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

gzt

Sr. Member
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
229
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
America
Website
skepticalscience.com
What about those caught up in the cult of personality of Metropolitan Jonah? They may have aspects of 1 and 2.

But, yes, I've worked in HR, too, and know that it is not in my interests to know all the dirt and that it is not in anybody's interests to know all the dirt. If you want to know the dirt, it is most likely a prurient interest rather than a righteous one. If you want to know something, you need to have a reasonable need for that information and you will be given the minimum necessary to meet that reasonable need. Beyond that, "What is it to you?" as Jesus once said.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
48
Location
Portland, Oregon
rakovsky said:
Hermogenes said:
Peter took me to the proverbial woodshed (as he should have).
So that no one in the house could hear your cries?
If it is so good a thing to do, why is it done hidden in darkness?
Could this be a metaphor for the way some things are done in the leadership of organizations- they are done hidden and people don't know about it, and people think everything is OK, but it really isn't. They just trust the leadership while the leadership makes its own justification about the things. "They just wouldn't understand", "It's for the good of the order", etc. Meanwhile people think it's better if they don't know.

Perhaps I am part of this. I heard that there was a problem with the leadership, and avoided trying to find out about it myself. But if something bad is going on in the woodshed, could it be better to open the doors and expose it so people can stop it?

Admittedly, it seems there can be the opposite problem- when people are brought out to be mistreated and ridiculed by an uncaring populace. What if, say, the problem was that the Metropolitan had a mild (nonsexual) condition of some kind. Then there could be a problem if it was exposed needlessly.
What are you talking about, Rakovsky? ??? You're taking a metaphor primuspilus used in reference to a very public interaction I had with him on this thread and turning that metaphor into something totally different.
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Let's be fair: the higher you move up in terms of responsibility, the less expectation one should have of privacy.

For example, if you cheat on your wife as a layman, it can be handled in complete confidentiality.  How about a priest?  No, some of it is going to be public because he's going to be deposed.

If there are criminal matters, there is also less of an expectation of privacy.  However, this situation was not criminal.

In this case, there was a violation of the canons regarding the reception and release of clergy.  Yet, the Church has flexibility in how to deal with these kinds of violations, and retirement is appropriate.

The second was a rather significant violation of the trust OCA members have that the hierarchs will act on behalf of the entire community.  His Beatitude violated that trust by refusing to abide by the OCA's misconduct policy which was in place before his elevation and which he never made any official effort to remove.  Given that the OCA is involved in a lawsuit, and the Metropolitan's action may very well have been revealed through later legal proceedings, I think that this revelation would have been made at some point and so there was no expectation of privacy beyond what the Holy Synod had already offered him.

Let's remember something as well: for those diehard supporters of His Beatitude's 'culture warrior' role, what is more important in modern American religious discourse than sexual misconduct?  This very issue has shattered the confidence of countless Roman Catholics and even Evangelicals (yes, they've had their share: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_evangelist_scandals).  Metropolitan Jonah had a significant problem in a monastery he received... and he did nothing but cover up the problem.

While His Beatitude's personality issues that appeared to be behind many of these decisions could have been kept confidential, what could not, in the end, were his primatial decisions.  In the end, the Holy Synod could neither force him to make these decisions, nor could they help him once he made them.

It is apparent that the Holy Synod wanted to keep all of this as quiet as they could, but it was the dire calls of His Beatitude's supporters that forced the hands of the Holy Synod to release the information and air the 'dirty laundry.'  Even now, one site is crying for documentation.  I am beginning to wonder if this site is not directly involved in some kind of plot to undermine Met. Jonah while pretending to support him.

His Beatitude probably could have been given the Diocese of the South had he resigned a few years earlier before these decisions became entrenched, but now this will never happened because his violation of the canons are such that he is truly disqualified from further service in the episcopate.  


katherineofdixie said:
FatherGiryus said:
This is not merely, in my opinion, limited to OCA internet denizens.

I recently had a parishioner leave our parish because I would not describe exactly what was going on in a pastoral situation with another parishioner.  Of course, the other parishioner was fabricating big time, knowing that I would not break confidentiality.  When I tried to explain that I could not defend my decisions or answer the accusations, he said, "Yes, but I still need to know."

So, he walked, and God has since sent others to take his place.  Too bad for him.

What was interesting was that he had said, quite plainly, that he has done this before in other churches.  Most of the folks who are grousing right now are people who've had issues like this with other jurisdictions and even other churches altogether.  They are perennially discontent, and nothing will make them happy.

Exactly, Father. What people don't seem to understand is that it is not always fair, appropriate, helpful or even (in some cases) legal, for them to know all the gory details. I learned this as an HR manager, and I have seen it play out in interactions between Bishops and parishes. A Bishop or Priest literally cannot divulge details of interactions with Priests or parishioners. Nor is it necessary or helpful to anyone not directly involved.

Why do I need to know what conditions Metropolitan Jonah needed treatment for?
 

FatherGiryus

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The problem with the Monomakhos post is that it assumes the ENTIRE Holy Synod is lying, in which case one would wonder why George is not attending a parish of Antiochian, Serbian, Romanian Patriarchal or some other jurisdiction.  All hope would be lost at that stage.  Met. Jonah could not be 'restored' to a jurisdiction without bishops, which is the natural conclusion of such an act of depravity as he accuses.

Furthermore, most of this information is outside the OCA, so it would make no sense to make claims about the transfer of the priest in question since ROCOR is in possession of the original letter of transfer.  If the Holy Synod was lying, ROCOR could easily post the original letter and utterly humiliate the entire OCA while exonerating an innocent man.

In some ways, the Holy Synod has been far more loving to Metropolitan Jonah than George has.  They have been trying to get him help and end his self-destructive behavior, which George, Fr. Joseph Fester, Rod Dreher, Jesse Cone, and many of the other 'supporters' were busy trying to get His Beatitude to double-down.  They created a conspiracy narrative to drive a wedge between the bishops and the metropolitan.

There are many people who love Metropolitan Jonah and wanted him to succeed.  I don't think any of them wanted to see him violate OCA policies and Church canons the way he did.  They did not support him to do those things, but rather be an inspirational leader.  Sadly, his actions were not in keeping with his sermons, and this disconnect is disappointing to everyone.


PrincessMommy said:
Nigula Qian Zishi said:
According to that blog, the accusations of the synod were incorrect. Read and decide for yourselves:

http://www.monomakhos.com/first-rule-of-holes-when-youre-in-one-stop-digging/
I saw that.  He's lost every shred of credibility with that post.  Sad, really sad.
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
JamesRottnek said:
Basil 320 said:
Officially, it's probably unfortunate that the Holy Synod issued the statement today, but now that I've read it, thank God the Synod took the action they took.  It's a sad situation.  Their action seemed to be taken reluctantly and they do not seem to rejoice in it.  Wow was I wrong in doubting the Synod last week, although I thought the reasoning that was being discussed on these internet forums seemed highly unlikely.  The Synod did what it had to do, and I think still tried to maintain some decorum the best they could given the circumstances.

What do others think about this?  Given the "misfeasance, malfeasance, and nonfeasance" enabled for 19 years by the two primates who preceeded Metropolitan Jonah, as set forth in the SIC (Special Investigative Committee) Report ('08), the administrative problems associated with Metropolitan Jonah's primatial service, including his resignation, the manner in which it came about, and the reasons for it, I think the Synod should work toward reestablishing credibility among the priests, deacons, and laity, and take their time electing the new primate (although I think I've seen that the statute calls for an election within 90 days or so).  I imagine there would be a great deal of cynicism--lots of eye rolling ("Oh no, now what?), that would greet a new metropolitan.  Also, because of the distrust, the new metropolitan will have quite a task promoting new initiatives; a qualified hierarch's initial challenges could work against the possibility of the success of his long term primatial service.  Should the Synod secure the concurrence of the Metropolitan Council to delay the election for a year?  Of course, another approach would be, as a new parish priest may often act, for the new primate to preach the message of the Gospels, the salvic message of the church, and avoid any new administrative initiatives to restore credibility.  Your thoughts?
I think what really needs to happen, if the people (including the priests and deacons) are to have faith in their leaders, a Metropolitan who is completely unimpeachable, and who's character and talents and personality are well known, must be elected.  As I understand it, Fr. Hopko was pushing for Met. Hilarion to be elected back in '08.  Perhaps such a thing wouldn't be a terrible idea.
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
 

Benjamin the Red

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
1,601
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
31
Location
Georgia, United States
Hermogenes said:
JamesRottnek said:
Basil 320 said:
Officially, it's probably unfortunate that the Holy Synod issued the statement today, but now that I've read it, thank God the Synod took the action they took.  It's a sad situation.  Their action seemed to be taken reluctantly and they do not seem to rejoice in it.  Wow was I wrong in doubting the Synod last week, although I thought the reasoning that was being discussed on these internet forums seemed highly unlikely.  The Synod did what it had to do, and I think still tried to maintain some decorum the best they could given the circumstances.

What do others think about this?  Given the "misfeasance, malfeasance, and nonfeasance" enabled for 19 years by the two primates who preceeded Metropolitan Jonah, as set forth in the SIC (Special Investigative Committee) Report ('08), the administrative problems associated with Metropolitan Jonah's primatial service, including his resignation, the manner in which it came about, and the reasons for it, I think the Synod should work toward reestablishing credibility among the priests, deacons, and laity, and take their time electing the new primate (although I think I've seen that the statute calls for an election within 90 days or so).  I imagine there would be a great deal of cynicism--lots of eye rolling ("Oh no, now what?), that would greet a new metropolitan.  Also, because of the distrust, the new metropolitan will have quite a task promoting new initiatives; a qualified hierarch's initial challenges could work against the possibility of the success of his long term primatial service.  Should the Synod secure the concurrence of the Metropolitan Council to delay the election for a year?  Of course, another approach would be, as a new parish priest may often act, for the new primate to preach the message of the Gospels, the salvic message of the church, and avoid any new administrative initiatives to restore credibility.  Your thoughts?
I think what really needs to happen, if the people (including the priests and deacons) are to have faith in their leaders, a Metropolitan who is completely unimpeachable, and who's character and talents and personality are well known, must be elected.  As I understand it, Fr. Hopko was pushing for Met. Hilarion to be elected back in '08.  Perhaps such a thing wouldn't be a terrible idea.
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
You're probably right. The question is, whose problem is that? I'm not so sure anymore...
 

Marc1152

Hoplitarches
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
14,838
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Maryland
Hermogenes said:
JamesRottnek said:
Basil 320 said:
Officially, it's probably unfortunate that the Holy Synod issued the statement today, but now that I've read it, thank God the Synod took the action they took.  It's a sad situation.  Their action seemed to be taken reluctantly and they do not seem to rejoice in it.  Wow was I wrong in doubting the Synod last week, although I thought the reasoning that was being discussed on these internet forums seemed highly unlikely.  The Synod did what it had to do, and I think still tried to maintain some decorum the best they could given the circumstances.

What do others think about this?  Given the "misfeasance, malfeasance, and nonfeasance" enabled for 19 years by the two primates who preceeded Metropolitan Jonah, as set forth in the SIC (Special Investigative Committee) Report ('08), the administrative problems associated with Metropolitan Jonah's primatial service, including his resignation, the manner in which it came about, and the reasons for it, I think the Synod should work toward reestablishing credibility among the priests, deacons, and laity, and take their time electing the new primate (although I think I've seen that the statute calls for an election within 90 days or so).  I imagine there would be a great deal of cynicism--lots of eye rolling ("Oh no, now what?), that would greet a new metropolitan.  Also, because of the distrust, the new metropolitan will have quite a task promoting new initiatives; a qualified hierarch's initial challenges could work against the possibility of the success of his long term primatial service.  Should the Synod secure the concurrence of the Metropolitan Council to delay the election for a year?  Of course, another approach would be, as a new parish priest may often act, for the new primate to preach the message of the Gospels, the salvic message of the church, and avoid any new administrative initiatives to restore credibility.  Your thoughts?
I think what really needs to happen, if the people (including the priests and deacons) are to have faith in their leaders, a Metropolitan who is completely unimpeachable, and who's character and talents and personality are well known, must be elected.  As I understand it, Fr. Hopko was pushing for Met. Hilarion to be elected back in '08.  Perhaps such a thing wouldn't be a terrible idea.
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
Maybe just for a couple years to bring order.

I have spent time with Met. Hilarion. I cant attest to his leadership style, Russian or not, but he is very wise in his personal style.
Sounds like what the doctor has ordered to me.

My Priest was ordained by him at all levels. Just after he was made a Deacon, he was serving the Liturgy with  the Met. He recounts that he did not really know what he was doing and went out from the Altar with the sensor. He walked back and forth, back and forth in front of the Icon Screen until all eyebrows were up and there were a few giggles.

He got back to the Altar when Met Hilarion looked at him and said............. "Perfect"    
 

Cognomen

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
2,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Archdiocese of Baghdad, Kuwait and Dependencies
I don't claim to know the truth in this situation, but these blogists come off as revolting rumor mongers.

I'll be in line when bishops seem to stray from the faith (as we all should), but the derisive tone these folk (or maybe one fellow) take towards the bishops is disconcerting.  

I suppose the taking in of a bunch of disgruntled folk is coming back to roost. These type of reactions make me miss the 90% of my life when I had no affiliation with churches.
 

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
No edit.

I would like to say I have been following alot of blogs on this, from Episcopalians, to Baptists, Roman Catholics, and Anglicans.

They dont denounce the Holy Synod (well...except for one....no not mono...its an Anglican blog) but they say how much he'll be missed and how great a voice he was for American Orthodoxy. His Eminence is loved by alot of folks.

I hope he does get an episcopal assignment because he seemed to be a true asset to our faith.

I am surprised that Stokoe hasnt said too much (except for some Chicago Tribune piece or something)

PP
 

Hermogenes

Elder
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
Maybe just for a couple years to bring order.

I have spent time with Met. Hilarion. I cant attest to his leadership style, Russian or not, but he is very wise in his personal style.
Sounds like what the doctor has ordered to me.

My Priest was ordained by him at all levels. Just after he was made a Deacon, he was serving the Liturgy with  the Met. He recounts that he did not really know what he was doing and went out from the Altar with the sensor. He walked back and forth, back and forth in front of the Icon Screen until all eyebrows were up and there were a few giggles.

He got back to the Altar when Met Hilarion looked at him and said............. "Perfect"    
[/quote]

I didn't mean he was evil. He's extraordinarily kind and cultured. But for example, take a look at his comments a year or so ago to Der Spiegel (German news pub) about the breakdown in discussions between Orthodox and Lutherans. "Brisk" would be about the most generous spin I could put on it. Needlessly blunt and rude would be closer. And it's not a translation issue. The interview was in German, which I speak, being half Viennese. I believe we do not need a bishop given to harsh public comments that offend his audience. And even apart from this, I do not think he will leave Russia. He is being guided to a much different future.
 

PrincessMommy

High Elder
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hermogenes said:
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
Maybe just for a couple years to bring order.

I have spent time with Met. Hilarion. I cant attest to his leadership style, Russian or not, but he is very wise in his personal style.
Sounds like what the doctor has ordered to me.

My Priest was ordained by him at all levels. Just after he was made a Deacon, he was serving the Liturgy with  the Met. He recounts that he did not really know what he was doing and went out from the Altar with the sensor. He walked back and forth, back and forth in front of the Icon Screen until all eyebrows were up and there were a few giggles.

He got back to the Altar when Met Hilarion looked at him and said............. "Perfect"    
I didn't mean he was evil. He's extraordinarily kind and cultured. But for example, take a look at his comments a year or so ago to Der Spiegel (German news pub) about the breakdown in discussions between Orthodox and Lutherans. "Brisk" would be about the most generous spin I could put on it. Needlessly blunt and rude would be closer. And it's not a translation issue. The interview was in German, which I speak, being half Viennese. I believe we do not need a bishop given to harsh public comments that offend his audience. And even apart from this, I do not think he will leave Russia. He is being guided to a much different future.
I think you two are talking about two different Hilarions:

Met. Hilarion of ROCOR and Met. Hilarion Alfeyev.  
 

PrincessMommy

High Elder
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
Points
0
primuspilus said:
No edit.

I would like to say I have been following alot of blogs on this, from Episcopalians, to Baptists, Roman Catholics, and Anglicans.

They dont denounce the Holy Synod (well...except for one....no not mono...its an Anglican blog) but they say how much he'll be missed and how great a voice he was for American Orthodoxy. His Eminence is loved by alot of folks.

I hope he does get an episcopal assignment because he seemed to be a true asset to our faith.

I am surprised that Stokoe hasnt said too much (except for some Chicago Tribune piece or something)

PP
Good grief!  Baptists are talking about this?  I had no idea he was even their radar.
 

Melodist

Archon
Joined
Dec 30, 2009
Messages
2,522
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
primuspilus said:
he seemed to be a true asset to our faith.
I agree. He served well in the positions he was in before being elected Metropolitan. Having admitted his own personal shortcomings as an administrator in the position of metropolitan, regardless of what position he will find himself in when the dust settles, I do honestly hope that he ends up in a position where he will be able to best serve the OCA and Orthodoxy in general in North America.
 

Marc1152

Hoplitarches
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
14,838
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
Maryland
Hermogenes said:
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
Maybe just for a couple years to bring order.

I have spent time with Met. Hilarion. I cant attest to his leadership style, Russian or not, but he is very wise in his personal style.
Sounds like what the doctor has ordered to me.

My Priest was ordained by him at all levels. Just after he was made a Deacon, he was serving the Liturgy with  the Met. He recounts that he did not really know what he was doing and went out from the Altar with the sensor. He walked back and forth, back and forth in front of the Icon Screen until all eyebrows were up and there were a few giggles.

He got back to the Altar when Met Hilarion looked at him and said............. "Perfect"    
I didn't mean he was evil. He's extraordinarily kind and cultured. But for example, take a look at his comments a year or so ago to Der Spiegel (German news pub) about the breakdown in discussions between Orthodox and Lutherans. "Brisk" would be about the most generous spin I could put on it. Needlessly blunt and rude would be closer. And it's not a translation issue. The interview was in German, which I speak, being half Viennese. I believe we do not need a bishop given to harsh public comments that offend his audience. And even apart from this, I do not think he will leave Russia. He is being guided to a much different future.
[/quote]

Are we talking about the same guy? He officially lives in Australia and spends most of his time in New York, Met of Rocor.
 

kijabeboy03

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
1,084
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I think there's been a confusion of Metropolitans Hilarion (Kapral) of New York and the ROCOR and Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Volokolamsk, head of external affairs for the Moscow Patriarchate...

Marc1152 said:
Hermogenes said:
I can see His Emminence is known to you only by name. He would truly bring disaster upon our church. Yes, he is brilliant, devout, and talented. But his very Russian style of leadership would never work here.
Maybe just for a couple years to bring order.

I have spent time with Met. Hilarion. I cant attest to his leadership style, Russian or not, but he is very wise in his personal style.
Sounds like what the doctor has ordered to me.

My Priest was ordained by him at all levels. Just after he was made a Deacon, he was serving the Liturgy with  the Met. He recounts that he did not really know what he was doing and went out from the Altar with the sensor. He walked back and forth, back and forth in front of the Icon Screen until all eyebrows were up and there were a few giggles.

He got back to the Altar when Met Hilarion looked at him and said............. "Perfect"    
I didn't mean he was evil. He's extraordinarily kind and cultured. But for example, take a look at his comments a year or so ago to Der Spiegel (German news pub) about the breakdown in discussions between Orthodox and Lutherans. "Brisk" would be about the most generous spin I could put on it. Needlessly blunt and rude would be closer. And it's not a translation issue. The interview was in German, which I speak, being half Viennese. I believe we do not need a bishop given to harsh public comments that offend his audience. And even apart from this, I do not think he will leave Russia. He is being guided to a much different future.
Are we talking about the same guy? He officially lives in Australia and spends most of his time in New York, Met of Rocor.
[/quote]
 
Top