Syosset Strikes Back

Diocese of the West?

Who is running that circus in Syosset ? Kucynda and his ideas are killing the church. When MH fired RSK , did he realize that over half of the donations came from RSK's friends. Business's can't survive without money.
Kucynda when people don't like or trust a company , they won't give a dollar. The midwest is brilliant , don't back down to that power hungary tyrant HERMAN !!!

"[+Job] seems to be hurting the church not helping her."

I have to admit I really can't believe anyone who is not personally involved in the crimes could believe any such thing at this point. But, you do; and not doubt there are some others. Waddaya gonna do?

For those who are so intently focused on the immediate pain to the "OCA" (not to be confused with "the Church"), remember that just like doing a geometry problem, and just like being lost in the mountains, when you've gone wrong, when you've off on the wrong and ultimately fatal path, the only way to get right again is to go back; and in geometry, as in climbing mountains, going back can "seem" both painful and fatal --- until, that is, you've reached the point where you can put right your mistake and this time hit the mark. We have other and greater evidence also that this is often the rule of the universe in which we live: the treatment of injury or illness; the death of a seed before it becomes a full grown plant; and, as the greatest example of this ironic rule, remember the Incarnation and Crucifixion both preceded the Resurrection and the Ascension.

Yes, it may pain the OCA (again, not to be confused with "the Church") for a large diocese to withhold its funds; but don't be confused by this seeming hurt --- its only pain, which, like medical treatment, often hurts us worse initially than the injury or illness ever did; but it is the only thing that will make us whole again.

Note also, perhaps, your most fundamental flaw: the Midwest has declared that it will see to it that funds are distributed to those to whom have need --- these monies are NOT the property of Syossett. Rather, in an exercise of rather gross inefficieny (not unlike our American income tax system), monies which go to Syosett are (in theory) sent there to be conglomerated at a central administration and from there allocated out to worthy causes benefitting all the dioceses, all the parishes, and the OCA's American mission. The argument would be that this ultimately leads to the broadest, most golobal fairness, efficiency and effectiveness ... but we have seen that it does not.

This money is the Lord's, and its proper use is in the most faithful stewardship of it as measured by a standard that looks at whom is it helping. And, as we can see from the gross misuse, as well as the theft, of funds, monies going to Syosett are not helping worthy causes. (Also: given Herman's lawyer-like salary and CEO-like perqusistes, he is not exactly one of the needy.) You may say that the worthy missions and programs the OCA supports are now needy due to the Midwet's witholding, that they are not getting the support they need to continue. Well, they weren't before, either! Moreover, they were often merely the cover story, the facade, for the graft that the cassocked crooks were perpetrating. Each diocese can better care for its own, than the OCA can for those in all the dioceses ... keeping it closer to home makes as much sense with regard to efficiency as it does with with regard to community and the pastoral nature of the Church (not to be confused with the OCA).

Remember the omophorion is supposed to represent the needy sheep being carried caringly by its shepherd; but here the omphoroin as worn by Herman seems to represent nothing more that wounded or dead sheep that have suffered at the hands of the shepherd, being carried merely to get them out of the way so he doesnt trip over them as he plods forward, or perhaps to hand them over to his cook (one of those CEO perqs???) to prepare his next meal of minced lamb stew.

So, yes, it may seem to some who look only at the immediate effect of witholding that the mountainous route back is too painful; but step back and view it from the perspective of the mountain itself (better, from the perspective of the cartographer). Doing so will result in the unavoidable conclusion that sending money to the OCA's central administration furthers what amounts to no less than organized crime (and/or its cover up) being masterminded at OCA headquarters. [O]rganized [C]rime in [A]merica --- it is into this that wolves in sheeps clothing (remember the omophorion) have turned the Orthodox Church in America, and since money is the blood of any criminal enterprise, it must be withheld.

It is only this that will make us whole again, and it is only from the vantage point of having been made whole that the pain of the remedy can be comprehensible.

"It is not our job to worry about where the money goes."

I can't imagine saying something too much more wrong than that. Its plain horse hockey. We simply may not delegate our duty to act in wisdom to anyone else --- even a hierarch. Thats NOT what being an Orthodox hierarch is about.

Even if we all accepted your pass-the-buck understanding of a hierarchical church, we'd have to recall that +Job is a hierarch! What? Does Herman "outrank" him or something? Non habemus papam!

P.S. Conciliarity does NOT = congregationalism.

Repeating your point doesnt make it any more reason-based. It simply further entrenches you in willful blindness.

Olympiada,

You joined a church which is neither hierarchical nor congregational. The Orthodox Church is conciliar.

The basic unit of church government is the council. When it functions properly, hierarchs, clergy and laity all have a role to play in governing the church. These councils have generated a large body of canon law over the centuries.

There have been various attempts to subvert the conciliar traditions of our church and make it hierarchical over the centuries. One such attempt resulted in the schism of 1054 and the establishment of the Roman Catholic Church. Some of us think that another attempt to subvert the church is happening right now.

If the system works the way it is supposed to, those responsible for the theft of $5.7 million will be deposed and punished at the AAC in Pittsburgh next year.

What planet have you been on for the last several years? The intransigence of Herman is the central problem. Yes, he still has "fight" in him - that is his only tactic - no repentance, no love, no confession, no leadership - just lies, manipulations, and "fight".

"Misleading statements under oath" has another name, Father. Its called perjury; in the Church we call it lying. When its done to induce another to take some action to that person's detriment (esp re the giving of money) and knowing that such person has reason to rely on the statement (or ommission), its called fraud; in the Church we call it theft. When the fraud and perjury are done knowing that the money received from the third person will not be used for the organization to whom it is given, but for the personal benefit of individuals, its call accomplice liability to embezzlement; in the Churhc we call it deceit. When the phone lines or Internet are used in the process, its call the Federal Wire Fraud Statute; when the US mails are used, its called the Federal Mail Fraud Statute. When there's an agreement between or among two or more people to do any of these, its called conspiracy.

When there's a pattern (2 related acts committed within 10 years on one another) of racketeering activity (e.g., wire fraud, mail fraud, obstruction of State or local law enforcement, retaliating against a witness or victim or informant), its called a R.I.C.O violation.

When the underlying crimes for a RICO violation are present, the government need not prove the defendant agreed with every other conspirator, knew all the other conspirators or had full knowledge of all details of the conspiracy. Delano, 825 F. Supp. at 542. All that must be shown is: (1) the defendant agreed to commit the substantive racketeering offense through agreeing to participate in two racketeering acts; (2) he knew the general status of the conspiracy; and (3) he knew the conspiracy extended beyond his individual role. United States v. Rastelli, 870 F. 2d 822, 828 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 982, 110 S. Ct. 515, 107 L. Ed. 2d 516 (1989).

In the Church we call it a whole heap o' trouble.