Enjoy the ride!
(If something is still broken, let us know.)
We’re Back and Running Better Than Ever!
March 6, 2013 by
Ones Who Fight Alone
(If something is still broken, let us know.)
Copyright © 2023 · Prose on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in
From the Sarasota Herald Tribune
The Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office said that the administrator of a Venice FL church is accused of embezzling 53,950 USD (1.67 million Roubles. 41,500 Euros. 35,900 UK Pounds) from funds intended to help struggling parishioners. Robert Kondratick, 67, of the 11700 block of Tempest Harbor Loop in Venice, was arrested Wednesday for reportedly embezzling from church funds intended to help people who fell on hard times. In January, church council members contacted the sheriff’s office after discovering funds were misused over a six month period from June to December 2012. Kondratick, then employed as administrator of the Holy Spirit Orthodox Church, was then fired by church officials. Witnesses told the sheriff’s office that Kondratick requested signed blank checks to pay what he claimed were church expenses. However, an investigation revealed he cashed 28 checks made out to “cash” or to himself totalling 53,950 USD. Detectives obtained an arrest warrant for Kondratick, who turned himself in to face one felony count of grand theft. In 2007, the Orthodox Church in America relieved Kondratick of his duties as priest following an investigation into financial misconduct whilst he was working in the state of New York. At that time, criminal charges were not pursued.
How sad. I had been hoping the best of Fr. Rodion. Were his detractors right after all? Was it perhpas neither wise nor merciful to put him in a position where ability to access and misuse funds would be too great a temptation?
lxc
Perhaps we should withhold judgement until we know the facts. We don’t know that his detractors were right.
http://www.news-press.com/article/20130306/CRIME/130306029/Venice-priest-arrested-theft-church-funds?nclick_check=1
Kondratik gets charged.
I was hoping you’d do something about the Heracleides button? When was the last time you clicked on it, George?
Are you going to report on the arrest of Kondratick, yet George?
You handsome devil!
Mr. Michalopulos,
Impressive how quickly your upgrading took and your lightning speed return to Cyber Space.
Marvelous.
Keep the editorials coming.
With warm regards from Switzerland.
Clawdia
Let see how Bishop Tikhon (Fitzgerald) will spin this one!
UPDATE: Venice church official accused of embezzling $53,950
Staff report
Published: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 at 4:12 p.m.
VENICE – The administrator of a Venice church is accused of embezzling more than $50,000 intended to help struggling parishioners, the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office reported.
Enlarge
Robert Kondratick (Photo provided / Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office)
Robert Kondratick, 67, of the 11700 block of Tempest Harbor Loop in Venice, was arrested Wednesday, accused of embezzling church funds intended to help people who have fallen on hard times.
In January, church council members contacted the sheriff’s office after discovering funds had been misused over a six-month period from June to December 2012. Kondratick, then employed as administrator of the Holy Spirit Orthodox Church, 700 Shamrock Blvd., was fired by church officials.
Church leaders told the sheriff’s office that Kondratick requested signed blank checks to pay what he claimed were church expenses. But an investigation revealed he cashed 28 checks made out to “cash” or to himself — totaling $53,950.
When questioned about the checks, “Kondratick would rarely have an explanation” and provided no receipts, the police report said. Confronted by the church council about the missing funds, Kondratick reportedly responded, “What do you want to do? Work it off?”
The report added that Kondratick was paid a salary of $3,673 monthly and also given $811.41 per month for medical insurance and automobile reimbursement.
Detectives obtained an arrest warrant for Kondratick, who turned himself in to face one felony count of grand theft.
Barbara Demis, church council warden, learned of the arrest Wednesday afternoon.
“We have a church with a lot of faith; we’ll get through this,” she said. “As time goes by, there might be more to say, but not today. I will say that this warns people that things like this can happen and that when they do, transparency is a good thing.”
It appears that this is not the first time Kondratick has been accused of stealing from a church, the police report.
In 2007, the Orthodox Church of America in Syosset, N.Y.,relieved Kondratick of his duties as priest following an investigation into financial misconduct. No criminal charges were filed, but the police report said Kondratick was tried by church leaders in a “Spiritual Court,” after which he was removed as a priest.
The Holy Spirit Orthodox Church of Venice was formed in 1984. The church moved into its parish at 700 Shamrock Blvd. in 1991.
EARLIER: The administrator of a Venice church is accused of embezzling more than $50,000 from funds intended to help struggling parishioners, says the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office.
Robert Kondratick, 67, of the 11700 block of Tempest Harbor Loop in Venice, was arrested Wednesday for reportedly embezzling from church funds intended to help people who have fallen on hard times.
In January, church council members contacted the sheriff’s office after discovering funds had been misused over a six month period from June to December 2012. Kondratick, then employed as administrator of the Holy Spirit Orthodox Church, was then fired by church officials.
Witnesses told the sheriff’s office that Kondratick requested signed blank checks to pay what he claimed were church expenses. However, an investigation revealed he cashed 28 checks made out to “cash” or to himself – totaling $53,950. Detectives obtained an arrest warrant for Kondratick, who turned himself in to face one felony count of grand theft.
In 2007, the Orthodox Church of America relieved Kondratick of his duties as priest following an investigation into financial misconduct while he was working in the state of New York. At that time, criminal charges were not pursued.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20130306/BREAKING/130309720/2055/NEWS?Title=NEW-Venice-church-official-accused-of-embezzling-53-950
And “monk” James Silver too
Bishop Tikhon (Fitzgerald) regarding Robert Kondratick (Ode to Kondratick)
Posted on Sat, 4 Mar 2006 at 15:22:49 on Indiana Listserv
Bishop Tikhon (Fitzgerald) post regarding Robert Kondratick Deserving a Mitre
Posted on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 at 15:20:12 on Indiana Listserv
He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much; and he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much. Therefore if you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in what is another man’s, who will give you what is your own? “No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.” (Luke 16:10-23)
Thanks, Chris Banescu! My only comment today is ‘Ditto!”
Perhaps my estimation of Protopresbyter Rodion S. Kondratick’s and his wife Elizabeth’s qualities has risen a lot since I wrote those emails you have been nursing (possibly, grudgingly nursing).
You, though, Chris Banescu, are an attorney, no? You wouldn’t, therefore prejudge the outcome of a legal process just recently begun, I’m sure.
Thanks again. I confess I didn’t expect this generosity from you, of all people!
Cowardly Centurion! That’s easy. You may quote me “It’s my conviction that Protopresbyter Rodion S. Kondratick is innocent of the charges made against him in Florida, as he is innocent of the charges made against him in New York”. Oh, and, before I forget it, ‘Where there’s smoke, there’s TOAST!!!!!!!’
What I find sad is that people seem glad he was arrested, and no one hopes that LOVEBT’S quote is true.
Not judging what the truth is, but why are people so cruel? Lent is upon us, let us guard our mouths. Is anyone praying for him, or just throwing stones. I never met him, but all this cruelty is making me ill.
im sadden that this thief is at it again
To all who are jumping on the news about Kondratick’s arrest in Venice, a word to the wise, I have heard from a most reliable source that Kondratick will mount a very vigorous defense against these charges. He has engaged the top defense attorney in Sarasota who also happens to be the President of the Sarasota Bar Association. He is outraged at these charges and to the handful of people in the Venice parish who blocked every effort to understand the circumstances and the facts and to avoid the parish from taking this terrible course, you will bear the heaviest burden. This defense will cost him money he does not yet he does not want anyone’s help, just their prayers.
The detective on the case was coached by the usual MC and former MC members about the NY case which he was all to anxious to tell reporters. Anyone who would be gleeful about this sad situation should check their heart. Those posters here who are salivating, some of which are the same posters on the Orthodox Forum, beating their chests and feeling somehow a sense of vindication are some of the lowest examples of not just Christians but human beings. The theme of the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee appears to be lost on them while they somehow live for this sort of excitement. I hope they all enjoy feasting on their pound of flesh.
When the case goes to trial, if the charges are not dropped after the defense has a gander at the evidence and all records during the discovery phase, I hope that you bandwagon judges will be quick to apologize and ask forgiveness of Mr. Kondratick when he is vindicated especially the parishioners in Venice.
In the meantime, you might want to add this prayer (if you pray at all) to your prayer rule:
PRAYER FOR ENEMIES
Lord forgive me a sinner.
if you only knew what the truth was
people like you bobby and fitz is why im now an atheist
Glory be to God for everything.
I’m not sure what just happened. I quoted Saint John Chrysostom’s famous words in exile, “Glory be to God for everything, ” and seven Monomakhos contributors gave those words a Thumbs Down, and only one gave a Thumbs Up.
Is there really such a dominant component of Orthodox Forum people posting here or what?
I’m afraid to post “God is love,” for fear people will give that a thumbs-down too!
First an atheist brags about being an atheist, then a bunch of angry people don’t want to give God glory. is Voices from Russia” worse than this?
Bishop Tikhon,
The people responded correctly.
You glorified God as a rebuttal to a man who said he left God.
The tone is you are celebratory to him leaving God and you of all men must not celebrate when men leave God.
And for the record, I almost never vote and did not vote.
Daniel.
One: Thank you for giving me your reaction. I don’t agree with your assumption about my intent in offering St. John Chrysostom’s famous words or, rather, what you call “the tone.’ What do you mean by “the tone”, please?
Two. What are the parameters within which one may glorify God for EVERYTHING?
Three:. Is “rasputin iii” a real person speaking for himself or herself, or is “rasputin iii’ an artificial character produced in an act of amateur creative fiction through whom the given writer is able to be nasty but not be blamed for it?
Four: Is “rasputin iii” someone who has NEVER believed in God and has only recently been rocked into realizing it? If so, then not only glorifying God, but thanking and blessing Him for bringing the instance to a state of self-realization that may, finally, result in real conversion, would be appropriate, no?
Five: “rasputin III’s” inane utterance is not worthy of what you call a “rebuttal.” What an idea, Daniel! How does one “rebut” a statement of a person’s conviction about himself? “Glory be to God for everything” does not and can not rebut anything at all.
Well tone is a problem in emails and blogposts.
And it is all about perception; people perceived you glorifying God for a strange reason or in relation to responding to someone’s atheism.
I didn’t say it was accurate, I was only explaining what I believe was perceived by others and how one would get neg votes for such a great statement.
Regards.
That was not at all clear, Daniel!
After all your entire message was this:
“Bishop Tikhon,
The people responded correctly.
You glorified God as a rebuttal to a man who said he left God.
The tone is you are celebratory to him leaving God and you of all men must not celebrate when men leave God.”
There’s no evidence of explaining the perceptions of others; in fact, it looks like a clear expression of your own judgement only.
Obviously I’m a poor reader, and I must and do apologize.
Daniel, tone is also notoriously difficult to accurately determine in digital media. It is quite difficult to intrepret what is being said in a converstaionl medium that lacks the depth and context of
1. Real Names (often)
2. Relationship (s)
3. Inability to see body language
4. Inability to hear inflection
…and that God would make the evil be good…
Nikos,
If you have within you any remaining sense of propriety, decency, or fairness “as small as a mustard seed” (Lk. 17:6), tell these readers, who have faithfully accepted your words, exactly who you are. You are begging to be doxed, you simpleton, just in that whole “good for the goose, good for the gander” thing. Sorry to digress, but did you actually say “has a gander at the evidence?” Lean your ear over to the monitor, Nikos. Come on, closer! I need to whisper: did you forget? i already know who you are. But, Nikos, the law is my delight, and no one should fear me. Others were in “abeyance.” Aye!
Tonight’s lesson: Why Nikos’ goose is cooked
1) Groomed & nurtured by a psychopath’s irresistible, irrepressible superficial charm. Scratch my ears.
2) Establishes a psychopath as cornerstone of a house of cards – CORRECTION: Make that twice. Didn’t seem to notice that the psychopath used his bench (hmm, a Tartuffe of a monk and a “security-cleared” hieryak) while he went off to play.
3) When the psychopath gets hammered, founds the “suffering servant” object-relation, blaming the “herd” for fattening, then casting out the servant after all have dined on the fatness. “Pay up, bitches,” Nikos’ recorded message states, “or your OCA will flounder. His injustice indicts you!” Your call is important to us.
4) Psychopaths practice the “myth of eternal return,” and in defiance of the laws of probability, conclude that the “milk was sweet then,” so why not now. As luck would have it – our luck anyway – the laws of probability are, indeed laws.
5) And finally, this is the end, my only friend, the end. Karma catches the Norwegian Brown Rat (rattus norvegicus), which in turn elicits the $5 preemptive excoriation (“I know what you’re thinking, you hypocrites!”) and a prayer for heaven’s sake! In the soon-to-come movie version, Roger Daltrey actually joins the faithful in singing, No, Nikos, Won’t Get Fooled Again!
Sing me a chorus of “Stand by your man,” Nikos, and throw whatever remains of your heart into it. But I can’t dance. And that would be figuratively & literally.
Please, please! PRAY that M. Stankovich does not add miming to his street-theater repertoire! That was just AWFUL! Why didn’t he just quote Monty Python, like this: ‘Nudge! Nudge!”
Michael,
LMAO. That was really good. Thanks for the belly laugh. Bravo. I certainly can see where you are coming from, it just so happens that I know a psychopath when I see one. I also can spot a narcissist. 😉
What would the 54,000+ dollars have been used for if he is innocent of these charges? What are the alternative scenarios that could explain where he spent the money? These are straightforward questions. As administrator, hired to disburse the funds intended for the needy, is it acceptable that writing checks to “cash” would be the means by which he would distribute those funds; and would writing the checks out to himself be the means by which he reimbursed himself, legally, for the expenses incurred in doing his job? Is this possible?
Is it possible he was shafted by laity in cahoots with the current Syosset bums?
Photius,
One person in particular in the Venice parish has had it in for our former parish administrator since he was told that because he had several ordination impediments. This man has led the charge against the man now charged with grand theft. This person also blocked every attempt to discharge this matter before it went to the police. The man also has a serious drug issue which was another block to him being ordained and is known to many of us in our parish.
This man also made it known to the Syosset legal committee that he thought the former administrator had stolen money and Syosset was all too eager to assist him and the local Venice detective who investigated the case. The similarities to how this case resembles the blind ambition of those trying to make a name for themselves at the expense of the former chancellor are too close to be a coincidence.
This matter will now have to run its course in the courts but not everyone in the Venice parish is happy with the direction taken. The parish is already suffering a dramatic loss of income and attendance and now are not sure we can even afford a full-time priest. This is a complete turnaround from when the former parish administrator was working hard to position the parish to get a full-time priest and setting up the community for that necessary next step,
The entire situation now appears to be a blatant disregard for what is best for the Holy Spirit parish but rather the ambition of one man in the parish and those in Syosset and one particular former member of the Metropolitan Council who is now a legal consultant and has had it our for our former parish administrator. The real losers will be the faithful in Venice who are being played and another black eye for the OCA.
There are many of us in Venice who are looking forward to the exoneration of our friend and dedicated former parish administer who did not steal one penny for our parish. Not one penny.
Please pray for us that we may come to our senses before this matter destroys our community.
Well, Venice Watch:
Let’s not just watch. Let’s think a little about what you have said and what I believe has been reported. Feel free to correct any factual errors.
I will use a Q & A format and ask you to respect this choice and furnish clear answers to each question in sequence (“I don’t know is a perfectly good answer”)
Is it correct that the man under accusation is 67 years old with about 4 decades of experience in various high positions of trust in church leadership?
Is it true that he was driven from the priesthood and from his administrative leadership of the OCA because of allegations of financial impropriety that involved claimed misuse of checks made out to cash or in blank which he said conveyed to him large sums of money to which he was entitled?
Is the published Venice police account correct that while in “administrative” leadership of the Venice church the defendant obtained in a six month period or so over $50,000 (let’s leave aside whether he was entitled to any of it or not) by means of checks signed and delivered to him in blank or made out to cash?
Is it true that people in charge of church funds ought to hold themselves to and operate by very high standards of above-board operation so as to prevent suspicion and allegations of this kind from arising and dividing or scandalizing the faithful?
Is there ANYONE in the OCA who has/had better reason than Mr. Kondratick to know the VERY serious potential for accusation, division and scandal, whether valid or not, that can arise from the use of checks of substantial size made out in blank or in cash?
I believe in the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings. I also believe in an extremely high standard of accountability in stewardship of church funds.
We’ll see in due course if it was met with regard to these monies. The outcome of criminal proceedings – in which the state must prove every bit of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt – will be of little relevance to the larger question of whether or not the accused has been a wise steward of the trust invested in him. We don’t have to decide that question on the internet, especially before the evidence is in, but we can’t help but start to think about it.
love,
Fr. George
Fr George,
A very barristerly presentation and your last paragraph is the one that counts. The state now has to prove its case and good luck to them when people from the parish members not consulted nor interviewed by the police are allowed to weigh in. The depositions during discovery should be most revealing.
This is going to be another swing and a miss for the OCA and again bad stewardship on their part, not to mention the Venice parish. Remember, the last time the OCA tried this it cost them over $750K in a losing effort that never even made it to a jury. My bet is this one will not either. How much will the Venice parish and the OCA have to pay in suing for peace?
Thanks for that concluding confession of helplessness! More of us should conclude likewise, even at the beginning of messages.
However, I believe this clause is tendentious and slanted: “which he said conveyed to him large sums of money to which he was entitled?” Protopresbyter Rodion S. Kondratick NEVER claimed to be “entitled”to any sums of money. He might, however, have said ‘sums of money that he had been assigned responsibility for.” Father George’s claim that he said he was “entitled” to the money he managed is, to me, quite egregious.
Let’s try two for one and reply to both Venice Watch and Bishop Tikhon in the same message:
For all we know Venice Watch is in fact Mr. Kondratick ….or a close friend or relative of his …who is pretending to post objective comments here – for whatever practical purposes that might serve. So I take him/her/them with something between the proverbial grain of salt and a shaker full.
The careful reader, and just about everyone else, will have noticed that they have both completely refused to deal with my recent questions as phrased. Partial credit to Bishop Tikhon though for pointing out that Mr. Kondratick may not have ever claimed to be entitled to receive any of the NY or FLA money for the benefit of himself and/or his friends and relatives. Fair enough. Point that out or any other defects or ambiguities or unfairnesses of phrasing or fact that you can find in my questions..
But then let’s get to the gist of the questions: did he get in trouble before for this same basic kind of “handling” of charitable funds entrusted to him, and if so a) are we seeing “deja vu all over again,” and b) why?
And by the way, one of the practical purposes of a masquerade here by a Kondratick or Kondratick sympathizer under any name **could** be to spread fear and hesitation. Such a scare purpose might be served, for example, by suggesting huge civil liability to accrue to Syosset or Venice church folks for cooperating with Florida law enforcement.
Why, darn! That’s what our Venice Watcher just did, isn’t it? Wow! Now I don’t know anything about Florida law, but I do know that as a matter of public policy most American jurisdictions, including California, provide very substantial immunities (exemptions from both prosecution and civil liability for money damages) to people who are cooperating with law enforcement probes. So I don’t see Venice Watch’s fear-mongering as terribly realistic without much, much more **evidence**.
And while we are on the subject of aliases and manipulations, remember our erstwhile interlocutor from a week or two ago, “Henry Chinaski” of the mostly-redundant, triple posting? I complimented all three of him on using his real name and his sincerity, and tried to draw him into a little dialogue. He hasn’t replied, at least not under that pseudonym, in part probably because the name he used is actually a well known fictional character/alter ego of the modern American novelist Charles Bukowski. An allusion not usually seen here, so some credit for fiction….unless fiction and imagination and manipulation of facts and feelings isn’t what this site is supposed to be about.
sincerely,
Fr. George
Good grief Charlie Brown.
JR,
Of course it’s possible, but I hope for his own sake that he kept detailed receipts and records as every responsible person should.
“Those posters here who are salivating, some of which are the same posters on the Orthodox Forum, beating their chests and feeling somehow a sense of vindication are some of the lowest examples of not just Christians but human beings. The theme of the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee appears to be lost on them while they somehow live for this sort of excitement.”
The theme seems more lost on you. I think Christians can look at the situation and think the man is likely guilty of stealing Church money, and be glad secular authorities are bringing charges, without being the “lowest examples of not just Christians but human beings.” You’re the one projecting “salivating” and that “they somehow live for this sort of excitement.” And if people feel vindication, I don’t blame them for that either, since this seems to disprove the interpretation of OCA history that had people trumping up charges of mishandling money. I know I feel some relief on behalf of my deceased bishop +Job and others who supported Stokoe (until he suddenly turned on +Jonah and started using his site to advocate homosexuality).
Does anyone know, after successfully suing the OCA for hundreds of thousands of dollars, Mr. Kondratick was given this position to begin with? Was this part of the lawsuit settlement? Does anyone know what that OCA settlement was? I think we should know because our dues paid a portion of that settlement.
http://oca.org/news/archived/kondraticks-reach-settlement-with-oca
If I would hear things like during the time of Metropolitan Theodosius, like paying the private school tuition for specific children of under-compensated priests, I would think two ways. One, that the children sent to private schools had turned out very nicely. But two, that a scholarship opportunity was not published as available for all OCA children of priests who might have benefited or even published as having been disbursed. The problem was never a benevolent fund, per se, but rather that the disbursement of the benevolent fund was not seen by those of us who contributed to it. Nothing seemed either evil or selfish.
I don’t know if the former Father Robert was involved in such disbursements. Perhaps, if he was, he only disbursed as he was told to disburse, from discretionary funds, on behalf of the Metropolitan for whom he worked. Perhaps he really felt he was doing Christian good disbursing funds and covering his expenses in this latest perception of misuse of funds? He did win his previous lawsuit against the OCA
I think we should not prejudge. I remember when the news came out about Metropolitan Jonah. I thought to myself that it didn’t ring true that he helped a predator priest. And it turned out not to be true within weeks. So let us pray that the OCA is not smeared with yet another fake scandal and yet another lawsuit. For there is scandal even worse in prejudging a scandal to be true before enough facts are known.
Yo, you’re mixed up apparently and couldn’t understand what is to be found at the link you gave us!
The OCA refused to honor their own promissory note for $250,00o,signed by members of the Metropolitan Council. No action or response to Mrs. Kondratick’s request was made in any decent time frame. in order to force the OCA to move on its Christian responsibility and duty, an adversarial law suit for an astronomical amount of money was instituted as the only way to ‘get them off the dime.” The strategy worked and the Kondraticks got the OCA to pay itsdebt.
I do hope that none of the “usual suspects” from the Orthodox Forum and elsewhere will have to see the OCA REALLY held liable in the event the accusations of embezzlement they encouraged are found to be without foundation, and they be seen as frivolous and malicious charges encouraged in a parish of oldsters by outsiders with an axe to grind. There wouldn’t be anything as easy as paying only a $250,000 DEBT to ;make this one go away., in my personal opinion.
The former OCA Chancellor was transferred as “Rector,” (Parish Priest) of Holy Spirit Church in Venice, Florida, upon his dismissal as Chancellor. After his being unfrocked, he was retained by the parish as its administrator (Coordinator). This was done wholly independently of his wife’s law suit. Archbishop Dimiti of Dallas was the bishop who authorized this activity. I read on “OrthodoxChristianity.net” that he did not have enough time in the retirement system to retire and was allowed to serve this parish in order to earn a pension—I don’t know if this is true or not. For purposes of the Spiritual Court that heard the allegations of his improprieties, he was transferred by Archbishop Dimitri back to Metropolitan Herman. I imagine after a priest is unfrocked, he isn’t directly under a bishop’s administrative authority.
It should be noted, too, that while he served the parish as its priest, Archbishop Dimitri had commented that parish membership was reported to have grown substantially.
What I don’t understand, is that when he was engaged as the parish’s “coordinator,” OCANews had reported that he was not to be involved in any way with finances or money of the parish. I wonder how that changed.
Metropolitan Jonah was reported to have met with him once, but nothing about their meeting was reported to my knowledge.
His wife is the Choir Director; I don’t know if she receives a stipend for that responsibility.
I also don’t understand what the situation is of the priest who celebrates the Divine Services of the parish. His name is not on their website and nothing about him is ever published, from what I’ve seen. Is he retired perhaps, only serving as a Liturgical Priest without administrative involvement?
Bruce Wm. Trakas,
Here are answers to your questions:
1. Pension – Fr. Kondratick was already vested in the OCA Pension Plan when he arrived in Venice. He continued to accrue credits as priest and later administrator.
2. Fr Kondratick was transferred back to Met. Herman after the Synod threatened Archbishop Dmitri with forced retirement if he did not send him back to Herman. That is not conjecture, His Eminence shared this with many people in the DOS.
3. The Holy Spirit parish did grow while Fr Kondratick and later Mr. Kondratick was associated with it. A review of the DOS tithe income records prove this.
4. The OCAnews report about Kondratick banned from any contact with money is not true, however he had no contact with money until this year, under the direction of the parish council.
5. Metropolitan Jonah did meet with Mr. Kondratick. Many things Met. Jonah did were never reported by the ocawebsite.
6. Mrs. Kondratick received no stipend as choir director.
7. Holy Spirit has no assigned priest, rather retired clergy from area Orthodox Churches, Greek, have been helping with services only. The OCA does not list any clergy if they are not assigned or attached. I believe now that a certain Fr. Stephen Plumlee is back in Venice. I don’t know his official status.
I hope this helps
I know nothing about this Kondratick fellow. I know what people write, but I have no personal opinion on his guilt, innocence, or harassment as the case may be.
What I want to know is what universe I can go to where people will write me blank checks. I have never heard of such a thing happening in any organization anywhere. And the claim is this happened twice now with the same person in the OCA? Maybe I should convert after all.
Also, I just assume that any time a blank check is written out and handed to someone, the person who signs the check is the one primarily responsible for that check and the money withdrawn. If someone gives me a blank check and says go use it, I guess my biggest concern is that I might be accused of forging the signature, not that the signature will be accepted as valid while my use of the admittedly blank check is considered a felony. Has the check signer been arrested too? One would assume so, but I see no mention in the news article.
This is just an extremely odd situation all around. I don’t think even Dan Brown could imagine an organization like the OCA.
Kondratick could well be a felon or a victim, but this bizarre story is clearly only half told.
In the long tradition of agitprop — refitted to the American culture courtesy Saul Alinsky — it appears there may be in our midst a gaggle of OrthoForum-type activists, who not only post the same kinds of tired opnions as those chroniclly found on that “Forum”, they also fiddle with the thumbs-up, thumbs-down polls by clicking them more than once!
Will there be no justice?
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
Thanks, Nikos! and also Yo.
Elias! Do you mean Samsonoff, Tkachuk-Dimas, et al are hiding behind pseudonyms here? That’s priceless!
And they fear our retaliation,apparently–that’s the only justification i’ve heard or read for those pseudonyms. it makes me feel embarrassingly powerful!!!!
Judging (oh my) from the increasingly numerous thumbs down given towards certain views (or persons) of a spiritually traditional or politically conservative kind, or I would say that there could be members of the “Orthodox Forum” present among us. This IS, after all, an alternative “forum” founded by a conservative Orthodox activist.
Bill Samsonoff does not seem like the sort of person who would cloak his identify in the manner you describe. Nina… I don’t know. But there are certainly enough left-wing, politically oriented scalawags on the Forum list who would have few qualms about crossing over and dissimulating “for the good of the Church”, after all.
In the interest of full disclosure, I adopted pseudo-identities a few times on Thuh Forum. Though for the longest time I posted as myself. It was only after I was shown the door once or twice that I posted as someone else — or as others.
But I never weighted anyone’s posts with repeated thumbs down or thumbs up.
What an idea!
elias
Elias says:
March 10, 2013 at 3:22 pm
It is particularly blatant in the thread of the latest topic “For the Record.”
Carl, since the website maintenance, I am unable to post a response directly below your comment asking which jurisdiction I belong to, so I will post my response here:
I have shared before, so it is not a problem. Although in your campaign to distract yourself and others from truth at any cost, I do fear you will misuse whatever information I give you. I do wish that you would choose to start investing your talents in doing good. The behavior you exhibit with respect to the bishops in the OCA is very much like the behavior of an enabling or codependent spouse of an addict. You are doing everything in your power to try to open up space for their dishonesty and abuse of your church to continue. I do not know what you get out of this emotionally, socially, or economically. If you were in favor of more liberal sexual practices in society, that would explain your behavior. You claim you are not. It is possible that you enjoy bullying behavior or see it as a way of firming up social or familial identity. This sometimes happens in codependent relationships, maybe you are just transferring a model you have previously observed in a domestic context and there is no more malice in your behavior than that. But I must tell you frankly, the longer I observe your behavior, the more it is inaccurate to say I do not trust you, and the more it becomes accurate to say I am convinced you act with the same ill will and deceitfulness that your bishops model for you. So I do not expect you to use this information responsibly or honestly. I give it to you out of the principle of the matter, and because it is already public record.
I am informed that in true Orthospeak (the Orthodox version of the English language), I am not part of one of the many lowercase churches (or as you say here: jurisdictions), but I’m part of another kind of Christian religious body that also is opposed to key errors in the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church: a dreaded “denomination”. Whereas the jurisdictions are those with legal power, the denominations are simply those which can be named. I’m sure as a good cradle orthodox man, you fully appreciate the difference. Actually, I do understand why the Latin speakers of Rome might wish to force this new set of meanings on the English language, and why Orthodox currently lacking the intellectual focus Rome provides might adopt the agenda for their own purposes. It is just one of those well-intentioned language-change projects that creates far more inconveniences than you realize, if you actually try to follow it consistently.
OK, in all seriousness, I’m an Anglican who’s local church (“nationally defined denominational subunit”, if you prefer) has broken communion with most of world-wide Anglicanism. Most of the bishops of this local church have been declared heretics and/or schismatics by the majority of the Anglican bishops (not to mention lay persons) of the world. I no longer commune, contribute money, or sing in the choir of any parish whose bishop has been rejected as a heretic or schismatic by the majority of Anglicans around the world. It is not simply a matter of majority bishop rule mind you, I also decide in my own heart and mind what is beneficial, to the best of my limited ability to discern, but in practice the path is the same. There are at most 6 Episcopal Church dioceses left where I could participate with a clear conscience, and I do not live in one of them. So what does that make me? In the eyes of the Episcopal Church, I am a schismatic even though I support its official teachings (teachings which it rejects but has not officially changed).
Having fought the gay activist movement and its associated theological innovations for years, I am tired. But I’ve also suffered real personal harm, partly because I previously was rather naive about what people were willing to do within a religious context to accomplish personal and political objectives. By nature, I’m a bit of a Pollyanna. Many religious people are, especially in there own “churches or … denominations” (See it just doesn’t work, does it? Does anyone really say that?).
There are several Anglican groups in the US now that are recognized by one or more of the local churches (“local denominations”?) overseas. Though perhaps less than the number of overlapping Orthodox jurisdictions, there are enough that I won’t list or discuss them all individually. Suffice it to say there are now what amount to archdioceses in the US of the Church of Nigeria, the Church of Rwanda, etc. and one large locally organized group that is often promoted as the legitimate or soon-to-be-legitimate local jurisdiction by most overseas bishops (notwithstanding equivocation and shenanigans from the Church of England which still communes with most but not all of the heretical bishops). Unfortunately, these non-heretical groups are relatively small at the moment. Although larger than the OCA (most likely, it is difficult to say for sure), the parishes of these groups are only slightly more accessible where I live.
I might have become a seeker anyway, but this situation has left me no choice but to re-evaluate everything. In the end, I have chosen to raise my children in the Catholic Church. I’m very comfortable with this decision right now. I myself am unable to convert, but their mother has and I am also comfortable with that — there is no question she is more spiritually healthy as a result and that I suffer from my own stubborn resistance to the authority of Rome and several dogmas that it defined as obligatory for all the faithful after the time of the Great Revolt (Protestant Reformation). But in reality, I support more of the teachings in the Catechism of the Catholic Church than 99% of Catholics.
I thought maybe Orthodoxy was the place for me. Even some Catholic friends encouraged me in this direction. This was originally one motivation for figuring out what was happening in the OCA. But I have been mostly just shocked to find out how structurally, functionally, and culturally similar Orthodoxy and Anglicanism are. Whereas you have Russia, we have Nigeria. Whereas you have an Ecumenical Patriarch approved by a secular Muslim government and under pressure from it, we have an Archbishop of Canterbury approved by a secular humanist government and under pressure from it. The confusions about doctrine, overlapping jurisdictions in the US, capitulation to secular mainstream culture, dysfunctional church government, functional atheists as bishops, triumphalism vis-a-vis papists and pietists, all the really big problems are shared or analogous between Orthodoxy and Anglicanism. Even the terrible governance structure of the OCA seems to be modeled directly after that of the Episcopal Church. Beyond that, I have seen evidence that gay activists in the Episcopal Church had a direct role in at least encouraging the ouster of Jonah from your church. I’m afraid the term bedfellows might actually be more than just a metaphor when it comes to leaders in your church and my former denominational subunit.
Well said Um.
Wow Um. You stated some things I have only wondered about. Sad.
Um-
Thank you for sharing so much about your self, your journey and your struggles.