Thursday, March 30. 2006
A new chapter in the drama begins. I encourage you all to share your thoughts with the Church. Please, take courage, and sign your names.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I've just finished reading Bishop Tikhon's statement to His Beatitude Metropolitan Herman and needless to say, I'm quite disturbed by his attacking attitude.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Bishop Tikhon given an opportunity to voice his concerns at the most recent extraordinary session of the Holy Synod?
What I took out of the reports surfacing from that meeting were that the members of the Holy Synod as a collective whole, were not really interested in listening to the facts presented and therefore conveyed an attitude that they didn't care about the matter, nor was it any longer their responsibility.
Well, you know what, Bishop Tikhon already had his chance to be involved.
As predicted in a previous statement, the office of the Primate has now regained control over the governance of the Church, and that has upset some people. Too bad!
It's about time we have a Metropolitan who is willing to be the type of pro-active leader our Church needs.
I sense so much anger and bitterness in his messages whenever Bishop Tikhon of the Diocese of the West decides to post a comment on anything.
Why is that?
#1 Michael Geeza on 2006-03-30 08:45
Why is Bishop Tikhon angry and bitter? He's frustrated because of what has been going on in the Synod of Bishops and the Met's unilateral decisions. It appears there is only one way to do things - the Metropolitan's way. When one's suggestions, opinions, and view points fall on deaf ears, the result if frustration which turns to anger and bitterness.
How can we entrust OCA finances to the Metropolitan's office? Is this why the mission appeal has fallen 75% short of its goal? Withholding money is the only voice the laity has in dealing with this authoritarian. The ruin of OCA will long live after the Met.
#1.1 Withheld upon request on 2006-03-30 11:07
The appeal has fallen by 75% because people are expressing their dissatisfaction at the lack of action on the accusations. The Metropolitan is giving some sign that he is actually willing to take action and confront the issues. This is a very good first step to restoring the trust that will make people feel comfortable once again entrusting their donations to the OCA central administration.
To attribute the drop to the Metropolitan's action is absurd. The drop is a manifestation of frustration at the prior inaction.
It seems like anything goes as far as His Grace Bishop Tikhon is concerned in bishop criticizing bishop, unless the bishop is in the Mid-West, in which case he should be silent. But should someone take on a protopresbetyr, well that's crossing the line. For someone who has been vocally advocating good order this public endulgance in extreme language and outright mocking of the Metropolitan is quite amazing. "Good order" according to the bishop of the West is a apparently defined as doing what he likes.
Actually it all makes sense. Metr. Herman was selected by the Holy Synod as the status quo candidate in the face of overwhelming (but not early enough expressed) support for an altnernative. And now Metr. Herman has the audacity to actually act against the king-maker and puppet master. Some see that as betrayal, others see that as rising to the office to which he was elected.
(why is Bp. Tikhon's defender above not willing to share a name?)
#1.1.1 Anonymous on 2006-03-30 17:16
Why don't you have the courage to sign your name?
Didn't Bishop Tikhon have an opportunity to voice his concerns and frustrations at the Holy Synod meeting? From the reports given, it is my understanding that he no longer wanted anything to do with the problem. Now since the Chancellor has been let go, he's mad because he nor the rest of the Synod or Metropolitan Council wasn't consulted?
Perhaps if more attention was paid to the facts and finding a resolution to the problem during their all-day meeting rather than bickering amongst his fellow bishops, then maybe Bishop Tikhon wouldn't be so angry or bothered by this.
I'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways!
I'll say it again, he and his fellow bishops had their chance to reach a decision during their meeting and they blew it. Nothing happened.
Because of that, a decision had to be made by the Metropolitan and some people don't care for that decision.
None of this has anything to do with there only being one way to do things . . . . .the Metropolitan's way.
Unfortunately it has everything to do with people crying over spilled milk. They don't like the fact that they've been told what will be done. Well, you know what, that's just too bad.
If he or any of the other bishops for that matter can't accept the fact that we now have a Metropolitan who is a pro-active, strong leader who will make decisions on behalf of the church and for the good of the church, well then, maybe they should consider stepping down and retiring.
The internal bickering must stop now.
#1.1.2 Michael Geeza on 2006-03-31 08:32
When clergy in the Midwest suggested to their Archbishop that their diocese withold funds to Syosset as a means to call for the question "Are the allegations true or are they false?", His Eminence Archbishop JOB said no, being above such manipulative tricks.
Now we see this very disgusting thing being done from the West. Indeed, when a man doesn't get his way, he can make an angry, public, manipulative play, but that doesn't mean he is going about this the right way. That His Grace Bishop TIKHON is angry and bitter is no secret at all. He wouldn't listen when a parish in his diocese made such a move because of their problems, but now he pretends to be on high ground and expects this to accomplish something constructive? Does cutting off funds really edify the Body of Christ?
Let us pray that His Beatitude Metropolitan HERMAN and the rest of the Holy Synod are above such diabolic manipulation. Starving the seminarians and their families, the missionaries and their families and the good, hard-working people of the central administration just because one's buddy was "released from duty" is a most heinous abuse of Christ's flock!
#1.1.3 Anonymous on 2006-03-31 13:34
I strongly suggest that we DO NOT pat any one on the back yet, because ALL of the BISHOPS and the METROPOLITAN have known about this abuse for years.
Let the process, that is in place, work itself, hopefuly to a good conclusion, then we can make necessary changes. I had hoped that this process would had gone back to 1999, or when this abuse started. However this is a starting point.
We should not attack one another on this site and this includes the BISHOP. This site is the only way to get our constructive messages out in the open.
Remember, the OCA is only thirty six years old, and will survive, if WE work to make it whole again.
Let us all remember Bishop Tikhon's modus operandi - the best defense is a good offense. He has mounted a noisy offensive, therefore...
He appears to be implementing the SPEW STRATEGY - if he can spew out enough junk, then he will succeed in wearing out his opponent who will feel compelled to refute the junk and those sitting on the fence will lose interest at trying to sort out the truth from the lies. This all consumes time and energy and gives him more time to divert the scrutiny. We must stand firm... Are the allegations true?
#1.2 Name Withheld by Request on 2006-03-30 16:19
UNDERSTANDING BISHOP TIKHON (FITZGERALD):
1. Point howitzer in random direction.
2. Lock and Load.
#2 Wayne Matthew Syvinski on 2006-03-30 10:33
The Church is a means of Grace for its members and for the world. Without it there is a void that cannot be filled by any alternative.
While I can understand some anger and resentment over the current problems, it is tragic to hear a bishop, or a priest, or a layman call for the withholding of funds to attempt to punish or attempt to reform by force the problems of the Church.
The Church is profoundly more than a few individual personalities that abide within it.
Throughout its long history the Church has been subjected to many abuses and persecutions and it responds in Grace to each situation and grows into greater healing and wholeness from it.
The OCA is not in a hopeless or desparate situation that it cannot cope with it constructively.
It is facing a serious rite of passage in its emerging growth and development since the days of its autocephaly that now has to be constructively addressed.
Personalities and a culture of concealment and secrecy
that those personalities have been living within which has embolded them to invoke discretionary rights and powers which they indiscreetly exercise
without proper oversight and accountability must now be permanently reformed "to protect the Church from further scandal". This will require a spirit of repentance and humility and reconcilliation
and courage to be a truly
The Holy Synod in the end must come to grips with its own collective responsibility
and speak for itself. I am acquainted with most of these men and have some appreciation for how they would like to see the OCA Administration resolve its own problems and do the work it is supposed to be doing so they can get on with the work and responsibiilities they have back within their own dioceses. That is one of the major reasons why Archbishop Herman is the Primate of the OCA is that the Holy Synod had confidence in his competence and hoped he could resolve the problems
that needed to be resolved within the OCA financial Administration. The fact that those problems have not been resolved and have burst into a public scandal
has exposed their unrealistic expectations that one man can change and correct problems created by a culture that has also shaped that same man in his own way of thought and life.
The Metropolitan Council
has a mandated role to represent the All American Council between its brief and infrequent assemblies.
The relationship between the Metropiltan Council and the OCA Administration has to be now carefully reviewed. The Church has to protect itself from a few individual personalities. The Metropolitan Council has to come to a collective recognition that it can no longer continue to assume the legal liability and responsibility for any actions that members of the OCA Administration take within a prevailing culture of concealment and secrecy. Assumed discretionary rights and/or powers taken for granted by members of the OCA Administration have to be identified for what they are and be thoroughly reviewed and reformed "to protect the Church from further scandal" which is the mantra of those personalities who comfortably live within that culture of concealment and secrecy.
The Holy Synod and The Metropolitan Council have to come to terms with their collective responsibilities to clarify, reform, and keep its Administration accountable to them with proper oversight procedures that remove the temptation for individual personalities to indiscreetly exercise some subjectively perceived discretionary rights and powers. The offices of Primate, Chancellor, and Treasurer are way too important to be defined by some individual personalities who are occupying them.
The Church must reclaim without shame its Conciliar heritage and have the vision and courage to carry it out within a spirit of repentance, humility, reconcilliation, and conviction. It is not too late to do this. It is never too late to do this. So, let us start to do this with ourselves within our parishes, deaneries and dioceses which will in turn lead to the reinvigoration of the Metropoiltan Council and the Holy Synod and the OCA Administration itself.
In Christ the Victor!
#3 A unworthy churchman from the OCA on 2006-03-30 12:48
"The Metropolitan Council has to come to a collective recognition that it can no longer continue to assume the legal liability and responsibility for any actions that members of the OCA Administration take within a prevailing culture of concealment and secrecy."
Are you a member of the Metropolitan Council, and know this for a fact? No statements have been made by theMetropolitan Council publicly, and it's not wise to assume the intentions or hearts of others (for good or bad)...
#3.1 a former parishioner on 2006-03-31 04:49
Thank you, "unworthy churchman" for your calm, clear, and right-spirited post. I appreciate it.
#3.2 Macrina Lewis on 2006-03-31 10:56
Bishop Tikon appears to be doing plenty of talking, letter writing, and website reading. When does he find the time to attend to his diocesan duties?
#4 Anonymous on 2006-03-30 17:23
Clearly either Bishop Tikhon is deranged or so outrageously off the ecclesiastical deep end that he should be deposed forthwith! An embarrassment to the Church, not to mention himself.
#5 Kenneth R. Tobin on 2006-03-30 18:16
Mark, please include links! I have no idea what this new chapter is unless you include a link to whatever event you are referencing. I gather my Bishop has fired another round, but would be delighted if you linked to it, so I could read it for myself before reading everybody else's opinion. Thanks!
#6 Scott Walker on 2006-03-30 19:31
I support Bishop Tikhon in what he has done in our diocese. I was very dismayed to see the dismissal letter Metropolitan Herman wrote to Protopresbyter Rodian published in The New York Times. That was totally inappropriate. This website is totally inappropriate. Bringing Church problems to the attention of the World will solve nothing.
#7 Olympiada Kane on 2006-03-30 22:44
Finally, someone who see's this website as I do.
To those of you who wanted transparency, you got it now. An entire diocese has made it clear that they're dues will become transparent.
It's fine for people to air their frustration and anger on this website and point it at Syosset. But now, a Bishop stands up and speaks his mind for what he believes in and he becomes arch enemy #2.
Finally, for those of you wanting answers to the question "Are the allegations true or false?" I have a question for you, "Why hide behind, anonymous, former parishoner, an unworthy churchman, what are YOU afraid of?"
#7.1 Michael Livosky on 2006-03-31 20:46
As one of the annonymous contributors to whom you refer, I will share several of my reasons for choosing to remain annonymous, at least for the time being.
Among my reasons is a desire to keep the dialog focused on the issues and not on personalities, including mine. The powers that be within the OCA are adept at using misinformation, disinformation, half-truths and innuendo to neutralize those who, like me, have tried to call attention to these accountability deficiencies in the past and have been deftly silenced as a result.
My family and I have moved on with our lives, including our Church lives. I hope you can appreciate that we are still interested in a healthy OCA, but have no interest in being sucked back in to the pain and suffering experienced at the hands of this "culture of concealment." There is no dialog in that culture.
With the emergence of ocanews.org I commend you and others for identifying yourselves. I believe that my decision not to identify myself at the present time is a more constructive service to this God-sent dialog. I would ask that you suspend judgement since you have not walked that mile in my shoes.
#7.1.1 Name Withheld by Request on 2006-04-02 17:14
If it weren't for the efforts of many to reveal irregularities in finances for many many years, our donations may have continued to be misused and at the very least misclassified. If my family and my parish are going to make a donation we need to be clear as to its purpose.
If you believe that there is not a finance issue then please send your donations direct to Syoset bypassing your local diocesan office.
....but coming back to this web site, it brings news to many faithful in the Church. I can't disagree with you that this site will not solve the problems. However, people have become empowered by this site to make changes and for that I applaud the website!
#7.2 Anon in NY on 2006-03-31 21:12
If this website is inappropriate in your eyes, why do you read it and respond to it??
#7.3 PUZZLED on 2006-04-01 10:03
You wrote: "Bringing Church problems to the attention of the World will solve nothing."
Are you saying that you'd prefer that the the abuse that occurred in the Roman Catholic Church not be made available to the public? What makes the problems of the Orthodox Church any different??
How does ignorance solve problems?
#7.4 Heather Price on 2006-04-05 10:12
I would like to read Bishop Tikhon's entire letter to be able to judge for myself what his point was.
I applaud Bishop Tikhon for taking a stand for somehting he strongly believes in. It just goes to show that there is a person with "behind the scenes" information that is not sold on what Metropolitan Herman is selling!
#8 Demetrius Economus on 2006-03-31 18:28
I respectfully beg to differ with you. Bishop Tikhon should not be applauded for his actions. He is an embarassment to the Church, his Diocese and to the entire Episcopacy!
Quite frankly, a written request asking for his resignation should be sent to him via Federal Express this very evening.
To embarass the Metropolitan the way he did in a public forum is a gross lack of good judgement and a classic case of insubordination.
What would happen to you or I if we spoke to our bosses in that manner or embarassed them the way he did?
We would both be fired.
Bishop Tikhon had an opportunity to accomplish something positive at the recent Holy Synod meeting. He did NOTHING! Shame on him and shame on anyone in his Diocese that supports his ridiculous, vindictive and embarassing behavior.
#8.1 Michael Geeza on 2006-03-31 20:28
"Bosses" ? "Insubordination" ? , I always thought Herman was "1st among equals".............
#8.1.1 Bill Osolinsky on 2006-04-02 05:32
I feel that these people who defend Tikhon of the West do not understand how much suffering he has caused in the West. We have suffered first hand from his lack of leadership skills. We have found that Tikhon seems to live in the Russia of the 19th Century.
#9 A Priest in the West on 2006-03-31 21:24
I have seen +Tikhon's rantings on other web sites and have been embarassed by his actions, words and apparent lack of active ministry...
There is a standard that shephards of the church need to follow and here in America there is in my mind an even higher standard. The OCA is in serious trouble right now, they will be suffering from this for many years -- what could have been averted with modern management and proactive actions -- as presenlty taught in our colleges apparently was not in the hierarchy's quiver of talents. The Byzantine route was taken and all was swept under the carpet -- don't they realize that all these audits prove nothing because they do not answer the fundamental question? (Do) they perhaps have the answer to and are afraid to face the facts ? The facts will not go away and the probe will not be complete until all is our in the open, and that which could have been discretely handled becomes national news -- and all of our self righteous -- 'we are the first church, the only church' is out the window with the Protestant liberals laughing, as they accept out youth into their churches.
perhap's this points out the fact that here in america we need to choose our hierarchs not only on the basis of how well the can sing the liturgy but whether or not they the have a harvard mba.
we continue operating in byzantine ways and byzantine things happen, including our youth going elsewhere
God help us all, but perhaps the best thing to do is to completely clean house at the oca - bishops, chancery staff etc and start with a fresh team -- one that can not only attend to the spiritual but ones that can also lead and manage -- otherwise I fear much more will be lost.
#10 rjklancko on 2006-03-31 21:29
As I said before, the Holy Synod must eventually come to terms with their own collective responsibility and they must speak for themselves in a spirit of consensus and unity.
The Holy Synod did act in a very responsible way by choosing Metropolitan Herman as their Primate. Met. Herman has a strong background in Business Administration and has served many years on the Pension Board which is in very good financial health and he has a long track record of administration of St. Tikhon's Monastery and Seminary as well as the Eastern Pennsylvania Diocese. That is why the Holy Synod put their confidence in him as their Primate. They figured, quite rightly, if anyone could resolve the problems of the OCA financial administration he would be the one who could do it based on his experience.
However, there has been for a long time a prevailing culture of concealment and secrecy in the way the OCA Administration does its business. For those of us who have had contact with Archbishop Herman over the years, it is well known that he has strong personal convictions about keeping administrative matters concealed from public scrutiny and will not disclose any more information that is absolutely necessary unless he has no other alternative. This has been and continues to be his approach, like it or not.
The Holy Synod unrealistically put all of its eggs in one basket by placing all their confidence in one man expecting him to be some kind of white knight that would save the day and help the Church dodge a public scandal. This has not worked out the way that they had hoped it would work out and now individual members of the Holy Synod are upset about it.
In the end, the Holy Synod must come to terms with its collective reponsibility and reach a consensus as to what they are now going to do. They truly need our prayers and moral support to do the right thing in the best interests of the Church.
In Christ the Victor!
#10.1 A unworthy churchman from the OCA on 2006-04-01 14:01
Your third paragraph has me in a quandry. When you start with"however" this is what got the OCA in trouble. This concealment of information, that you talk about, will lead into the same situation that the OCA is in at the present time.
You also stated that, the METROPOLITAN, has a good business background and I applaud him for that. But a good business man would not hire an outside firm, without consulting with people within the OCA, that are lawyers, CPA's and MBA's. I have read many responses, and we have a great number of people willing to help us out of this dilemma. A one man show will not succed!
With respect and humility I must say that His Grace Bishop Tikhon cannot have it both ways, he cannot call for the removal of His Eminence Archbishop Job for publicly disagreeing with the Holy Synod in public comments and then withhold his Eparchy assessment when he does not get his own way and even publicly mock the Metropolitan. To say that it was a disgrace that the Chancellor was dismissed is too assume that the Chancellor is a power unto himself, when in fact a Chancellor is only a servant of the Metropolitan and the church. A master has the right to dismiss his servants at any time, and most especially for disobedience and noncompliance. Bishop Tikhon called for obedience when it was convenient for him, now he has gone to the extreme. He has greater loyalty to a Chancellor who has been tainted than to the greater good of the Church. I kneel before your Bishop and kiss his right hand, but I find his words both full of hatred and cause for embarrassment to the Episcopal throne he occupies. Though he is a very clever man, his letters and Internet posts rarely come from the perspective of the good shepherd, or even the loving discipline of a strict father, but rather a clever man using his verbose letters to make others feel inferior and beneath him. Forgive me, but this Bishop who attacked people on this website and others for voicing concerns and asking for an open discussion, has now withheld vital funds from the central administration. I am sure I read him post on three or so occasions that any individual parishioner that diverted their normal giving during this crisis to other areas of the church were in error, is he not also bound by his own advice? I do not wish to criticize a Bishop, but I have difficulty calling out Axios to this Bishop who is more concerned with clever writing and well worded insults, than recognizing that a good servant is always glad to step down for his master, and that Father Rodion had no divine right to serve as Chancellor for the rest of his life. I admire loyalty, it is far better to have 100 friends than 100 rubles. But why is it that a Bishop has more loyalty to a Protopresbyter than to his Brother Bishop and a Senior Heirarch? In many ways this all but proves the point that Chancellor Rodion had too much power and influence, and was a threat to the stability of the church. You say above that this website is a disgrace, but this website could have called for a boycott as Bishop Tikhon has now done, but most on this website have resisted that call. I cannot say that I agree with everything on this website, but I can say that His Grace Bishop Tikhon is now willing to be disobedient, to publicly mock, and to act in a disorderly fashion when he does not get his own way. He has forced me an Orthodox Man, to have to raise my voice against his actions. However, his dogged loyalty to a disgraced chancellor who acted more as a master of this church rather than a servant, reinforces many of the allegations of impropriety. No Bishop should be so eager to kiss the feet of a Protopresbyter. Yes, a Master should kneel before his own servants and pay them honor, but His Grace Bishop Tikhon has confused his divine office with the temporary office and service of a Chancellor. I would submit to all that there must be a renewed effort for the OCA to establish new monasteries in order for us to have a legitimate and large pool of candidates, that are true monastics, and not simply unmarried white clergy, to fill the Episcopal thrones of America. We must all pray for monastics, and more, establish a national campaign to recruit monastics, fund monastery's, and encourage the strengthening of our Holy Synod. Forgive me for these words that I say against Bishop Tikhon's position. I can only say that Bishop Tikhon called for the removal of Archbishop Job for less than he has now done, does he hold himself to a different standard of conduct?
#11 Ivan Shabalin on 2006-04-02 07:15
we must remember a few important facts -- the metropolitan is not a good manager nor a good administrator -- his meager -- yes meager business experience is shown by his wanting to keep information concealed and by not acting quickly and decisively --- he does not have real world business experience and does not exhibit a basic understanding of the principles we teach in management school. but he is a bishop because of his spirituality and his ability to sing the liturgy -- this is a known fact about most clergy -- and this is why we get into problems especially here in america. we cannot continue many of the byzantine traditions of the old country and operate in american business and society - and even if we do and do not do it right we get caught -- look at what happened to the ptl club and jim and tammy-- as shown by this situation at the oca, a situation that could have easily been resolved, has mushroomed and perhaps to the point of a criminal investigation by the authorities in light of possible "fraud" -- if this occurs, and if bishops and cleerg are implicated, it will really be a black eye for all of us -- but just think what our young educated business faithful are thinking and what choices they may choose to make -- those who we need the most may leave us for other denominations rather than endure the humiliation -- and all of this because egos and tradition stand in the way of the ethical --- i am greatly concerned about this -- i am concerned for the oca, i am concerned for our youth, and i am concerned about the image of orthodoxy here in the usa -- in my mind these happenings do not bode well -- may God bless us all --
#12 rjklancko on 2006-04-03 19:21
I think this is just Bishop Tikhon's way of staying with his prior position.
Bishop Tikhon's prior position is that the administration can do no wrong, did no wrong, and that any investigation, or even transparency is wrong. He is forgetting that an investigation by the government that would void the OCA as a charity, that would subject its leaders to prison, and the loss of the people's faith in leadership (not Christ, but men), etc, is/are far more serious than spending 10-30k on an audit each year (if that's what it'd cost). I'd guess one bequest to the OCA that is lost each year to trust is worth 10k or more. The costs should be the least of Tikhon's worries. I truly believe he is only trying to protect himself, to say "I was right". I've seen this in business, where a leader goes to such lengths to protect himself that he becomes lost, ineffective, foolish even.
Unfortunately, his prior position is extremely flawed. If the OCA was transparent financially, none of this would be happening, there would be no question. If the OCA power structure was different, if someone did something wrong with the money, they'd never be able to stay. The flaw in the power structure is multifold, one part of it is that the Metropolitan had to take the action, not that he could. A healthy organization would not hesitate to take necessary action, but I'm guessing the Met Council is just too powerless with Kondratick on. In 1999, the auditor recommended an organization chart. The OCA has a fine website, but no org chart. If Kondratick did anything wrong, who decides to fire him? A committee that he is a member of? That's rather absurd, don't you think? If things that were supposed to happen in 1999 didn't, does the entire Holy Synod need to be fired? Who would do that? Tikhon?
I am finding Tikhon mostly entertaining, he certainly can't be taken seriously. He is saying, we'll pay you next month cuz we don't like you this month because we were right in our prior position, but after we talk, we'll start paying again. I don't think it is even a strong enough statement to acknowledge loudly and I pray that Metropolitan Herman take no action, stop the soap opera. In fact, if I were wearing his shoes, I wouldn't even speak to Bishop Tikhon on the matter. I might go further and refuse to give Tikhon the floor at the next meeting because he didn't earn his place at the table, so to speak, but that's eye for an eye, which is what Tikhon is doing, and that needs to stop somewhere. If I were Metropolitan Herman, I'd probably first ask Tikhon if he was still a member, just to make him think about it, then I'd let him speak.
I wish I could have put it as well as Ivan S. His approach was far more toned down and much gentler. My bottom line is that Tikhon is working way to hard to justify his prior position. He needs to back away from the typewriter, cuz its kinda like Comedy Central.
For those of you that are angry at Tikhon, try to forgive his actions, it is an easy thing to do and the right time for it.
For those of you that support Tikhon's actions, ask yourself one question: What will the impact of his request mean in 10 years? in 5 years? in 1 year? in 2 months? I'll answer for you. This action by the Diocese of the West is not impactful, not supportive, and not even revolutionary. It is a nonaction that has one design, to support a prior position that is no longer supported..
Pray that Metropolitan Herman take the high road towards a transparent financial structure, an effective power structure, an org chart, regular 3rd party financial audits, repealing the 1999 discretionary fund language, terminating leaders and management that stand in the way of audit, open trust....
#13 Dan Fall on 2006-04-03 20:14
I became Orthodox, in part, because of Bishop Tikhon's letters on the DOW website. And I was amazed by the quality of the priests in the two DOW parishes I visted while trying to decide about converting. I've been Orthodox for three years now. I've never met Bishop Tikhon, though I love him. And like everyone else in the DOW I pray for him daily. I am so sorry for him now. Obviously, something is very wrong with him. I don't know if it is old age or the enemy or what. But it is very very sad. I hope his brothers in the episcopate will have mercy on him, over look his horrible words, and help him.
#14 Matthew on 2006-04-04 21:08
The author does not allow comments to this entry