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

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maria said:
I am not convinced.

The three page letter released by the OCA Synod was not done in charity.
There was no excuse for all the dirt they released without any proof.
The same type of character assassination was done on St. Nectarios of Aegina.
Do not forget the grief which our Saint John of San Francisco endured too.

I have lost respect for the OCA Synod.

If indeed an OCA priest had raped a girl, why was he not publicly defrocked?
Why this inactivity on the part of the OCA Synod.

Did not Archbishop Joseph of the Antiochians immediately defrock the Northern California man?
Was not this man's name published in the newspapers?

Why is the OCA Synod withholding the name of this so-called OCA priest if he is a danger to society?

I do not buy any details in that letter.

Again, LESS IS BEST. A one sentence statement would have sufficed.
The priest was most definitely on the OCA roster until he was shopped to another jurisdiction. Your paranoia aside, the difference between what ought to have happened and what happened instead seem to be exactly what the synod'setter deals with.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
Hermogenes said:
Maria said:
I am not convinced.

The three page letter released by the OCA Synod was not done in charity.
There was no excuse for all the dirt they released without any proof.
The same type of character assassination was done on St. Nectarios of Aegina.
Do not forget the grief which our Saint John of San Francisco endured too.

I have lost respect for the OCA Synod.

If indeed an OCA priest had raped a girl, why was he not publicly defrocked?
Why this inactivity on the part of the OCA Synod.

Did not Archbishop Joseph of the Antiochians immediately defrock the Northern California man?
Was not this man's name published in the newspapers?

Why is the OCA Synod withholding the name of this so-called OCA priest if he is a danger to society?

I do not buy any details in that letter.

Again, LESS IS BEST. A one sentence statement would have sufficed.
The priest was most definitely on the OCA roster until he was shopped to another jurisdiction. Your paranoia aside, the difference between what ought to have happened and what happened instead seem to be exactly what the synod'setter deals with.
Smoke.

Either you know this priest or you blindly believe the OCA Synod letter.

Why has not the OCA released his name? He remains a threat to women and children.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
PrincessMommy said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.


Lord have mercy.
Lord have mercy.
Lord have mercy.
The Synod cannot defrock him if they were not made aware of the problem until just now.  I think that's part of their issue with Met. JONAH.  He withheld very important information from the Synod until this most recent meeting in early July. 

Also, don't say he raped a girl.  I have heard it was an adult female, but it was is hearsay so that it all I care to disclose on a public forum. 
I never used the word "girl" or implied that the priest raped a girl.
I said:
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
Just re-read that letter.
Then ask yourself if that three page letter really needed to be published?
Did it settle anything? No.
Did it raise vague charges against Met. Jonah? Yes, and there is the lack of charity. In addition, that very letter raised serious questions like why the name of the so-called OCA Priest was not released by the OCA Synod when he obviously was considered to be a threat to women by his prior arrest for violence.

I am wondering if there is a cult mentality associated with the current OCA synod.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
Just re-read that letter.
Then ask yourself if that three page letter really needed to be published?
Did it settle anything? No.
Did it raise vague charges against Met. Jonah? Yes, and there is the lack of charity. In addition, that very letter raised serious questions like why the name of the so-called OCA Priest was not released by the OCA Synod when he obviously was considered to be a threat to women by his prior arrest for violence.

I am wondering if there is a cult mentality associated with the current OCA synod.
Again, you do not know what is going on inside the Synod, so the best you can do right now is shut up, because all you're doing right now is setting yourself up to be a judge of matters you know nothing about.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Maria said:
I do not believe in the infallibility of the OCA Synod.
No one here does, thus making this statement a straw man argument. Some here do wish to defend the Synod against slander just as much as they wish to defend Metropolitan Jonah against slander, though.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
Just re-read that letter.
Then ask yourself if that three page letter really needed to be published?
Did it settle anything? No.
Did it raise vague charges against Met. Jonah? Yes, and there is the lack of charity. In addition, that very letter raised serious questions like why the name of the so-called OCA Priest was not released by the OCA Synod when he obviously was considered to be a threat to women by his prior arrest for violence.

I am wondering if there is a cult mentality associated with the current OCA synod.
Again, you do not know what is going on inside the Synod, so the best you can do right now is shut up, because all you're doing right now is setting yourself up to be a judge of matters you know nothing about.
You did not answer my questions.

Why has the name of this priest not been released?
It is strange that the very outspoken Synod has its tongue tied.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
Just re-read that letter.
Then ask yourself if that three page letter really needed to be published?
Did it settle anything? No.
Did it raise vague charges against Met. Jonah? Yes, and there is the lack of charity. In addition, that very letter raised serious questions like why the name of the so-called OCA Priest was not released by the OCA Synod when he obviously was considered to be a threat to women by his prior arrest for violence.

I am wondering if there is a cult mentality associated with the current OCA synod.
Again, you do not know what is going on inside the Synod, so the best you can do right now is shut up, because all you're doing right now is setting yourself up to be a judge of matters you know nothing about.
You did not answer my questions.
I'm not going to.

Maria said:
Why has the name of this priest not been released?
Why do you need to know?
 

PrincessMommy

High Elder
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maria said:
I am not convinced.

The three page letter released by the OCA Synod was not done in charity.
There was no excuse for all the dirt they released without any proof.
The same type of character assassination was done on St. Nectarios of Aegina.
Do not forget the grief which our Saint John of San Francisco endured too.

I have lost respect for the OCA Synod.

If indeed an OCA priest had raped a girl, why was he not publicly defrocked?
Why this inactivity on the part of the OCA Synod.

Did not Archbishop Joseph of the Antiochians immediately defrock the Northern California man?
Was not this man's name published in the newspapers?

Why is the OCA Synod withholding the name of this so-called OCA priest if he is a danger to society?

I do not buy any details in that letter.

Again, LESS IS BEST. A one sentence statement would have sufficed.
Maria said:
I never used the word "girl" or implied that the priest raped a girl.
I said:
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.
oh, okay... whatever.

 

pensateomnia

Archon
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maria said:
Hermogenes said:
Maria said:
I am not convinced.

The three page letter released by the OCA Synod was not done in charity.
There was no excuse for all the dirt they released without any proof.
The same type of character assassination was done on St. Nectarios of Aegina.
Do not forget the grief which our Saint John of San Francisco endured too.

I have lost respect for the OCA Synod.

If indeed an OCA priest had raped a girl, why was he not publicly defrocked?
Why this inactivity on the part of the OCA Synod.

Did not Archbishop Joseph of the Antiochians immediately defrock the Northern California man?
Was not this man's name published in the newspapers?

Why is the OCA Synod withholding the name of this so-called OCA priest if he is a danger to society?

I do not buy any details in that letter.

Again, LESS IS BEST. A one sentence statement would have sufficed.
The priest was most definitely on the OCA roster until he was shopped to another jurisdiction. Your paranoia aside, the difference between what ought to have happened and what happened instead seem to be exactly what the synod'setter deals with.
Smoke.

Either you know this priest or you blindly believe the OCA Synod letter.

Why has not the OCA released his name? He remains a threat to women and children.
As far as I know, the priest was never officially accepted into the OCA, which is actually part of the problem. Met Jonah invited him to come from Greece (the priest is a Ukrainian) along with some nuns as part of the monastery Met Jonah wanted to establish in his new monastic/cathedral/church headquarters. Since the Synod didn't like that idea (such mixed setups are actually uncanonical and foolish to boot), a period of chaos ensued. The nuns continue to protect the priest in question, sending him back to their network in Greece. He's a real piece of work.

P.S. But there's nothing normal or official about this situation. It's a mess. The man was invited to be a "religious worker" in the legal sense, receiving housing and other compensation, etc.
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PrincessMommy said:
Maria said:
I am not convinced.

The three page letter released by the OCA Synod was not done in charity.
There was no excuse for all the dirt they released without any proof.
The same type of character assassination was done on St. Nectarios of Aegina.
Do not forget the grief which our Saint John of San Francisco endured too.

I have lost respect for the OCA Synod.

If indeed an OCA priest had raped a girl, why was he not publicly defrocked?
Why this inactivity on the part of the OCA Synod.

Did not Archbishop Joseph of the Antiochians immediately defrock the Northern California man?
Was not this man's name published in the newspapers?

Why is the OCA Synod withholding the name of this so-called OCA priest if he is a danger to society?

I do not buy any details in that letter.

Again, LESS IS BEST. A one sentence statement would have sufficed.
Maria said:
I never used the word "girl" or implied that the priest raped a girl.
I said:
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.
oh, okay... whatever.
Let me help you:

Maria said:
Why has not the OCA released his name? He remains a threat to women and children.
 

iustinos

Jr. Member
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
All of the controversy about whether this **** was ever in the OCA confuses me. If he was--as one commenter states--wouldn't he appear in one of the OCA official publications? Wouldn't he have appeared at some point on the clergy directory on the OCA website?
Has the Synod contacted his new bishop to let him know what they allege Met. Jonah failed to tell him?

It's very odd.



Name removed to protect the accused until permission has been granted for his name to be released to the public  -PtA
 

pensateomnia

Archon
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
2,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
iustinos said:
All of the controversy about whether this **** was ever in the OCA confuses me. If he was--as one commenter states--wouldn't he appear in one of the OCA official publications? Wouldn't he have appeared at some point on the clergy directory on the OCA website?
Has the Synod contacted his new bishop to let him know what they allege Met. Jonah failed to tell him?

It's very odd.



Name removed to protect the accused until permission has been granted for his name to be released to the public  -PtA
It's only odd because everything about this priest is odd and the way the Metropolitan brought him over was odd as well. The absolute fact is, regardless of whether or not the Metropolitan had this unnamed priest entered in the OCA clergy directory (he may or may not have; I don't know), the Metropolitan invited this unnamed priest to come, set him up in DC, and, at least for time, had him performing priestly duties (e.g catechizing lay people, leading worship, performing sacraments, etc).



Name of priest removed to protect the accused until permission has been granted for his name to be released to the public  -PtA
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
Just re-read that letter.
Then ask yourself if that three page letter really needed to be published?
Did it settle anything? No.
Did it raise vague charges against Met. Jonah? Yes, and there is the lack of charity. In addition, that very letter raised serious questions like why the name of the so-called OCA Priest was not released by the OCA Synod when he obviously was considered to be a threat to women by his prior arrest for violence.

I am wondering if there is a cult mentality associated with the current OCA synod.
Again, you do not know what is going on inside the Synod, so the best you can do right now is shut up, because all you're doing right now is setting yourself up to be a judge of matters you know nothing about.
You did not answer my questions.
I'm not going to.

Maria said:
Why has the name of this priest not been released?
Why do you need to know?
Enough of this nonsense already. No one is saying that anyone is 'infallible' or that this matter might have been handled in a different matter. However, given the crap that has been thrown against the wall by certain parties online, it is clear to me that the Synod had to take some action to let the faithful know something was amiss.

The names of victims and the alleged perpetrator were not released for common sense reasons and because I am certain that the OCA's quite competent legal counsel advised the Synod members not to do so for obvious reasons in anticipation of a multitude of potential litigants. That is certainly the type of advice that I or any other competent attorney would have given a client under similar circumstances involving serious personal or management indiscretion allegations. The same would occur in any school district or hospital or wherever if legal charges were either not let brought or if the proof necessary to sustain criminal charges were not there but the lower burdens of proof needed for civil liability were present. For the Synod to unanimously request the resignation of the Metropolitan tells me at least, that more than just smoke and mirrors were involved. There has to be some substance to what is behind the whole mess. If not, you would have to believe that each of the nine Bishops are corrupt and venial. That is simply absurd and sinful to hold such a belief.

Give it a rest and let things play out. But comparing Metropolitan Jonah with the trials and tribulations of Saints at this point in the discussion is just ridiculous.
 

Paisius

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
42
Location
Florida
pensateomnia said:
iustinos said:
All of the controversy about whether this **** was ever in the OCA confuses me. If he was--as one commenter states--wouldn't he appear in one of the OCA official publications? Wouldn't he have appeared at some point on the clergy directory on the OCA website?
Has the Synod contacted his new bishop to let him know what they allege Met. Jonah failed to tell him?

It's very odd.



Name removed to protect the accused until permission has been granted for his name to be released to the public  -PtA
It's only odd because everything about this priest is odd and the way the Metropolitan brought him over was odd as well. The absolute fact is, regardless of whether or not the Metropolitan had this unnamed priest entered in the OCA clergy directory (he may or may not have; I don't know), the Metropolitan invited this unnamed priest to come, set him up in DC, and, at least for time, had him performing priestly duties (e.g catechizing lay people, leading worship, performing sacraments, etc).



Name of priest removed to protect the accused until permission has been granted for his name to be released to the public  -PtA



All several years before finding out about the rape allegations and at least two years after withdrawing his blessing to serve. That is if you believe the letter from the godmother. I don't know who's right or who's wrong; but I do know there are always more than one side to a story. I also know that until now we've only heard one version of the events. It will be interesting to see how all this plays out.
 

Bigsinner

Elder
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
436
Reaction score
0
Points
0
podkarpatska said:
Give it a rest and let things play out. But comparing Metropolitan Jonah with the trials and tribulations of Saints at this point in the discussion is just ridiculous.
I agree.  We shouldn't be jumping to any conclusions as we do not have half, let alone all, the facts.  Until such time, I would rather assume the best, avoid labeling anyone a saint, victim, or villain, and pray for all parties involved.
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
podkarpatska said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
A one sentence press release would have sufficed, such as this:

Metropolitan Jonah has been placed on Administrative Leave pending an investigation by Police and the OCA Synod for allegedly withholding information regarding the alleged rape committed by a priest.​

However, I really doubt that this so-called rapist priest was even with the OCA at all.
If he were, certainly the OCA synod would have immediately defrocked him.
Certainly, they would have published his name so that women could avoid him.

In this country, persons such as Metropolitan Jonah are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
What ever has happened to charity? Lord have mercy.
Yes, Maria, whatever happened to charity? I see you're not showing any.
How so?

I am truthfully saying that LESS is BEST.
Was that three page letter on July 16, 2012 posted by the OCA Synod dripping with charity? No.
Did they publish the truth in love? No, because their charges against Met. Jonah were unsubstantiated and vague.

Again, the so-called OCA priest should have been named in that letter and that priest should have been placed immediately on administrative leave to protect women and girls. Why wasn't this done?

The OCA Synod is seriously derelict by not naming this so-called OCA priest and removing him from public service.

St. Nectarios was treated similarly when he was serving in Alexandria as a Bishop.
He was also charged with vague sexual accusations which were never proven.
Maria, do you know enough about what the Synod is dealing with, what they've done, and what they've not done, to be able to make such statements? I don't think so. If not, how are not making accusations against the Holy Synod that you cannot substantiate? How are you not slandering the Holy Synod of the OCA?
Just re-read that letter.
Then ask yourself if that three page letter really needed to be published?
Did it settle anything? No.
Did it raise vague charges against Met. Jonah? Yes, and there is the lack of charity. In addition, that very letter raised serious questions like why the name of the so-called OCA Priest was not released by the OCA Synod when he obviously was considered to be a threat to women by his prior arrest for violence.

I am wondering if there is a cult mentality associated with the current OCA synod.
Again, you do not know what is going on inside the Synod, so the best you can do right now is shut up, because all you're doing right now is setting yourself up to be a judge of matters you know nothing about.
You did not answer my questions.
I'm not going to.

Maria said:
Why has the name of this priest not been released?
Why do you need to know?
Enough of this nonsense already. No one is saying that anyone is 'infallible' or that this matter might have been handled in a different matter. However, given the crap that has been thrown against the wall by certain parties online, it is clear to me that the Synod had to take some action to let the faithful know something was amiss.

The names of victims and the alleged perpetrator were not released for common sense reasons and because I am certain that the OCA's quite competent legal counsel advised the Synod members not to do so for obvious reasons in anticipation of a multitude of potential litigants. That is certainly the type of advice that I or any other competent attorney would have given a client under similar circumstances involving serious personal or management indiscretion allegations. The same would occur in any school district or hospital or wherever if legal charges were either not let brought or if the proof necessary to sustain criminal charges were not there but the lower burdens of proof needed for civil liability were present. For the Synod to unanimously request the resignation of the Metropolitan tells me at least, that more than just smoke and mirrors were involved. There has to be some substance to what is behind the whole mess. If not, you would have to believe that each of the nine Bishops are corrupt and venial. That is simply absurd and sinful to hold such a belief.

Give it a rest and let things play out. But comparing Metropolitan Jonah with the trials and tribulations of Saints at this point in the discussion is just ridiculous.
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0


Having read through the recent anonymous letter on Monomakhos, I think it requires closer analysis to see how many questions it really answers.  First, of course, is that it is anonymous.  We have no way of verifying who the author really is, whereas the letter of the Holy Synod is very clear: the bishop unanimously stand by it by name.

But, lets go through the letter (http://www.monomakhos.com/another-hole-in-the-official-story/):

1. Metropolitan Jonah did not know about this crime until mid-May 2012.
The victim of the crime is a God-daughter of mine who lives in another part of the country. No one here knew what had happened to her in 2010 until she contacted me in mid-May of 2012. At that time she and her husband had contacted the police who said that nothing could be done without more evidence. They then decided to turn to the church in order to initiate an ecclesiastical court to defrock him. She wrote a testimony of her story later in May and sent it to a ROCOR priest and to me, asking that I pass it on to Metropolitan Jonah, which I did. She included a confidentiality statement that it pass no further. Metropolitan Jonah had already in 2010 issued a letter forbidding this hieromonk to serve in any OCA church. Since he was still in a Greek jurisdiction, nothing more could be done by the OCA except to offer pastoral help to her and her husband, which the Metropolitan did by phone.


Problems:
a. The Godmother says that no one knew, but she also lives in another part of the country.  The information regarding the rape could have come out through the priest's own admission or the victim, despite what the Godmother says.
b. If ROCOR initiated an investigation, then ROCOR has jurisdiction over the priest, which means he was received along with the nuns.  Metropolitan Jonah had knowledge of the situation since he was intimately involved with the nuns.  Why would he then have no idea about the priest?  Did he warn ROCOR even if the assertion that he no jurisdiction is true?
c. It would appear the Metropolitan Jonah has some knowledge that this priest had problems, because he banned him from serving in the OCA.  Why, then, he he allow the nuns to harbor this man while they were under the metropolitan's omophorion?

2. This hieromonk was never received into the OCA so it was not possible for the OCA to defrock him.
Metropolitan Jonah issued a “no blessing to serve” in any OCA church already in 2010 in response to reports of unpriestly behavior. I myself had made one of these reports on the basis of alcohol abuse and an attempted assault of a neighbor on property owned by my family which occurred in late May 2010. Based on the information known at that time, this was the most that could be done. This hieromonk then left the area.
Nothing more was known about him until he returned to the area early in 2012, having sought from ROCOR a “blessing to serve” in its monastery outside of Washington. Now, with the revelation of his crime in May 2012, ROCOR has also rescinded its “blessing to serve”. Shortly after Pascha, he returned to the Church of Greece and the jurisdiction to which he has always belonged.


a. Since this priest was 'acting out' in a monastery that the metropolitan had received, why was this not reported to the OCA Central Administration so a proper review for liability could take place?  This seems exceedingly risky behavior from a legal standpoint, not to mention the pastoral dimension: would you want your local priest to recommend visiting a monastery where you knew an inappropriate priest active in his disease was 'hanging out'?
b.'The most that could be done' would be for the metropolitan to force the priest out of the monastery.  he certainly had that right.  Why didn't he exercise it?
c. If he was not received into ROCOR, why is there an investigation going on?  Metropolitan Jonah, by this letter, did not receive the priest, yet did not launch an investigation.  So, why should ROCOR?
d. Can the author prove that neither ROCOR nor Metropolitan Jonah received this priest?

3. My testimony to ROCOR for it’s investigation was ignored in the OCA.
I was recently requested to send a copy of the testimony that ROCOR asked me to write for it’s investigation of this hieromonk who had managed to receive a “blessing to serve” within it’s jurisdiction earlier this year before anything was known to them of his criminal activity. With the revelation of his crime in May 2012, that blessing has been rescinded and a case is being prepared for presentation to the Greek jurisdiction and the heads of all Orthodox jurisdictions. However, the description of this case cited in the letter of the Synod of Bishops is completely at odds with the evidence presented in my testimony and can be corroborated by others in Washington.


a. If the Godmother's testimony was ignored by the OCA, then we must ask how the metropolitan initiated an investigation and how procedures were followed.  Did the metropolitan follow the Sexual Misconduct policies of the OCA/  According to the letter, he did not.  This essentially explains why the testimony would be ignored: the investigation, if there is any at all, was not following procedure... which the metropolitan was duty-bound to oversee.
b. This letter cannot verify what Metopolitan Jonah knew and when he knew it.
c. This letter cannot verify exactly what communications occured between Metropolitan Jonah and ROCOR.
d. The author does not have access to official documents of the OCA to verify whether or not this priest had been merely allowed to serve or actually received.
e. If the priest was not properly received into the OCA, but then 'properly' (i.e. with letters of transfer) transferred to ROCOR, then ROCOR would be obligated to return the priest's case to the originating bishop in Greece.  This letter opens up this scenario as a distinct possibility if there is any truth in it.

After all of the threats of lawsuits in the OCA over the last few years (c.f. Bob Kondratick, Bp. Nikolai Soraich, Fr. Ray Velencia, Eric Iliff, etc.), it would seem that the Metopolitan would be extra careful about allowing an out-of-control priest to be in proximity to his flock.  I can see why the Holy Synod would also be astonished that Metropolitan Jonah kept this information from them.  A letter rescinding his blessing to serve raises more questions as to what the metropolitan knew and what he told his brethren in the Holy Synod.
 

88Devin12

Protokentarchos
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
5,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I think the situation that people might be misunderstanding here, is that we aren't dealing with a situation where the Metropolitan himself abused this girl (God forbid, he is a wonderful man) but it is the problem of how he dealt with the situation.

He apparently did not inform the synod about this Priest, which was fully within his rights and his duty to do. While the girl told the Metropolitan in confidence about the situation and he couldn't share it, he still had a duty to inform the Synod that this Priest had problems and has been accused by an anonymous source, of abuse.

Metropolitan Jonah is a good, wonderful man. He is very kind, caring and from what I've seen, humble. He is a good Orthodox Christian and a good monk. I think he would also be a good Priest and, if given time, I good diocesan Bishop. But he was just too "young" and inexperienced as a Bishop to appoint to the top position.

I don't think the statement by the Holy Synod defames him or somehow hurts his reputation. He is still a good man, he just could have dealt with this better, and it is probably best that the position of Metropolitan be given to someone who has a bit more experience as a hierarch.

I think Bishop Jonah did a fine job as Metropolitan, he could have done better and made some mistakes. Unfortunately some of those mistakes endangered faithful and endangered the church.
 

katherineofdixie

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
3,719
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
the South, thanks be to God
I agree with Father and devin. First of all, the "godmother letter", whether true or not, indicates that proper procedure was not followed. As a former HR manager, and one who has had to deal with similar situations, I can tell you that according to most guidelines, once the incident/problem is reported to you, you really have no choice legally but to follow the procedure regarding informing those in charge and even the police. In fact, your only "defense" is that you have followed the guidelines and procedures of your company or organization. Now the clergy/parishioner relationship may complicate matters, but your obligation, both morally and legally, is to follow the procedures and guidelines. Not following them is what results in big problems and a greater mess.
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Devin, I agree that His Beatitude is a man of faith and a sincere Christian.

At this point, I'm not sure that he ever would have succeeded as a hierarch, in large part because he did not seem to get the institutional experience of the OCA and why such things as the Sexual Misconduct Policy were put in place.  If he had, as one cleric pointed out, really read the minutes of the previous ten eyars of Holy Synod sessions, he would have made better decisions.  At least, if he could have learned from them.

The difficulty here is, I think, the Metropolitan Jonah lived for many years under the thumb of Bishop Tikhon (Fitzgerald).  If you want to see Bp. Tikhon for all his glory, read his posts on Monomakhos and the Indiana List.  Basically, 'BT' is a rather bitter man, and not from being virtually compelled to retire.

His episcopacy was marked not only by his acidity, but also his neglect.  In his last years as bishop, though fully able to walk and care for himself, he made only around a dozen or so pastoral visits per year.  He rarely if ever came to the Monastery of St. John.  Instead, he made his chancellor, then Archimandrite Nikolai Soraich, the 'dea of monasteries' and sent him to the monastery to 'clean it up' on a fairly routine basis.  But, he never went himself.

Fr. Jonah, who was not made abbot until Bp. Benjamin received the diocese, learned to do what so many OCA DOW priests had learned: endure Bp. Tikhon's screeds without reacting, then go back to what you were doing before.  Fr. Jonah was popular and successful because he did not react to Bp. Tikhon, but simply ignored him and went about building up his community.

Of course, this breeds a kind of 'relational dysfunction': Metropolitan Jonah became schooled in ignoring bishops with great success, but that successful method in California did not work when he became primate.  People scratched their heads when he would 'wander off' doing his own thing without leading the Holy Synod, but that had worked for him before: his monks followed his instructions, and he never really had to heed bishops.

Opportunity does not cure dysfunction.  If a person is dysfunctional, they need to be cured first.  Otherwise, they will take their dysfunction and reassmeble it in their new circumstances.  This is, I think, the problem that Metropolitan Jonah faced.  

Bp. Tikhon made light of Archbishop Benjamin's alcohol usage and other slights, yet Bp. Tikhon recommended him for the episcopacy and laid hands on him anyway.  I think, deep down, Bp. Tikhon knew that years of being his Archdeacon had worn on Archbishop Benjamin.  However, the latter had his meltdown and sought help for his problem.  Metropolitan Jonah never did.

If there was ever a 'root cause' to the problem, it was the previous Synod's tendencies to ignore problems and act 'mercifully'.  For the OCA, mercy has never worked.  Bp. Nikolai sued the OCA and was never deposed, only to turn around and conspire with Fr. Joseph Fester (see the OCA News leaked emails).  Bp. Tikhon has never been prevented by the OCA Holy Synod from posting his horrors against them, and he has returned the favor by demanding their resignations.  Even now, an OCA priest compared the Holy Synod to Judas and cursed them, yet he will likely not be reprimanded.

If Metropolitan Jonah had only paid more attention to the institutional knowledge of the new Holy Synod, he might have been able to overcome his problems.  This is why they started with 'get help' rather than 'get lost.'  The Holy Synod was trying to help him.  Getting help works, and that's why we preach this to our people.

In the end, I think there were people who encouraged Metropolitan Jonah to continue in this dysfunction, and this led to his downfall.  My estimation is that there were a lot of people who hoped that he would carry out their wishes which were contrary to the direction of the Holy Synod.

The mere fact that the DC situation was handled outside of OCA administrative norms by the very man who was charged with supervising the administration of the OCA should tell us something.  At some point, he abandoned his self-understanding of being the supervisor of the administration.  I think this happened early on when he went to DC and left Syosset to 'run itself.'

Clearly, something was wrong.

I hope now he will get the help that he needs, for his own peace of mind.


88Devin12 said:
I think the situation that people might be misunderstanding here, is that we aren't dealing with a situation where the Metropolitan himself abused this girl (God forbid, he is a wonderful man) but it is the problem of how he dealt with the situation.

He apparently did not inform the synod about this Priest, which was fully within his rights and his duty to do. While the girl told the Metropolitan in confidence about the situation and he couldn't share it, he still had a duty to inform the Synod that this Priest had problems and has been accused by an anonymous source, of abuse.

Metropolitan Jonah is a good, wonderful man. He is very kind, caring and from what I've seen, humble. He is a good Orthodox Christian and a good monk. I think he would also be a good Priest and, if given time, I good diocesan Bishop. But he was just too "young" and inexperienced as a Bishop to appoint to the top position.

I don't think the statement by the Holy Synod defames him or somehow hurts his reputation. He is still a good man, he just could have dealt with this better, and it is probably best that the position of Metropolitan be given to someone who has a bit more experience as a hierarch.

I think Bishop Jonah did a fine job as Metropolitan, he could have done better and made some mistakes. Unfortunately some of those mistakes endangered faithful and endangered the church.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
I am locking this thread for a couple of days to figure out how to address issues that have been brought up with the moderation team. Thanks, Second Chance
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
South Carolina
After reviewing the case, I have determined the following.

A Forum member made the following point "(posts) that give specific identifying information (name, national origin, assignment, previous experience)--anything sufficient to determine his identity should be removed at once. I do not like the priest in question, but he is still entitled to a presumption of innocence and all other protections offered under US and canon law. I am amazed these posts weren't pulled. By the moderator and the posters warned."

The applicable rule is:

  * Criminal Accusations -- Original accusations of criminal conduct against individuals will not be made on the forum. By original, we mean accusations that are drawn from original research or from information collected from sources that are not peer-reviewed which contain original research. Examples would be a blog post without reference to legal proceedings or a news article that appears only on one or a few sites of undetermined accuracy (clarify this part up?). Determinations of appropriateness will be made by the section moderator.  If there is an ongoing, documented public criminal investigation about an individual already in process, and such a discussion is germane to the scope of this forum (for instance, an Orthodox individual is arrested for misconduct and there is a discussion about the facts of the case) then such discussion will be allowed within limit (at the discretion of the moderator of the section)."

As authorized by the rule, I have determined that:

1. Fellow moderator PeterTheAleut was correct in masking the name of the alleged priest in posts made by several Forum members. Furthermore, PetertheAleut's quick action in masking the name was an outstanding example of moderatorial responsiveness.

2. I do not accept the recommendation to mask "specific identifying information (name, national origin, assignment, previous experience)" in its totality. As indicated above, protecting the name of the individual is sufficient to be in compliance with the rule cited above. I also do not accept the recommendation to pull or delete the posts that have that information.

Since the moderators are doing their job as volunteers, it is possible that they will not be able to react quickly to the publication of the priest's name. Therefore, should such an infraction occur from now on, the offender will start in severe moderation status rather than the  usual warning status. The thread is now unlocked. Thanks, Second Chance





 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Thank you, Moderation Team, for your efforts to navigate this minefield.

To respect the terms set, I will try to avoid crossing the lines.

On another forum, a trascript of a letter was posted which I will only partly quote:

11th of April 2009

To
The Elders' Council
of the Holy Monastery of XXXXXX
at XXXXXXX

In answer to your document of April 11th, 2009, Reg. No. 19, we make known to you that we approve Section B of the Minutes/11 April 2009 concerning the issuance of a joint Letter of Canonical Release to the brothers of your Monastery, XXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX (lay name XXXXXXXXX), following upon the Letter of His Beatitude Jonah, Archbishop of Washington and New York, for the foundation of Sacred Monasteries therein.

THE METROPOLITAN

(signature)
X X X X
of X X X X X X X X X X X X X
(seal)


(Note to Moderators: I reviewed the Rules and am not sure how to handle this, so I posted without an originating link.  If there is a question as to where I got this from, I can provide a source, but I do not want to violate Forum rules ragarding links.)

The second name in the letter is that of the priest in question that originated this controversy.  So, His Beatitude requested this priest and the originating metropolitan issued a release.

Now, some are saying that because Metropolitan Jonah did not enroll this priest in the usual manner, that he was not 'technically received' into the OCA.  This is a very hard position to hold, since the situation looks very much like a standard transfer.  Whether a form was filled out or a data entry made, the fact is that the priest in question was:

1. Requested by His Beatitude
2. Released with a formal letter by the originating bishop
3. Took up residency in the territory of His Beatitude
4. Served in the cathedral of His Beatitude

It passes the Duck Rule. It also passes the canonical test for a transfer.  Whether His Beatitude officially notified his own administration of the transfer has no bearing on the canons.

This punches a hole in the "Godmother's Letter" which claims no transfer occured, as well as the narrative that the Holy Synod's letter was inaccurate.  Now, we can make allowances for people who were unaware that the transfer had been completed because the priest in question was not enrolled in the clergy list of the OCA, but that does not erase the fact that this transfer was done according to the canons.

The larger question now is what ROCOR was told by His Beatitude.  If there is a variance between the facts of the transfer and the narrative it was given, ROCOR has every right to feel upset.

 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
My thanks to the Moderator team for giving this situation due consideration!

Second Chance said:
Thank you Father Giryus for your scrupulous observance of the Forum rules.
 

PrincessMommy

High Elder
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Thank you Fr. Giryus

I do feel that we should give the transcript the same critical thought that we should give the letter from the godmother.  How clear is it that it is authentic?
 

nstanosheck

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
1,837
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
47
Location
Dallas, TX, United States of America
Website
nstanosheck.blogspot.com
This was published on the Yahoo Orthodox Forum:

From: metjonah@oca.org
To: BPBasil@aol.com
Sent: 4/23/2011 7:25:59 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Fwd: documents (1 of 2)

Dear Saidna Basil,

Wishing you a joyous Pascha! I look forward to greeting you at the Episcopal Assembly if not before.

Attached are the documents for [the priest].

He applied to the OCA, but we have declined to accept him. Fr Constantine Nassar in Oklahoma City was inquiring about him, so I thought to send you the documents. Fr Constantine called and expressed willingness to lend him a hand to get him through a difficult period in his life.

Some unfortunate things happened with him and the DC Cathedral community and OCA, which make it impossible for me to accept him canonically. He has been greatly slandered.

You are in my thoughts and prayers. For me this has been a very difficult Lent, as you may have heard. Please keep me in your prayers.

Kalo Pascha!

With love in Christ,

+Jonah
Archbishop of Washington
Metropolitan of All America and Canada
PO Box 675, Syosset, NY 11791-0675
(516)922-0550 Fax (516)922-0954
Notice, not once did His Beatitude say that this priest was in the OCA! He was not received, nor accepted, unilaterally or otherwise.

Taken from http://www.monomakhos.com/well-that-was-easy/
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This is contrary to the understanding of the releasing metropolitan: His Beatitude requested the priest.  There simply is no way to request, then receive, then say that he was not received.  Look at the document from the originating metropolitan... the priest did not apply to the OCA, he was requested.  Very different.

So, the question remains, what really happened?  It appears there are documents telling two different stories.

My inclination is to think that something along these lines happened (this is just a theory based on what's come out so far):

1. Metropolitan Jonah, either in conjunction with the nuns or directly with the priest in question, thought that it would be a good idea for the priest to come to the US with the nuns and serve in DC.

2. His Beatitude initiated a formal request.

3. The originating monastery agreed, and the release letter to Metropolitan Jonah was sent by the originating metropolitan.

4. The OCA Holy Synod found out and resisted the arrangement at some point, either prior to the issuing of the letter or shortly afterwards.

5. Metropolitan Jonah did not want a fight with the Holy Synod, so he received the clergyman but did not enroll him formally into the OCA clergy rolls (hence, no listing on oca.org, etc.).  Hence, we have 'receiving without receiving.'

6. Accusations and rumors reached His Beatitude.

7. His Beatitude prevented the priest from serving, then began entertaining possible opportunities for the priest to go elsewhere.

8. Eventually, some type of deal was reached with ROCOR, though it is unclear whether the priest was represented as having been officially received into the OCA or merely 'on loan.'

That's as far as I can take this.  Obviously, the bishops of ROCOR have not released the actual letter they received from Metropolitan Jonah.  I think it would clear up a great deal, but I would not hold my breath for anything anytime soon.  I believe they run a pretty tight ship and leaks seem improbably.


Nigula Qian Zishi said:
This was published on the Yahoo Orthodox Forum:

From: metjonah@oca.org
To: BPBasil@aol.com
Sent: 4/23/2011 7:25:59 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Fwd: documents (1 of 2)

Dear Saidna Basil,

Wishing you a joyous Pascha! I look forward to greeting you at the Episcopal Assembly if not before.

Attached are the documents for [the priest].

He applied to the OCA, but we have declined to accept him. Fr Constantine Nassar in Oklahoma City was inquiring about him, so I thought to send you the documents. Fr Constantine called and expressed willingness to lend him a hand to get him through a difficult period in his life.

Some unfortunate things happened with him and the DC Cathedral community and OCA, which make it impossible for me to accept him canonically. He has been greatly slandered.

You are in my thoughts and prayers. For me this has been a very difficult Lent, as you may have heard. Please keep me in your prayers.

Kalo Pascha!

With love in Christ,

+Jonah
Archbishop of Washington
Metropolitan of All America and Canada
PO Box 675, Syosset, NY 11791-0675
(516)922-0550 Fax (516)922-0954
Notice, not once did His Beatitude say that this priest was in the OCA! He was not received, nor accepted, unilaterally or otherwise.

Taken from http://www.monomakhos.com/well-that-was-easy/
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
So far, no one has questioned its authenticity.

PrincessMommy said:
Thank you Fr. Giryus

I do feel that we should give the transcript the same critical thought that we should give the letter from the godmother.  How clear is it that it is authentic?
 

Seraphim98

High Elder
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
583
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
64
Location
MS
Does anyone know how other Orthodox jurisdictions are reacting to this news of the metropolitan's forced resignation? I've seen no statements of any of them on the matter…I would think the MP at least might have some sort of comment…even if it is "we are evaluating the situation" politicspeak.
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The smart money is on keeping silent until all the implosions die down.  

Very clearly, there are conflicting narratives.

The problem is that most of important documents are either in the custody of Metropolitan Jonah (i.e. the exact letter of transfer sent from overseas, copy of the letters to ROCOR, etc.) or in the custody of the various hierarchs involved with a number of the issues in question.  My guess is that the latter category find it distasteful to post the letters and thereby aggravating a situation outside their respective jurisdictions.

Meanwhile, everyone is praying someone else's 'gift of repentance.'


Seraphim98 said:
Does anyone know how other Orthodox jurisdictions are reacting to this news of the metropolitan's forced resignation? I've seen no statements of any of them on the matter…I would think the MP at least might have some sort of comment…even if it is "we are evaluating the situation" politicspeak.
 

rakovsky

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
12,011
Reaction score
7
Points
38
Location
USA
Website
rakovskii.livejournal.com
FatherGiryus said:
Fr Constantine called and expressed willingness to lend him a hand to get him through a difficult period in his life.

Some unfortunate things happened with him and the DC Cathedral community and OCA, which make it impossible for me to accept him canonically. He has been greatly slandered.

Kalo Pascha!

With love in Christ,

+Jonah
Archbishop of Washington
Metropolitan of All America and Canada
PO Box 675, Syosset, NY 11791-0675
(516)922-0550 Fax (516)922-0954
Fr. Giryius,

From your summation of what you guess, and from this letter it doesnt necessarily sound that what Met.Jonah thought he was doing was so bad. Perhaps when he took those missteps toward receiving the priest he did not know what the real situation was. Perhaps the priest made an appeal to him and he thought the charges were exaggerated.

In such a case, even if it's true the priest was bad, it would not mean Met. Jonah was. Besides this possible issue, it seems more likely that there is some other issue, like the Met.'s treatment in the clinic, that may be playing a much larger role.

The other major thing, like the expensive move to D.C. from New York seems bad, but also seems like it would not be enough. And things like the "culture wars" claims or other things from the newspaper seem not so important here.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
rakovsky said:
FatherGiryus said:
Fr Constantine called and expressed willingness to lend him a hand to get him through a difficult period in his life.

Some unfortunate things happened with him and the DC Cathedral community and OCA, which make it impossible for me to accept him canonically. He has been greatly slandered.

Kalo Pascha!

With love in Christ,

+Jonah
Archbishop of Washington
Metropolitan of All America and Canada
PO Box 675, Syosset, NY 11791-0675
(516)922-0550 Fax (516)922-0954
Fr. Giryius,

From your summation of what you guess, and from this letter it doesnt necessarily sound that what Met.Jonah thought he was doing was so bad. Perhaps when he took those missteps toward receiving the priest he did not know what the real situation was. Perhaps the priest made an appeal to him and he thought the charges were exaggerated.

In such a case, even if it's true the priest was bad, it would not mean Met. Jonah was. Besides this possible issue, it seems more likely that there is some other issue, like the Met.'s treatment in the clinic, that may be playing a much larger role.

The other major thing, like the expensive move to D.C. from New York seems bad, but also seems like it would not be enough. And things like the "culture wars" claims or other things from the newspaper seem not so important here.
My advice, rakovsky: Quit speculating; you're only tying your brain up in knots.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
FatherGiryus said:
The smart money is on keeping silent until all the implosions die down.  

Very clearly, there are conflicting narratives.

The problem is that most of important documents are either in the custody of Metropolitan Jonah (i.e. the exact letter of transfer sent from overseas, copy of the letters to ROCOR, etc.) or in the custody of the various hierarchs involved with a number of the issues in question.  My guess is that the latter category find it distasteful to post the letters and thereby aggravating a situation outside their respective jurisdictions.

Meanwhile, everyone is praying someone else's 'gift of repentance.'


Seraphim98 said:
Does anyone know how other Orthodox jurisdictions are reacting to this news of the metropolitan's forced resignation? I've seen no statements of any of them on the matter…I would think the MP at least might have some sort of comment…even if it is "we are evaluating the situation" politicspeak.
There is an OpEd  piece in this morning's Washington Post dealing with the lack of trust in institutions and in documents which is prevalent among Americans these days. Although the piece is written in the context of the current presidential political campaign, the premise of the author is equally applicable to the OCA's predicament with respect to Metropolitan Jonah and the validity of documents. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/romneys-tax-returns-obamas-birth-certificate-and-the-end-of-trust/2012/07/20/gJQA2eZbyW_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop

The author notes:  "The more Americans mistrust politics, the news media, business and virtually every other major institution, the more demand there is for the documents, the proof, the evidence we need to get to the “real truth.” " Document battles — whether trumped-up election-season kerfuffles or genuine quests for important information — have been a mainstay of every national campaign since 2000. That should tell us that the hunger for proof stems from something much deeper than our search for the immaculate candidate. It’s part of our larger national neurosis, the corrosion of the sense that whatever our political leanings, we all share a common fact base. The fraying of that consensus has led increasingly to an entrenched popular skepticism, a stance toward politicians and institutions of all kinds that’s not just an arched-eyebrow “Show me,” but an obstinate and insistent “I don’t believe you.” "

Anyway, it is worth the read and says much about the dilemma the Church faces in attempting to convince a skeptical body of the faithful.
 

rakovsky

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
12,011
Reaction score
7
Points
38
Location
USA
Website
rakovskii.livejournal.com
PeterTheAleut said:
My advice, rakovsky: Quit speculating; you're only tying your brain up in knots.
Basically I will get Alzheimer's?
Tangles of dying nerve cells may form in your brain, and these knots are made of twisted protein. Tangles occur in cell transport systems when a protein called tau decreases and tangles occur in the strands.
Read more: Brain Knots and Seizures | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_6293356_brain-knots-seizures.html#ixzz21PoJDWrB
 
Top