Has anyone heard anything about Met.Jonah resigning? / Met Jonah Resigns / Holy Synod Releases Official Statement about Met. Jonah's Resignation

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I would also add that it is bad enough to revolt and jump ship over dogma or praxis; it is worse when it is done over personalities. As a veteran of 26 years in the USAF and as a son of a priest, this smacks to me to be treason, cultism and the work of the Evil One. However, as an ordinary Joe, I am limited to calling this schism, which is usually defined neutrally as a division between people.
As one with over thirty years of bureaucratic governement administrative experience and as a son, brother and nephew of  priests, I agree with Carl. Folks need to step back, take a deep breath and pray for unity.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
gzt said:
OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.
Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.
 

gzt

Sr. Member
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
229
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
America
Website
skepticalscience.com
podkarpatska said:
gzt said:
OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.
Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.
Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.
 

pensateomnia

Archon
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Basil 320 said:
Oh my, transcripts of Bishop Matthias' text messages to the 22 year old young lady who made the sexual harassment allegations are posted on Monomakhos.
So, Bishop Matthias now faces the jury of everybody, instead of his fellow bishops, and before the investigation into the allegation is complete. After this came out, +Matthias did say that he was innocent of sexual harassment. After reading the published documents, I agree with him.  I see the publication of the correspondence as a vengeful response by Team +Jonah to Bishop Matthias' publication of the explanation for +Jonah's resignation. This is just the sort of scorched earth tactics that Team +Jonah has pursued. It is past time that +Jonah put a stop to this kind of foolishness.
Don't let your objections to George's publication of the documents cloud your judgment. By the standards of secular law, workplace training, seminary-level pastoral care classes, and our own Orthodox canonical tradition, the behavior was, in fact, sexual harassment.

According to these standards, it doesn't really matter how one's behavior was "intended"; it matters how it was *perceived* by the person on the receiving end. Managers, clergy, and other people in authority know this. It's Sexual Harassment 101. It is a clergyman's responsibility to consider how his actions might be perceived and to go out of his way to make sure that his words and actions don't have even the *appearance* of impropriety.

The canons are just as rigorous: Many things are forbidden, and clergymen laicized for them, not because they are inherently wrong or because the offender intended wrong, but because they cause a scandal. Perception matters.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
gzt said:
podkarpatska said:
gzt said:
OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.
Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.
Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.
Those who follow postings here, know that I am something of an 'insider' in some ways as to Church comings and goings, I may be old fashioned, but when I opine here without any foundational background, I usually say so as I did in reply 460 above: "I will start off by stating once again that both Bishop Michael of New York and Bishop Mathias have been and remain personal friends. However, I have no personal sources or information about what is going on other than what has been reported on various websites"

I think that is a good practice, particularly on a controversial subject like this one. As the tired maxim goes, we are all entitled to our personal opinions, but not our own unique set of facts.
 

Matrona

High Elder
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
999
Reaction score
0
Points
0
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
gzt said:
podkarpatska said:
gzt said:
OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.
Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.
Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.
I agree with you that it may be possible that Seraphim was using the word "know" incorrectly. If that is the case, I will apologize to him profusely for my insinuations, but not for taking his words at their face value.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
pensateomnia said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Basil 320 said:
Oh my, transcripts of Bishop Matthias' text messages to the 22 year old young lady who made the sexual harassment allegations are posted on Monomakhos.
So, Bishop Matthias now faces the jury of everybody, instead of his fellow bishops, and before the investigation into the allegation is complete. After this came out, +Matthias did say that he was innocent of sexual harassment. After reading the published documents, I agree with him.  I see the publication of the correspondence as a vengeful response by Team +Jonah to Bishop Matthias' publication of the explanation for +Jonah's resignation. This is just the sort of scorched earth tactics that Team +Jonah has pursued. It is past time that +Jonah put a stop to this kind of foolishness.
Don't let your objections to George's publication of the documents cloud your judgment. By the standards of secular law, workplace training, seminary-level pastoral care classes, and our own Orthodox canonical tradition, the behavior was, in fact, sexual harassment.

According to these standards, it doesn't really matter how one's behavior was "intended"; it matters how it was *perceived* by the person on the receiving end. Managers, clergy, and other people in authority know this. It's Sexual Harassment 101. It is a clergyman's responsibility to consider how his actions might be perceived and to go out of his way to make sure that his words and actions don't have even the *appearance* of impropriety.

The canons are just as rigorous: Many things are forbidden, and clergymen laicized for them, not because they are inherently wrong or because the offender intended wrong, but because they cause a scandal. Perception matters.
Right. And, that is the reason why we have bishops and a Holy Synod. The woman made a charge, as was her right. The Holy Synod and Bishop Matthias did the right thing at this point in accordance with OCA policy. The scandal was deepened, however, by the publication of these letters which made all readers into de facto investigators, jury members and judges, whether they wanted to or not. In publishing the correspondence, George became a scandalizer himself. The stated reason why George did so is also another scandal in itself--to quote him:

"Why are we publishing them? One reason. The letter that was released by the Synod of Bishops to justify their removal of Met. Jonah was full of innuendo and errors of fact. They have yet to correct it and offer an apology. We do not trust them to deal responsibly with the facts.
We also believe that once Monomakhos readers are properly informed of Bp. Matthias’ misbehavior they will agree that he must be retired."

His words speak for themselves.
 

gzt

Sr. Member
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
229
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
America
Website
skepticalscience.com
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
gzt said:
podkarpatska said:
gzt said:
OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.
Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.
Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.
I agree with you that it may be possible that Seraphim was using the word "know" incorrectly. If that is the case, I will apologize to him profusely for my insinuations, but not for taking his words at their face value.
Not so much that he's misusing it, but that he's mistaken (or failing to think critically) if he thinks he actually knows it.
 

Matrona

High Elder
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
999
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
FOLLOW UP: I still need more time to find that particular indication that I had read on Monomakhos. In the meantime, I offer you +Jonah's Facebook page, where he shared the link to the OCA Investigation Petition Letter. Admittedly this is not a strong indicator but usually people do not share pages that they dislike.

http://www.facebook.com/metropolitanjonah

 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
Orual said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.
I am just heartbroken that I have unable to quickly and thoroughly impress you. Tell you what: I am done with you. I am suspending my search of Monomakhos for the second indication of +Jonah's involvement in this. The reason is simple: I did not expect, nor appreciate, that sucker punch you just threw at me; I had not brought in the +Matthias matter into our conversation, had I?
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
FOLLOW UP: I still need more time to find that particular indication that I had read on Monomakhos. In the meantime, I offer you +Jonah's Facebook page, where he shared the link to the OCA Investigation Petition Letter. Admittedly this is not a strong indicator but usually people do not share pages that they dislike.

http://www.facebook.com/metropolitanjonah
Fair's fair...this is not the Metropolitan's page unless he is being personally 'disingenuous'.There is a disclaimer on it:  "*Unofficial fanpage* Founding Abbot of St John of San Francisco Monastery, California, 1996-2008; Metropolitan of All-America and Canada, 2008-present. Official OCA fanpage: facebook.com/orthodoxchurchinamerica *His Beatitude does not check this fanpage*"
 

Benjamin the Red

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
1,601
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Georgia, United States
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
FOLLOW UP: I still need more time to find that particular indication that I had read on Monomakhos. In the meantime, I offer you +Jonah's Facebook page, where he shared the link to the OCA Investigation Petition Letter. Admittedly this is not a strong indicator but usually people do not share pages that they dislike.

http://www.facebook.com/metropolitanjonah
Metropolitan Jonah Facebook Page said:
*Unofficial fanpage* Founding Abbot of St John of San Francisco Monastery, California, 1996-2008; Metropolitan of All-America and Canada, 2008-present. Official OCA fanpage: facebook.com/orthodoxchurchinamerica *His Beatitude does not check this fanpage*
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
gzt said:
Orual said:
Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.
This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":
...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.
I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.
Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.
I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.
I am just heartbroken that I have unable to quickly and thoroughly impress you. Tell you what: I am done with you. I am suspending my search of Monomakhos for the second indication of +Jonah's involvement in this. The reason is simple: I did not expect, nor appreciate, that sucker punch you just threw at me; I had not brought in the +Matthias matter into our conversation, had I?
Couple of points here: First: Sexual harassment is a legal term and usually has application to the workplace and the employer/employee relationship. I don't think that situation existed here. If accurate, there are other terms with which to describe it. Second point: While the website in question certainly posted the documents about which we speak, there is no way to verify their accuracy or completeness. Third point: If they are accurate, then the Synod will have to deal with this and for us to pontificate upon an appropriate response as lay interloopers on the anonymous internet is at best unfair and at worst bordering on sinful.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
Regarding Metropolitan Jonah's Facebook page, I can accept that the Metropolitan himself may not have posted anything on this "unofficial fanpage." I also want to thank Podkarpatska and Benjamin the Red for pointing this out to me. In that case, I would call upon his supporters, advisors and even His Eminence to pay attention to what is posted there, small print notwithstanding.
 

Matrona

High Elder
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
999
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.
I am just heartbroken that I have unable to quickly and thoroughly impress you. Tell you what: I am done with you. I am suspending my search of Monomakhos for the second indication of +Jonah's involvement in this. The reason is simple: I did not expect, nor appreciate, that sucker punch you just threw at me; I had not brought in the +Matthias matter into our conversation, had I?
Maybe it was a sucker punch to bring up Bp. Moriak, but it showed poor information analysis on your part.  

I guess I should have just waited a few minutes.  I did not know you were about to proclaim that Metropolitan Jonah has shared the petition link on a Facebook fan page, when he does not operate or even read that Facebook page.

Whether you like me or not, you still need to document your claim that Metropolitan Jonah is somehow galvanizing the lay movement to restore himself to office.  All I remember anyone there saying is how His Beatitude is doing and where he is celebrating services.  Now that is truly scandalous intel.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
Orual said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.
I am just heartbroken that I have unable to quickly and thoroughly impress you. Tell you what: I am done with you. I am suspending my search of Monomakhos for the second indication of +Jonah's involvement in this. The reason is simple: I did not expect, nor appreciate, that sucker punch you just threw at me; I had not brought in the +Matthias matter into our conversation, had I?
Maybe it was a sucker punch to bring up Bp. Moriak, but it showed poor information analysis on your part.  

I guess I should have just waited a few minutes.  I did not know you were about to proclaim that Metropolitan Jonah has shared the petition link on a Facebook fan page, when he does not operate or even read that Facebook page.

Whether you like me or not, you still need to document your claim that Metropolitan Jonah is somehow galvanizing the lay movement to restore himself to office.  All I remember anyone there saying is how His Beatitude is doing and where he is celebrating services.  Now that is truly scandalous intel.
1. Regarding his Facebook page, see my posting immediately above.

2. Regarding my claim, to wit "There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so," I do not have any smoking gun. That is the reason why I phrased it the way I did.  I stand by my statement.
 

ICXCNIKA

OC.Net Guru
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,532
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Madison, WI
Basil 320 said:
Schultz said:
Basil 320 said:
Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation.  

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

The Holy Synod was scheduled to meet at the Chancery today, no report as yet on the OCA web site.  Topics to be addressed would be the matter of the investigation of the sexual harassment allegation against Bishop Matthias of Chicago, and an assignment for Metropolitan Jonah, in response to his request included in his letter of resignation, whose remuneration was scheduled to end at this time.  Last week, Bishop Michael was reported to have said  Bishop Matthias would be exonerated.
who is Bishop Michael of Baltimore?
My mistake.  I should have said Bishop Mark of Baltimore, the Metropolitan's auxiliary bishop responsible for Departments and Commissions of the OCA.  Bishop Mark was previously the Bishop of Toledo (I think) of the AOCANA, who attempted to impose a requirement for annual private auditing of parishes in his diocese and ran into conflicts with Metropolitan Phillip because he was butting heads with parish priests who were Metropolitan Phillip's buddies.  Met. Phillip was transferring him to the Northwest, whereupon, he negotiated with the OCA for transfer to it, which Met. Phillip approved.  He was initially appointed Administrator of the Diocese of the South, but ran into conflicts with many in the Diocesan Cathedral.  It was revealed that he was responsible for accessing the e-mail account of the previous Chancellor of the Diocese of the South and transmitting pertinent e-mail messages to OCANews for publication, the internet site of Orthodox Christians for Accountability.  His appointment to the Chancery is recent.

I apologize for the error in my previous post, Reply No. 459.
I am not aware of any revelation that Bishop Mark did anything wrong or gave any emails to OCANEWS. What evidence do you have that he did this?
 

Matrona

High Elder
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
999
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) said:
Orual said:
I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.
I am just heartbroken that I have unable to quickly and thoroughly impress you. Tell you what: I am done with you. I am suspending my search of Monomakhos for the second indication of +Jonah's involvement in this. The reason is simple: I did not expect, nor appreciate, that sucker punch you just threw at me; I had not brought in the +Matthias matter into our conversation, had I?
Maybe it was a sucker punch to bring up Bp. Moriak, but it showed poor information analysis on your part.  

I guess I should have just waited a few minutes.  I did not know you were about to proclaim that Metropolitan Jonah has shared the petition link on a Facebook fan page, when he does not operate or even read that Facebook page.

Whether you like me or not, you still need to document your claim that Metropolitan Jonah is somehow galvanizing the lay movement to restore himself to office.  All I remember anyone there saying is how His Beatitude is doing and where he is celebrating services.  Now that is truly scandalous intel.
1. Regarding his Facebook page, see my posting immediately above.
The small print is that the page does not speak for Metropolitan Jonah in any way.  You made a statement that he posted something there.  Then when you were corrected, you had to say, "He may not have".  You need to produce evidence that shows there is even a possibility that Metr. Jonah is personally behind the contents of his fan page.

2. Regarding my claim, to wit "There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so," I do not have any smoking gun. That is the reason why I phrased it the way I did.  I stand by my statement.
You say, "There are indications" and then said it wasn't clear "why he is doing so", "he is doing so" being a definite statement that His Beatitude is in fact doing a certain thing, while you now admit you do not have proof of this accusation.  

Furthermore, you do not say what "indications" there are, besides the utterly unverifiable statement that an unknown male individual whom you trust said so, and a Monomakhos posting you have both said you cannot find and refuse to find.
 

katherineofdixie

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
3,719
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
the South, thanks be to God
I'd just like to observe that it is not impossible to get people to stop doing things on your behalf that you may not approve of or want them to do. You tell them that you don't like it and they need to stop.
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
Your situation somehow resembles situation in Poland in the interwar: Polish oriented bishops vs. Russian oriented bishops vs. Ukrainian oriented bishops vs. Polish oriented priests vs. Russian oriented priests vs. Ukrainian oriented priests vs. Belarusian oriented priests vs. Polish oriented laity vs. Russian oriented laity vs. Ukrainian oriented laity vs. Belarusian oriented laity vs. autocephaly supporters vs. autocephaly opponents vs. state authorities vs. Roman Catholics vs. Ukrainian Catholics vs. Neo-Uniates vs. old calendarists vs. new calendarists vs. Wester Riters vs. mother Church(es); polemics in newspapers, books and bulletins; depositions, suspensions, laitisations, excommunications flying here and there; some unofficial sobors and gatherings of "concerned laity"...

I hope none of your archimandrites won't finally shot the metropolitan (or, in your case, the 3 of them) as one of ours did.

We needed Stalin to clean up the situation. I wonder how you will solve your mess.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Michał Kalina said:
Your situation somehow resembles situation in Poland in the interwar: Polish oriented bishops vs. Russian oriented bishops vs. Ukrainian oriented bishops vs. Polish oriented priests vs. Russian oriented priests vs. Ukrainian oriented priests vs. Belarusian oriented priests vs. Polish oriented laity vs. Russian oriented laity vs. Ukrainian oriented laity vs. Belarusian oriented laity vs. autocephaly supporters vs. autocephaly opponents vs. state authorities vs. Roman Catholics vs. Ukrainian Catholics vs. Neo-Uniates vs. old calendarists vs. new calendarists vs. mother Church(es); polemics in newspapers, books and bulletins; depositions, suspensions, laitisations, excommunications flying here and there; some unofficial sobors and gatherings of "concerned laity"...

I hope none of your archimandrites won't finally shot the metropolitan (or, in your case, the 3 of them) as one of ours did.

We needed Stalin to clean up the situation. I wonder how you will solve that.
Ah Michal, I just knew that a son of Belarus would be able to comprehend the inner-sanctum of the minds of Rusyn-Americans and all of their complicated orientations!
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Michał Kalina said:
Your situation somehow resembles situation in Poland in the interwar: Polish oriented bishops vs. Russian oriented bishops vs. Ukrainian oriented bishops vs. Polish oriented priests vs. Russian oriented priests vs. Ukrainian oriented priests vs. Belarusian oriented priests vs. Polish oriented laity vs. Russian oriented laity vs. Ukrainian oriented laity vs. Belarusian oriented laity vs. autocephaly supporters vs. autocephaly opponents vs. state authorities vs. Roman Catholics vs. Ukrainian Catholics vs. Neo-Uniates vs. old calendarists vs. new calendarists vs. Wester Riters vs. mother Church(es); polemics in newspapers, books and bulletins; depositions, suspensions, laitisations, excommunications flying here and there; some unofficial sobors and gatherings of "concerned laity"...

I hope none of your archimandrites won't finally shot the metropolitan (or, in your case, the 3 of them) as one of ours did.

We needed Stalin to clean up the situation. I wonder how you will solve your mess.
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.

James, go easy on me during your purging of the Church.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
orthonorm said:
Michał Kalina said:
Your situation somehow resembles situation in Poland in the interwar: Polish oriented bishops vs. Russian oriented bishops vs. Ukrainian oriented bishops vs. Polish oriented priests vs. Russian oriented priests vs. Ukrainian oriented priests vs. Belarusian oriented priests vs. Polish oriented laity vs. Russian oriented laity vs. Ukrainian oriented laity vs. Belarusian oriented laity vs. autocephaly supporters vs. autocephaly opponents vs. state authorities vs. Roman Catholics vs. Ukrainian Catholics vs. Neo-Uniates vs. old calendarists vs. new calendarists vs. Wester Riters vs. mother Church(es); polemics in newspapers, books and bulletins; depositions, suspensions, laitisations, excommunications flying here and there; some unofficial sobors and gatherings of "concerned laity"...

I hope none of your archimandrites won't finally shot the metropolitan (or, in your case, the 3 of them) as one of ours did.

We needed Stalin to clean up the situation. I wonder how you will solve your mess.
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.

James, go easy on me during your purging of the Church.
I don't think Papa Joe succeeded, at least as to the Rusyn/Ruthenians remaining in Slovakia and Transcarpathia. Between the Greek Catholics and Orthodox factions there, the same divisions and issues persist to the present day!
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
orthonorm said:
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.
To be frankly, I am now far from being sure that such a situation can be solved internally, using the organic and lawful actions.

I used to be an autocephaly-everywhere supporter but now I am starting to doubt that small local churches with no (or almost no) back up from the outside can succeed. I do not only think about the OCA, but about the Polish or Finnish or the Portuguese (self-ruled under Poland in the 90s) Churches as well.

Or maybe that's not the size but an autocephaly thing? There were no autocephaly granting that caused no problems or controversies (propably but Roman, Antiochian, Alexandrian and Jerusalemite):

Constantinoplian - Rome opposed
Cypriot - Antioch had opposed
Bulgarian - which one of the 3 do you want to know?...

I do not support any kind of Vatican-like dictatorships but there is a problem and we do not have any solution yet but "wait 150 years until it settles". We need a better one.
 

Fabio Leite

Protokentarchos
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
4,790
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Brazil
Website
vidaortodoxa.blogspot.com.br
I think one of the main difficulties with autocephaly for the US church is that it lacks unity. One head for one body, but where is this on body? Like I asked in another thread about Italy, do all Orthodox in America want to be one, or at least a hegemonic majority? Clearly the answer is no. They (and I include converts) much rather prefer the embassy format of Church and not having to deal with the "others". I can understand. Each group must think "things here are complicated as they are, imagine if we have to deal with all those exotic other guys I don't entirely understand and who have different or even competing interests".
Unity can be achieved bottom-up or top-down. There clearly is no hegemonic interest on either tip, so, no deal. Those who are interested must transmit this interest to the others. I don't know how really, but I can't see any other way.


Michał Kalina said:
orthonorm said:
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.
To be frankly, I am now far from being sure that such a situation can be solved internally, using the organic and lawful actions.

I used to be an autocephaly-everywhere supporter but now I am starting to doubt that small local churches with no (or almost no) back up from the outside can succeed. I do not only think about the OCA, but about the Polish or Finnish or the Portuguese (self-ruled under Poland in the 90s) Churches as well.

Or maybe that's not the size but an autocephaly thing? There were no autocephaly granting that caused no problems or controversies (propably but Roman, Antiochian, Alexandrian and Jerusalemite):

Constantinoplian - Rome opposed
Cypriot - Antioch had opposed
Bulgarian - which one of the 3 do you want to know...

I do not support any kind of Vatican-like dictatorships but there is a problem and we do not have any solution yet but "wait 150 years until it settles". We need a better one.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Michał Kalina said:
orthonorm said:
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.
To be frankly, I am now far from being sure that such a situation can be solved internally, using the organic and lawful actions.

I used to be an autocephaly-everywhere supporter but now I am starting to doubt that small local churches with no (or almost no) back up from the outside can succeed. I do not only think about the OCA, but about the Polish or Finnish or the Portuguese (self-ruled under Poland in the 90s) Churches as well.

Or maybe that's not the size but an autocephaly thing? There were no autocephaly granting that caused no problems or controversies (propably but Roman, Antiochian, Alexandrian and Jerusalemite):

Constantinoplian - Rome opposed
Cypriot - Antioch had opposed
Bulgarian - which one of the 3 do you want to know?...

I do not support any kind of Vatican-like dictatorships but there is a problem and we do not have any solution yet but "wait 150 years until it settles". We need a better one.
Michal raises a solid point. The traditional Orthodox model of national Churches made sense in the world which existed pre-1848. But, as a consequence of the rise of nationalism and the modern nation-state, the wars and mass immigration which followed ( and continue on to the present - as in the mideast ) and the collapse of the Soviet bloc this entire issue of Church governance is begging for a modern solution. Rome's model failed, the Orthodox model was sustainable through relatively modern times but today's map and demographic realities are a real challenge.
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Fabio Leite said:
I think one of the main difficulties with autocephaly for the US church is that it lacks unity. One head for one body, but where is this on body? Like I asked in another thread about Italy, do all Orthodox in America want to be one, or at least a hegemonic majority? Clearly the answer is no. They (and I include converts) much rather prefer the embassy format of Church and not having to deal with the "others". I can understand. Each group must think "things here are complicated as they are, imagine if we have to deal with all those exotic other guys I don't entirely understand and who have different or even competing interests".
Unity can be achieved bottom-up or top-down. There clearly is no hegemonic interest on either tip, so, no deal. Those who are interested must transmit this interest to the others. I don't know how really, but I can't see any other way.



Michał Kalina said:
orthonorm said:
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.
To be frankly, I am now far from being sure that such a situation can be solved internally, using the organic and lawful actions.

I used to be an autocephaly-everywhere supporter but now I am starting to doubt that small local churches with no (or almost no) back up from the outside can succeed. I do not only think about the OCA, but about the Polish or Finnish or the Portuguese (self-ruled under Poland in the 90s) Churches as well.

Or maybe that's not the size but an autocephaly thing? There were no autocephaly granting that caused no problems or controversies (propably but Roman, Antiochian, Alexandrian and Jerusalemite):

Constantinoplian - Rome opposed
Cypriot - Antioch had opposed
Bulgarian - which one of the 3 do you want to know...

I do not support any kind of Vatican-like dictatorships but there is a problem and we do not have any solution yet but "wait 150 years until it settles". We need a better one.
So Michal what do you think the solution would be?

You seem wise beyond your years and all that.

And we have podkarpatska who is wise beyond his years even if his years are quintuple or whatever yours.

Two great minds. Youthful out of the box thinking. Weathered and seen it all wisdom

We should have a solution by tomorrow.

Srly, what do you think?
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
podkarpatska said:
Michał Kalina said:
orthonorm said:
Nice! Although I think JamesR might take your post a little too seriously.
To be frankly, I am now far from being sure that such a situation can be solved internally, using the organic and lawful actions.

I used to be an autocephaly-everywhere supporter but now I am starting to doubt that small local churches with no (or almost no) back up from the outside can succeed. I do not only think about the OCA, but about the Polish or Finnish or the Portuguese (self-ruled under Poland in the 90s) Churches as well.

Or maybe that's not the size but an autocephaly thing? There were no autocephaly granting that caused no problems or controversies (propably but Roman, Antiochian, Alexandrian and Jerusalemite):

Constantinoplian - Rome opposed
Cypriot - Antioch had opposed
Bulgarian - which one of the 3 do you want to know?...

I do not support any kind of Vatican-like dictatorships but there is a problem and we do not have any solution yet but "wait 150 years until it settles". We need a better one.
Michal raises a solid point. The traditional Orthodox model of national Churches made sense in the world which existed pre-1848. But, as a consequence of the rise of nationalism and the modern nation-state, the wars and mass immigration which followed ( and continue on to the present - as in the mideast ) and the collapse of the Soviet bloc this entire issue of Church governance is begging for a modern solution. Rome's model failed, the Orthodox model was sustainable through relatively modern times but today's map and demographic realities are a real challenge.
You preempted my selection of you and Michal as the answerers of the problem here.

Please let me flaunt my self appointed authority properly.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
Opinions are how answers start. That said, our propensity to be very conservative (a very good thing in general) at times puts us into a box out of which we cannot escape. The Paris School, in a continuation of the pre-revolution reform movement, attempted to purge Russian Orthodoxy from the Western influences that had crept in. The main way that this was done was through appeal to the Early Church Fathers so that one can better understand what is part of Holy Tradition and what is pious custom. We all know that this effort unfortunately got conflated with others' ill-considered and badly executed reforms that tarred the whole notion of reform in many folks' minds. But, must we always be so fearful of change, any change, that, in the case of Russian Church and her progeny, we must be forever frozen in the pre-1917 praxis? The answer to Church governance is not in quasi-papal approaches that seem to be a continuing attraction for the holders of the sees of Constantinople and Moscow. The answer obviously is not any of the heterodox models. I think that we will not have a solution if we do not internalize Father Schmemann's admonition that the Orthodox Church is indeed hierarchical. We also have to do two more things.

First, we should understand that our priests are in effect Deputy Bishops who when surrounded by their flocks, particularly during the Divine Liturgy, are very much the ontologically complete Body of Christ. This does not in any way diminish from the fact that we do not have Orthodoxy without Orthodox canonical bishops running dioceses and ensuring all of their parishes are in consonance with the Holy Tradition. Since the days of one-city one-church, the reigning bishops have reigned through their presbyters.

Second, we must figure out the duties and responsibilities of the rest of the laos. We need to clarify the role of permanent deacons and deaconesses, particularly in light of their original functions. And, we must develop some ministries, duties and responsibilities for the laity. W can no longer afford to have two different kinds of the people of God: the active and the passive.

I prayt that what we are experiencing in the OCA is similar to birth pangs; painful but hopefully of short duration. If only we can see a larger, greater purpose behind the scandals and strife!
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
I think we do not have one case here, but the two of them: How to reduce the likelihood of problems in the "barbarian" Churches and how to solve the problems that already exist.

As to the second one question, I really do not believe that OCA is the only one autocephalous Church with such issues. I'm pretty sure each church have theirs (maybe even bigger than the OCA's). However the OCA is the only one Church where an average Joe can get to know about each and every minor or major problem within the church and can discuss it or express their emotions. That creates some insecurity among the faithful and makes the OCA look not serious from the outside.

For example, the Russian Church almost do not speak out about their internal problems. They prefer to deal with them in conspiracy with the help of the state, not informing the faithful. The argument for that is that the faithful are not troubled, the argument against - some of the irregularities might be tolerated unless they threaten the integrity of the Church.

I think we need to find something in between. Not to hide everything and not to allow the faithful to decide about every pet issue - we do not live in underground communities of several hundred people that know everything about each other. IMHO the best solution is when the faithful have influence (if they want that) on the lowest parish level (like calendar / language / Greek or Russian phelonion) - because that's what they care about most and on the top level (like choosing the primate) - because such issues can negatively impact them most strongly . Everything in between - deanery and dioceasan level (including nominating parish priests and dioceasan bishop) should be left for the pastors, deans and bishops. They better know how to solve such things and have more information to solve them.

Despite the fact that the second question cannot be solved easily, the first question is much more tricky. There is the EP's solution (try to control everything everywhere), there is the Russian one (control everything that is close to us, ignore the rest), there is the Serbian/Romanian/Bulgarian one (care about our people, ignore the rest). There even used to be Metropolitan Basil of Warsaw and all Poland who wanted to receive everyone into the Church and gave them all the freedom they want, so he accepted Milan Synod Metropolitanate of Spain, Portugal and Brazil, some ROCOR parish(es) in Italy, some converts in Germany (I've even hear there were some parishes in Australia too but I couldn't confirm that), and some American Eastern Catholic monks who moved to Poland.

The more strict approach reduces the amount of problems to be dealt with (at least in theology, liturgics, and orthopraxis - I know I am generalising here because I personally think no institution contributed to these things in the modern times as the SVS), but it stirs resentment among the faithful overseen by a bishop 10 Mm far due to his ignorance of local realities and, sometimes, some national issues. The second one approach results in the exactly opposite effects.

There is one Church that gained loads of converts in the recent years (several times more than the amount of American or Western European Hermans), expanded 10-20-50(?) times in the terms of area yet it handles their issues quite well. That's the Church of Alexandria. From several dozens of thousends in the 1960' to the several millions now. How did they do that?

First of all, they have extremely good mission-oriented and open bishops yet educated in the old countries. Most of them were born outside of Africa and even the native ones (currently two, 5-7 in total - not sure) were educated abroad and received traditional (I hate that adjective) Orthodox education in the traditional (hate) Orthodox environment surrounded by traditional (hate) Orthodox laymen, priests, monks, and hierarchs. They also do not ordain the locals for higher positions provided they know the locals would handle dioceses without major problems. They do not educate their leaders within their territory (despite having several educational institutions where they educate normal priests) like the OCA does. They understand that education (no matter how academic) not rooted in the traditional (hate) Orthodox setting is just knowledge that cannot help leaving the life of a priest or a bishop. Surprisingly, when these Cypriot bishops educated in Greece (or Greek bishops educated in Cyprus) go to Africa they perfectly deal with local customs, hundreds of liturgical languages and all that stuff.

One Kenyan priest I've had an opportunity to talk to (3rd generation Orthodox - he comes from one of the oldest Sub-Saharan Orthodox families BTW) complained a bit that there are two competing fractions in the Alexandrian Synod: Greeks and Cypriots*. Yet when asked about his own Cypriot Metropolitan Makarios (or the Cypriot Patriarch Peter VII who encouraged him to go to the seminary) he could not praise them highly enough. He also admitted that despite the 80-90-year presence of the Orthodoxy in Kenya, they have not managed to spiritually root it in the society.

After a few minutes of pondering, we can recall that there are some canons that forbade ordaining new converts. When we look into the history, we can also see that for the first 50-300 years after Christianising some area bishops were of foreign origin (or, at least of foreign education) from the traditional (hate) Orthodox countries. Only after some time local men educated in local institutions started to be ordained. Maybe medieval people were not idiots after all? Maybe they understood well-grounded but left alone men won't try to adjust the reality to their expectations and they allow the native faithful to live their way while controlling the situation while also having some experience in dealing with problems?

I purposely do not mention the need of administrative unity (or at least partial consolidation) because IMHO it's obvious.

I'm sorry, master orthonorm I've failed you, but there are not easy solutions. We also should remember two things: the Church as a living divine-human organism will always suffer from man-made problems that will have to be dealt with. Secondly: our Internet waffle can improve our mood but we achieve nothing only with words.

*I hope no one reports him to his bishop.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
This thread is what keeps many of us going...it was getting mired down in the 'gossipy' side of internet discussion (and admit it all of you - no matter how we may hold our noses in feigned disgust we do love to get down and dirty in the much from time to time......) and out of nowhere a serious, thought provoking discussion came to the forefront.

This is a great example of one of my pet pedagogical peeves - opinion does lead to ideas which may lead to solutions - provided that the opinions are grounded in fact but not solidified by the same or totally lacking in any real foundation. The entirety of our church's organization experience over the centuries going back even to the Apostolic or ante-Nicean eras has been played out against this seeming conflict and understanding the roles of the hierarchy/clergy and the laity and the various levels within each.... The United States is unique (along with Canada) to recent Church history because the North American continent is the place where all of the historic and venerable Churches of the East have found their people and their descendants in one political entity and as a distinct minority therein.
So I guess we are a 'petri' dish testing out the future of Orthodox organizational dynamics and like any experimental setting there will be ups and downs along the road.....
 

Seraphim98

High Elder
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
583
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
64
Location
MS
I have quoted only those statements of yours where it would near impossible for a regular person to know. I think that you must be a highly placed priest, influential lay person or Metroplitan Jonah himself to have this much intimate and detailed knowledge, and hold such catergorical opinions based on the published record.
 The published record is what it is. Such opinions as I have are rooted in that and informed by conversations such as those on this forum. I don't have anything I consider special knowledge…just what is generally known and published. I also have some friendships in ROCOR and occasionally they tell me their perceptions of what is going on in the OCA…and it's not all milk tea and cookies with respect to Metropolitan Jonah….but with respect to him, nothing scandalous, nothing vitriolic. This provides me a little outside perspective to weigh in the processing of the situation and the development of my opinions.

As for me actually being Metropolitan Jonah…you must be speaking tongue in cheek…I've only ever been mistaken for Haley Barbour at a Hardies some years back. Indeed I think that this whole assertion was not meant seriously and perhaps not kindly.

You know Seraphim, your writing is quite irenic and you write exceedingly well.
Thank you. I suppose we are fortunate this is not a forum requiring great mathematical skills…your opinion might not be so high of me then.

Its is also possible for a person to think that the Holy Synod's action was not based on a particular canon or that any acton against +Jonah should have been through a spiritual court.
Yes. It is indeed possible to do so.

I do not think that the published record would support the statements that I quoted.
This is where we differ, because I do think the there is enough in the public record to support every statement I made that you quoted.

  • Is it true or false that the allegations/explanation given for the synod (either less or greater) demanding Metropolitan Jonah's resignation has been shown to be false in every substantive particular?  
    • Is it not true that the young woman whose supposed near rape got all this started has publicly disavowed any such behavior actually took place? Is it not true that these allegations were couched in such a way that when made public it was of a nature damaging to Metropolitan's character and reputation?
    • Is it true or not that the Holy Synod does not let Metropolitan Jonah serve and receive communion in the OCA in but one parish? If so, is there a sound canonical reason for this. Is there some evil he has done so as to be publicly humiliated/chastized in this way?
    • Is he free to speak his mind without fear of economic reprisal against himself and his family? If so what is your evidence of this?
    • Is it true or not true the Holy Synod and Syossett are doing credentials checks and banning the participation of anyone who they find to be in question of their decisions or in support of Metropolitan Jonah? Have they banned well known and respected Orthodox scholars who do not take their part in participating at Parma? Yes or no?

All these things are public knowledge….and from these things logical inferences may be made.  If any of these points are not supported in the public record…please enlighten me. I will be happy to revise my opinions in the presence of better knowledge.

Which leads me to suspect that you protest too much when you claim not to know much. What is the term for one who comes to the herd as a meek and mild sheep?
Look who is making judgements now…or at least insinuating them.  As for me protesting too much…perhaps you are merely projecting.  And I think you have done so dangerously. Consider once you cautioned me about risking fighting against Christ and His Church by sowing discord. I took that to heart, thought on it, prayed on it, and then acted on it…publicly. So allow me to remind you of your own council in the light of what you just wrote.

1. You all but said I was a wolf out to prey on the flock.  

2. Given that you earlier wondered if indeed I might even be Metropolitan Jonah…then that means in your last line you are publicly calling Metropolitan Jonah a wolf out to prey on the flock…if not actually using the term wolf, but certainly leaving that impression. So tell me how this is somehow better than questioning the wisdom of a decision of the Holy Synod, or better than hoping the Holy Synod restores Metropolitan Jonah to the primacy or to the throne of the Diocese of the South?  Which opinion seems to be the more charitable in your view?

You are quick to scold me because I think Metropolitan Jonah was wronged by his brother bishops and that I would like to see them make that wrong right one way or the other.  I think they erred, but I've never questioned their authority, nor called them wolves.  Yet you…here in this very post forged a chain of insinuation that leaves the definite impression you consider His Beatitude to be a wolf amongst the flock though he has done nothing but remain silent before his accusers. Who here is sowing discord and risks making war on Christ and His Church?
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
He used bullet points.

BULLET POINTS.

[/thread]
 

primuspilus

Taxiarches
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
7,990
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
41
Location
A displaced Southerner in the Godless North
Website
www.saintgregorythetheologian.org
orthonorm said:
He used bullet points.

BULLET POINTS.

[/thread]
LOL that was the most fantabulous post......

Seraphim98
I gotta say, although I, nor many other folks, do not know the whole story, what has gotten out makes the Holy Synod look really bad.

PP
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
primuspilus said:
orthonorm said:
He used bullet points.

BULLET POINTS.

[/thread]
LOL that was the most fantabulous post......

Seraphim98
I gotta say, although I, nor many other folks, do not know the whole story, what has gotten out makes the Holy Synod look really bad.

PP
Again from the outside looking in, the Metropolitan doomed himself starting with his immature attack on the Ecumenical Patriarchate which was taken by all not within the OCA and in the USA who were under the EP's jurisdiction as a profound insult and an unexpected shot across the bow. (I would note that it was taken that way within the higher circles of the OCA as well and was recognized as a sign of trouble to come.) It was contrary to twenty years of cooperation and slow progress to developing a solution to our American jurisdictional stew. Things went downhill from there and the administrative mess with the Dionysians was the icing on the cake.

Get over this and move on or else we will all be wallowing in the muck for another twenty years.
 

Marc1152

Hoplitarches
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
14,838
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Maryland
Does anyone think that he will go to Rocor? He is often at St. John the Baptist Cathedral here in DC. There is an open chair available in Rocor for a Bishop for this geographic area since +Met Hillarian prefers to live in Australia.

As we speak there is a joint meeting of Moscow Pat. and Rocor clergy going on. The three Russian Jurisdictions really should come together in some manner. +Jonah could be in the center of that project if he chooses. Most people I know like and respect him.
 
Top