celebrating the Divine Liturgy. If they do not even consent to this, you cannot force them, nor can you publicize the matter, but you are to leave them to their unworthiness.” (Exomologetarion, p. 160).
Ironically, counsels like these, as well as certain ecclesiastical Canons, almost seem to enable and protect pedophiles and sexual predators among the ranks of the clergy, thus allowing them to continue their carnal sinning unhindered and unreported.
If Fr. George’s sex tapes did not become public, and the world remained unaware of his deviant acts behind closed doors, he would still be liturgizing every Sunday, preaching the Gospel, hearing confessions and giving penances, and perhaps still experimenting sexually with his spiritual children.
“Ironically, counsels like these, as well as certain ecclesiastical Canons, almost seem to enable and protect pedophiles and sexual predators among the ranks of the clergy, thus allowing them to continue their carnal sinning unhindered and unreported.”
Sadly, what other option is there when the communication is done within the mystery of confession? What can a spiritual father actually do that wouldn’t break the confidentiality required in the mystery?
One could withhold absolution until he agrees, could he not? I mean, he might not care either.
You could, sure. But that’s a moot point. The confidentiality isn’t dependent on absolution.
“Ioannis”, nice of you to show up to another discussion where Elder Ephraim’s name has been brought up. Again you don’t plainly say what you want to say but instead attempt to disguise the fact that your intention is to attack him. Interestingly, your comment got dozens of ‘likes’ as if the same person clicked a bunch of times. But the weirdest thing of all is that you chose as your username the Elder’s name in the world.
Stop this creepy behavior.
I agree with everyone’s comments but what comes to question is this if she was baptized in a bikini because she was going to marry into orthodox family then why didn’t the family say this is not appropriate and take action. I am a Greek Orthodox and am not a follow by the book totally Christian but I myself would have right then sought out some very big suspicion. Point said…the victims are the families and the Christians who I trust the archdiocese as well to make sure the churches are run sufficiently. I say going forward there has to be some correct order in churches because we as church goers have to deal with the nonsense of board members who have run the churches for years do not step down to give up position and think they own the churches when u go there on Sunday’s. We people have to give money and do as these board members say. I believe there are a lot of hidden truths and big lies between board member bishops and archdiocese with money scandals crime and adultery and they get pushed under carpet because of the same people for years and years run the church and don’t give up their power. They and their families have controlled the churches funds and operations I think with all this scandal it should be an eye opener. We need to bring more people into the faith of Christianity and not turn them away because of church operations and those that run on boards and put in power to make sure their kids in the schools are favored and or because their families have always served on board In church. I hope people wake up and see this scandal as HOW NO ONE LIsTENS to the parishioners who know what’s going on!!!!! If the community as a whole has pointed these facts out then why didn’t what they say matter. I can only guess because we church goers are the little people that fill up the church every Sunday just to say the church has a lot of people and the people that run the church just hush hush the dirty little lies that they themselves create by not doing the right thing
Sorry to sound so bitter but it’s the truth. No one believes in going to churches and the Christian faith is dwindling for such acts and reasons and it’s a sad world to not try and keep people trusting in a safe place to go and pray and feel humble a church.
Ioannis M. says,
That’s because the confessor cannot violate the seal of confession. This is not enabling sexual predation, it’s keeping a sacred and necessary commitment.
If we were to allow the inviolability of the seal of confession to be compromised, the predators would simply stop telling their confessors about their actions, making it that much harder for them to be discovered or (hopefully) brought to true repentance.
You claim these counsels and the relevant canons “almost seem to enable and protect pedophiles and sexual predators among the ranks of the clergy”. No more than they protect murderers and thieves who admit their crime but refuse their penance. These counsels and canons are written with Christ’s just judgment in mind, not the finite and fallible perceptions and decisions that pass for justice in this life.
Where has this idea ever begun that whatever is “confessed ” within the context of the Sacrament of Reconciliation and Unificatiion to the Church by confessings one’s sins to a priest it is somehow “sealed” and withheld from the Church? I have have never read nor been offered a Scriptural “defense” of a practice among the Orthodox – who originally always openly confessed ther sins before the congregation – then were suddenly bound by “mystical oath” to withhold the content of confessions? Are you suggesting that Monastic Counsels never discussed the truly unwholesome behaviour of passion of brother in hopes of saving his soul? That spiritual councils of local priests & bishops did not discuss the “illness” of a brother with intention of returning this lost brother to the path of salvation? What did Blessed Nikolai of Ziča tell us the Lord wrote in the sand in front of everyone who accused the the adulterous woman? The most vile sin committed by each accuser as they spoke. Such a basket of foolishness you offer here. Nothing prevents a bishop from revealing & chastising the wicked – be they clergymen or laity – in the pure interest of saving their souls. That they did not have the courage to do so according to their calling is one thing, but covering up, reveling in filth and corruption themselves, II say is a completely different matter, all of which God Himself sill judge. And also quite obviously is the complimentary “rustling in the bushes” of the faithful,” the lovers of money who cry for “true repentance” from a handful of lost persons, yet imagine themselves “different”
M. Stankovich:
It’s just another borrowing from the Catholic Church, that’s all, where the idea has been enshrined in the Code of Canon Law. It’s an excellent idea, too.
From the OCA Priest Guidelines:
“The secrecy of the Mystery of Penance is considered an unquestionable rule in the entire Orthodox Church. Theologically, the need to maintain the secrecy of confession comes from the fact that the priest is only a witness before God. One could not expect a sincere and complete confession if the penitent has doubts regarding the practice of confidentiality. Betrayal of the secrecy of confession will lead to canonical punishment of the priest.
St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite exhorts the Spiritual Father to keep confessions confidential, even under strong constraining influence. The author of the Pedalion (the Rudder), states that a priest who betrays the secrecy of confession is to be deposed. The Metropolitan of Kos, Emanuel, mentions in his handbook (Exomologeteke) for confessors that the secrecy of confession is a principle without exception”
So let me be sure I am understanding you correctly: the ancient practice of the Church of openly confessing one’s sins to the congregation should have led to “canonical punishment of the priest,” and the word of of a 19th century saint of Mt. Athos is the authority by which we should have “deposed” those who “betrayed” the secrecy of Confession, choosing to ignore the words of St James the Apostle: “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that you may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much. Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit. Brothers, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converts the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.” (Jm. 5:16-18). Or the custom of Blessed Bishop Basil (Rodzianko) that husbands and wives make it a practice to openly confess to one another? Somehow should one not fear an “incomplete and insincere” confession before God – Who will reveal everything to everyone on the Day of Judgement, for heaven’s sake! – extraordinarily more dangerous to their souls than the thoughts of several saints? Unless you are prepossessing, of course, that the practice of open Confession established in the Church is indeed proper and what is according to the Holy Tradition, and what is now allowed is an act conducted before a priest (“Withhold nothing for I am but a witness…) is a concession to our weakness & fundamental lack of humility. It most certainly is not a Roman Catholic leftover, but what Fr. Fr. Alexander Schmemann described as
Religiousness everywhere you turn is your answer!
And in the concluding prayer in the Byzantine Service, there is no “And I an unworthy priest, by the power given to me by Him absolve you…but rather, “Reconcile and unite him/her unto Your Holy Church, through Jesus Christ, our Lord!” says the Orthodox Service, “Who with You belongs all dominion and majesty.” And this suggests what we read in Ps. 138:
Nik! “The ‘author” of the Pedalion,” !!!! The Pedalion has NO AUTHOR.
Nikodemus of Athos was a collector and compiler and commentator, not an author..
By the way, a recent study in the Russian Church on the topic of Indulgences in the Greek Church revealed that not only did the Ecum. and other Patriarchs SELL printed indulgences ABSOLVING THE DEAD OF THEIR SINS for a price, BUT THERE ACTUALLY EXIST COPIES OF LETTERS sent by such people as Nicodemus himself , who requested he be sold indulgences on behalf of some friends of his. He is not the paragon of canonical punctiliousness you would like to believe him to be
How could this comment get so many dislikes? Are commentators here really so opposed to the clear and immutable teachings of the Church?
Nik, I generally only notice what’s in the positive column. As the Monty Python boys always said, “Always look on the bright side of life!”
Or as we Orthodox say: “What have the Romans ever done for us?”
ROMANI ITE DOMUM
But leave the wine!
(And the roads……)
Helga and others bewitched into accepting the idea, widespread in American culture, movies, novels, et cetera, that there is an “inviolable seal” of”the confessional” which condemns any priest that might tell his bishop or anyone else of a person’s confessed sins should realize they have been and are DELUDED. M Stankowitz is quite right to point out that Penance in the Apostolic and Post-Apostolic period is PUBLIC. It is only in the Post-Constantinian era that Confessions became mostly private: this parallels the elaboration of the Iconostasis and the secrecy of the Anaphora prayers: reaction to the decision of Caesar to open the doors of the celebration of the Mysteries to “every Tom, Dick, an Harry” that wanted to get ahead in imperial society
Evidence that the idea of the “inviolable seal” of Confession was never universally accepted may be found in a routine, common, conventional document given to every Priest by his ordaining bishop for centuries in the Russian and other Churches. It’s called an “Installation Certificate”: or “Stavlennaya Grammota.” . In it are the instructions EVERY bishop gave and still gives relative to the Priest’s entire ministry at his ordination.. The portion of this admirable long document that pertains to Penance reads like this:
“..to bind and to loose with good judgment those confessing their consciences to him according to the canons of the Holy Apostles, and the teaching of the God=bearing Fathers, according to the norms of the Holy Orthodox Church, and according to our admonition and injunction; to bring and lay before us greater and more complex faults.”
“Those that can read, let them read.”
PS Not ALL Freemasons are anti-Ephraim.
“Ioannis”, nice of you to show up to another discussion where Elder Ephraim’s name has been brought up. Again you don’t plainly say what you want to say but instead attempt to disguise the fact that your intention is to attack him. Interestingly, your comment got dozens of ‘likes’ as if the same person clicked a bunch of times. But the weirdest thing of all is that you chose as your username the Elder’s name in the world.
Stop this creepy behavior.
“Ioannis”, nice of you to show up to another discussion where Elder Ephraim’s name has been brought up. Again you don’t plainly say what you want to say but instead attempt to disguise the fact that your intention is to attack him. Interestingly, your comment got dozens of ‘likes’ as if the same person clicked a bunch of times. But the weirdest thing of all is that you chose as your username the Elder’s name in the world.
Stop this creepy behavior.
Everyone here must understand, these issues aren’t just GOA or OCA, but ALL the Church has it’s share. ROCOR isn’t as pure as you believe; neither the Antiochians, Serbs, etc. The problem is we are in a fallen world and priests, bishops, monastics, etc. are all subject to the wiles of the devil. The problem here with Passias is that The NY Post brought this to light 4-5 years ago and nothing was done; not rumor, but facts. People in that community knew yet, nothing was done. The top people within the GOA knew and nothing was done. Other priests knew and nothing was done. When something was seen, it was reported yet, ignored. Ephrem from Athos is a fraud. Any and all connected with him are to be held highly suspect.
George Michalopoulos wrote:
Adultery is a crime in New York. Under Penal Law section 255.17 a person is guilty of adultery when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person at a time when he or she has a living spouse. Adultery is a class “B” misdemeanor.
All churches have problems with clergy misconduct. I live in St.Louis. It was in the news that a local Baptist minister(I don’t know which group) was arrested for stealing money from his church to support a mistress. SNAP was picking on the Southern Baptists a few years ago. There has been problems in several Pentecostal groups.
This essay is a bit out of focus, and somewhat misinformed.
First, let me say that Father Isidor Brittain was primarily a victim of Bp Nikolai Soraich. From prison, FrIB has sent explicit details of his sad experience with BpNS to Met. Hilarion Kapral…It’s not like the OCA handed him off — we didn’t know all of the story, either… We should pray for both of them, especially for FrIB, who is in danger of losing his faith. May the Lord be merciful to him and to BpNS and to us all.
As far as I know, none of our bishops — for as badly as some of them behave — has attempted marriage with a deacon. But there is indeed the monastic deacon Gregory Burke in Florida who legally married a man in California, then divorced him, and finally returned to his former boyfriend, the forcibly retired Bishop Mark Forsberg in Florida.
This scandal is known to all, but the fact that our OCA has done nothing to discipline these men is inexcusable and unexplainable, except for that bishop’s longstanding relationship with Abp Nathaniel Popp, whose favors toward his homosexual clergy (Fr Gregory Becker, e.g.) are well documented at the same time as his persecution of heterosexual clergy who protest such behavior (Fr Vasile Susan, e.g.) is just as well documented,
Yet our OCA’s Holy Synod of Bishops do nothing to correct AbpNP and undo his misdeeds in these cases and in others, in one of which I was intimately involved.
In my own personal experience, I’ve observed that AbpNP is an evil man, thoroughly wicked in his ways. Yet our OCA’s Holy Synod of Bishops do nothing to correct AbpNP.
Whence comes this man’s power over his fellow bishops? Not from God, I’m sure. May the Lord send us holy men to exorcise our OCA!
Abp Benjamin Peterson is under AbpNP’s evil sway along with a couple of others, to the point where a basically good man like Abp Michael Dahulich can’t function to take corrective measures even in his own eparchy.
Other bishops, including Met. Tikhon Mollard, are so wishy-washy in general that they can’t decide which sock to put on first, and so are bullied and swayed by the loud and loutish insistences of their evil brothers in the Synod.
Lord, make us Christians better so that we produce better priests. Lord, make our priests better so that we produce better bishops. Lord, make our bishops better so that we produce saints.
“Other bishops, including Met. Tikhon Mollard, are so wishy-washy in general that they can’t decide which sock to put on first, and so are bullied and swayed by the loud and loutish insistences of their evil brothers in the Synod.”
As a stavropegial solo monk (as you have publicly stated on this site) whose sole claim to living under monastic obedience is that of obedience to the primate of the OCA — one Metr. Tikhon (Mollard) — this is a most remarkable statement. I have always been at a loss regarding how your monastic superior gives his blessing to some of things you write, but the questions become more acute (and begin to multiply like proverbial rabbits) when you say things like that about your monastic superior himself.
On the contrary, I have been told by members of the Holy Synod and other staff that with the departure of Met. Jonah and the the assumption of control by the real monastic Met. Tikhon is the difference between night and day. One priest – whom Mr. Michalopulos chose not to publish – used the analogy with me from the film Apocalypse Now: “I wake up now and there is no smell of napalm in the morning. There is no fear, no inconsistency, no intrigue, no distrust, just peace from from Met. Tikhon.”
If this is notyour opinion, so be it. But the lack of wisdom, the lack of prudence, the lack of respect and complaint that should be reserved officially for the Synod of Bishops – particularly when you accuse that a hierarch of the Church is, in fact, evil and leads those who are themselves likewise evil is shocking and with no corroboration other than “secret” information that members of the Synod of Bishops has personally told me is fantasy and delusion, the reason that you are not taken seriously and are pathological. In my opinion, until such a time as you openly provide documented, corroborated, substantiated proof for these shocking & scandalous accusations, I believe – like with the Orthodox Forum – you should be banned.
Readers will figure this out for themselves from context, but it is clear that MS is directing this comment to Monk James, not me.
I have ceased to be amazed at anything, but 11 dislikes (to 2 likes) for my questioning the propriety of a monk defaming his monastic superior in public on the internet is one for the books. If that is somehow representative of how the readers of this Orthodox forum think…
The voting is high schoolish Edward. The content could be a cure for the cold, but only if from friends would it be voted positive.
Kinda like the House and Obama. He could say tax cut and they vote no.
This essay is a bit out of focus, and somewhat misinformed.
First, let me say that Father Isidor Brittain was primarily a victim of Bp Nikolai Soraich. From prison, FrIB has sent explicit details of his sad experience with BpNS to Met. Hilarion Kapral…It’s not like the OCA handed him off — we didn’t know all of the story, either… We should pray for both of them, especially for FrIB, who is in danger of losing his faith. May the Lord be merciful to him and to BpNS and to us all.
As far as I know, none of our bishops — for as badly as some of them behave — has attempted marriage with a deacon. But there is indeed the monastic deacon Gregory Burke in Florida who legally married a man in California, then divorced him, and finally returned to his former boyfriend, the forcibly retired Bishop Mark Forsberg in Florida.
This scandal is known to all, but the fact that our OCA has done nothing to discipline these men is inexcusable and unexplainable, except for that bishop’s longstanding relationship with Abp Nathaniel Popp, whose favors toward his homosexual clergy (Fr Gregory Becker, e.g.) are well documented at the same time as his persecution of heterosexual clergy who protest such behavior (Fr Vasile Susan, e.g.) is just as well documented,
Yet our OCA’s Holy Synod of Bishops do nothing to correct AbpNP and undo his misdeeds in these cases and in others, in one of which I was intimately involved.
In my own personal experience, I’ve observed that AbpNP is an evil man, thoroughly wicked in his ways. Yet our OCA’s Holy Synod of Bishops do nothing to correct AbpNP.
Whence comes this man’s power over his fellow bishops? Not from God, I’m sure. May the Lord send us holy men to exorcise our OCA!
Abp Benjamin Peterson is under AbpNP’s evil sway along with a couple of others, to the point where a basically good man like Abp Michael Dahulich can’t function to take corrective measures even in his own eparchy.
Other bishops, including Met. Tikhon Mollard, are so wishy-washy in general that they can’t decide which sock to put on first, and so are bullied and swayed by the loud and loutish insistences of their evil brothers in the Synod.
Lord, make us Christians better so that we produce better priests. Lord, make our priests better so that we produce better bishops. Lord, make our bishops better so that we produce saints.
It’s hard to fault anything at all in Monk James’s note.
Additionally, Seraphim, Nathaniel, and ever=memorable Job were the main trinity that prevented Protopresbyter Rodion S. Kondratick from personally appearing WITHOUT LEGAL COUNSEL before the Holy Synod as he had volunteered to do before THEY decided to depose him through an ad hoc and non-canonical “court.”
Archbishop Seraphim was deposed last week; Archbishop Job received Sudden Death all alone in a motel parking lot. Of the three, only the former Uniate, Archbishop Nathaniel. remains at large.
Monk James:
Who are you, one of the exorcists, or one of the demon-possessed?
Yes, I am.
Okay, the Fr Susan thing is a chicken an egg matter. Turning in a gay priest doesn’t give you carte blanche for any behavior.
I know nothing of the minutae of the matter, but Susan’s own postings are laboriously long and seem to ramble.
I’d guess it was a cover job for other issues.
Am I wrong?
That is to say, you can’t point your finger at another priest and say ‘he’s gay’ to cover your own butt.
It goes against the entire concept of Orthodoxy.
It seems o me that such vulgar gossip has no place in a forum such as this, but obviously it is not my decision. As the Moderator o his site, I respect that it is our right and privileged to publish as you will. Nevertheless, you written argument and justification/policy seem to contradict what you choose o tolerate
As a direct responder to Mr Nevins, I personally have no conflict with managing him as I will, However, in the posts directly bove this are vague, scurrilous, murderous forms of gossip that are never corroborated nor substantiated, that the overwhelming number of he Synod of Bishops have expressed to me are outright fabrications and lies. They claim the purveyor of such filth is pathological and fraudulent and completely ignored.
Now I have attempted to make these statements – and more from hierarchs of other jurisdictions and legal documentation – and information – and you have censored it. My gut reaction is to join Edward and extend to others the fact that you truly censor and manipulate the information you release to present a story you wish to present. I am considering leaving rather than being manipulated.
MS makes an excellent point that I have had trouble putting my finger on. The selective consignment of posts to permanent limbo, never to see the light of day, creates a false narrative. It creates the illusion that one side in an exchange has presented arguments that other parties are unable or unwilling to confute.
It gives the false impression that there is only one side to an argument — or more precisely, that there is only one convincing side to an argument or story.
My own posts that have been blocked by George are not of major consequence to anyone but me, I suspect, but if indeed MS has presented facts that are as major as he says, only to have them blocked rather than refuted, then any claims this site makes regarding a full clearing of the air and shining a light in dark corners is an illusion.
I personally think more highly of the policy some sites have of banning people completely if it is felt that they have crossed a line. That way, there is no pretense of a diversity that doesn’t actually exist — and when one party is allowed free rein while another isn’t, with readers having no idea this is happening, it is a pretense indeed.
I am very careful not to say “I’m leaving” unless I am certain that I plan to follow through, but I have to say that my interest has distinctly cooled regarding participation in a site where I get the impression that I am hearing both sides of vigorous arguments — but now have no idea of whether I actually am.
Ouch! Your criticism is valid. Please allow me to explain why one or two of your comments (and others’ as well) have gone to limbo: they were too personal in my opinion. Not towards me but towards other commentators.
By and large, the majority of these comments (and we’re only talking about a dozen or so over the years) have been well-thought, well-reasoned, and well-written –for the most part. However, buried in the first paragraph (usually) was a comment that I thought could be perceived as being hurtful to the person on the opposite end of the argument. That’s all.
Now, you may say that I’ve let other comments go on about this or that clergyman, bishop, politician. Well, they’re public figures and they drive policy. They’re fair game.
I hope that clears the confusion. I truly respect your commentary Edward (as well as the overwhelming majority of other commentators on this site). Believe me when I tell you that you all are making a difference. I really mean that. I’ve heard from Orthodox centers of power that the commentary on this site plays a significant role in driving the narrative. (And then there’s the real fear in some circles that more arrest records will come out ;->.)
As far as Ashley Nevins’ posts, I’m still at a loss.
George, I appreciate your response. I disagree that all of the posts were personal. One had elements that could be perceived that way, but I think an objective review would show that I was responding directly in kind and with precise mirroring — not in a retributive way, but in a didactic sense — pointing out that sarcasm and personal attacks are no substitute for actual reasoned argument. And I do have a tendency to be persistent when someone repeatedly avoids answering the most important points that I or another poster makes, hiding that fact under a barrage of verbage and straw man arguments. That might come across as personal, but it is absolutely vital to occasionally do that in any debate.
The single most hurtful thing I ever wrote on this forum was directed at MS — if anything deserved to be moderated on that basis, it was that. I suspect that you didn’t do so (just as you have allowed the posting of hurtful and insulting things said to me) on the correct assumption that we are big boys who can take the heat.
But in your shielding the feelings of some but not others, it is important that you understand the implications such actions have for the debate I think you want to foster — and it is those implications I pointed out above. If you want people to trust that they are getting the unfiltered product here, you have to let people speak their peace as long as they observe whatever basic forum guidelines you have laid out.
I for one would like to hear what MS has to say from his sources in the OCA. They are just as worthy of seeing the light of day as are the things Monk James writes above about some of those bishops. I would say that any monk who has made bold to criticize his bishops by name and with great specificity in a public forum has made himself into an internet public figure no less than have priests like Frs. Reardon, Webster, et al, who decidedly take their licks on this site (and others) from their detractors.
I also suspect that the rules are something like:
1. If it does not fit the narrative, we don’t publish.
2. If it supports the narrative, we publish, no matter how unseemly, scandalous and unfair it may be.
That is a good description of how you compose your comments here.
I guess it’s not worthwhile to point out the irony of decrying alleged censorship through comments that are moderated and published by the very person you are accusing of censorship.
I was baptized in a lake wearing a rash guard t-shirt and a bikini bottom. Every adult baptism I have seen has been outside in a lake, wearing a swimsuit. No-one thought this was indecent. I think the real problem is the Anglo-Saxon culture’s relationship to human body. You also don’t want priests to touch us in any way, even though gentle touch is healing to those who are anxious or grieving. I’d hate to see our beautiful, visceral faith become so cold and Protestatinized.
RO:
RO, don’t you realize that YOUR BAPTISM WAS PROTESTANTIZED? Do yourself a favor and reread the posts of +Tikhon (and myself). The ancient tradition – the Orthodox tradition – is baptism in the nude. PERIOD.
The ancient tradition was also the Liturgy of St.James the Brother of the Lord.Do you want to go back to a 3 hour liturgy when people blubber that our liturgy is already too long? Besides, I thought most converts had already been baptised in another denomination. Aren’t you the one who complained about ROCOR rebaptising everyone?
Well I am just telling you how it’s done in Russia these days. If we had ritual baths like the Jewish people then we could do it in the nude like they do. But these lakes and rivers are public places where local laws apply. I doubt that the ancient Slavs got completely naked when they were baptized in the rivers. Most likely they stripped down their outer garments. Also think of different climates…..they do baptize people in frozen lakes, you know….