Saturday, December 1. 2007
More turmoil in Syosset. Why doesn't the OCA announce such things itself? Have things really changed? Your comments welcome.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Best wishes to Paul and Wendy. I hope they are doing well despite all the ........
#1 Fr. George Washburn on 2007-12-01 11:43
Yes, it must be very difficult for them. I sincerely hope this does not cause a crisis of faith for Paul & Wendy.
I am sure Paul Bodnar accepted the position with the desire to serve the Church. How terrible an ending for him
I am glad he is getting a settlement of $60,000 if that is true.
He will need it to tide him over until his next job.
But this is no way for a Church to treat her children. Where is the accountability in compassion as well as finances?
#1.1 anonymous on 2007-12-06 21:18
Was he even given a chance to perform his duties? All these expectations. Will Bodnar sue? What are his legal rights?
What about Fr. Jarmus? Has there been an employee evaluation yet? Is he a good enough yes man?
#2 Anonymous on 2007-12-01 15:40
Paul Bodnar's dismissal was not abrupt, and he wasn't so much fired as deemed indigestible: our OCA's current central administration had not anticipated anything like Mr Bodnar's INS troubles, which should have been identified and disposed of early on by our 'reorganization staff' and the Met. Council who recommended that the Holy Synod hire him.
But we have here nothing but a long string of incompetents who haven't the slightest idea of how to do what their responsibilities to the Church require of them. The 'blind leading the blind', literally. Blind and stupid reorganizers, councillors, and bishops, blind and stupid one and all except for as few as had the gumption to examine Mr Bodnar's situation, make sense of it, and at least vote to postpone his appointment.
Our problem is that Met. Herman has always exercised his suffocatingly controlling style in micromanaging everything in his real or imagined purview. He delegates NOTHING, but requires everyone to 'get back to' him before they make a move. Consider the 'near death experience' of the eparchy of Eastern Pennsylvania. Maybe Bp Tikhon of Philadelphia can help revive those poor people and their parishes, but not unless and until he gets out of MetH's shadow and rejects his mentor's pernicious influence.
Compulsive, defensive, paranoid micromanaging doesn't work in our OCA's church-wide concerns, but MetH doesn't know this; he CAN'T know this. His madness excludes any self-examination which might suggest the very possibility that he might be incompetent to do all he thinks he's empowered to do, and that's a whole lot more than the canonical tradition of the Church allows any bishop, even the first hierarch. That is, of course, unless that first hierarch is the Roman pope or someone with similar aspirations to 'universal jurisdiction'. MetH has given ample evidence that he shares just such papal aspirations, so here we are.
In our current situation, because of MetH's craziness, there is nobody organizing or co-ordinating the efforts of the principal officers of the OCA. They are trying their best to work and co-operate in a 'power vacuum'. They can't constructively consult each other and unify their efforts since they have no chairman but MetH, who even when he's present isn't all there, and he's mostly not present.
Even our current chancellor, Fr Alexander Garklavs, who's a good man being asked to play the fool at MetH's direction, has no authority to co-ordinate the efforts of the other three officers, but he ought to. He finds this very frustrating, and MetH yells at him for trying. FrAG probably won't be in the Chancellor's office much longer, since I know that he has a conscience which will kick in sooner or later, and MetH does not.
Perhaps acknowledging the screwed-up unworkability of this 'power vacuum', Mr Bodnar thought he might help pull it all together from his angle as Secretary. That, of course, was completely contrary to MetH's 'divide and rule' strategy, so now Mr Bodnar is out on his ear.
It is impossible for our OCA to begin healing unless and until MetH is out of office. And when that happens, I hope he'll be held accountable for all his destructive selfishness and abuse of authority in the Church.
#3 Monk James on 2007-12-01 18:23
Wow! The first time I can actually agree with Monk James...kind of scares me! The fact remains until we remove MH and everyone connected with this outrage, the OCA will surely hemorrhage to death. Thanks Mark for reminding me that good things are worth fighting for. It's far too easy to shake your head at all the craziness and stupidity we've seen and walk away. Come on people...if this noble endeavor called the OCA means anything to anyone, we need to take up some righteous anger and try everything we can to create some change. Lord have mercy on us sinners!
#3.1 Andrew A. Lukashonak on 2007-12-01 21:32
Amen, amen, amen!
You are so right, Andrew--it's just a little bit scary when I find myself actually agreeing with Monk James, but there it is: this once, at least, I think he's got it right.
#3.1.1 Sdn Henry Shirley--St herman of Alask Chapel, West Bend, WI on 2007-12-03 08:32
Why dont you people give it up! you have no power! you disstort the truth! you call people the devil! are you sure your "ORTHODOX"? By the way, the author of this website who endorses this type of behavior! name calling etc! what's the name of the seminary he attended? St Vlads? Is this what they teach at st. Vlads? Does Fr. Hopko endorse this website?I notice why no one comments any more? This is nothing more than gossip! I can get news like this out on the street! Please let the bishops solve this problem! what ever it is!
#3.1.2 Anonymous on 2007-12-04 09:50
Dear Friend in Christ,
This is the definition of "name-calling" from the Random House dictionary: "the use of abusive names to belittle or humiliate another person in an argument, political campaign, etc."
If the editor of this website edited all "name-calling" posts, I wouldn't be responding to yours right now. Please pray with me for the people that are so hurt and discouraged that they resort to angry comments. One thing I know from experience is that the most ineffectual way of calming an upset person down is to dismiss their thoughts and feelings. The most effective way, of course, is to listen and to love.
Peace to you.
#126.96.36.199 Jodie Captein on 2007-12-04 14:29
The point I was trying to make is that the author of this website reviews everyones comments! when someone calls the met the devil ! that bothers me! and it should bother the author but it doesnt! he and alot of other people endorse these hateful comments! Most priest that use to write on this website have quite! they dont want to be part of this gossip website! get my point! instead of calling the Met the devil! why doesnt the author ask people to pray for the met! or is it that the author is a nobody and has no back bone! it appears he is fueled by hatred!
#188.8.131.52.1 Anonymous on 2007-12-05 00:05
I, for one, am grateful to the author of this website for his obvious love for our church and his meticulously careful editing of news items and comments. Mark has been doing what amounts to an unpaid, full-time job for over 2 years now. He has shown remarkable integrity and restraint in the face of rock-throwing by a few posters here. Most of the clergy and laity would still be in the dark were it not for his efforts. I pray daily that God will continue to bless him for his selfless work.
#184.108.40.206.1.1 Lifetime Orthodox on 2007-12-05 08:44
Forgive me for pursuing this. I'm only hoping that good will come out of it, and no way do I mean to "humiliate or belittle" you. If your point is that you are offended that someone (other than the "author" of this website) called the Metropolitan the devil, I get your point. That is, indeed, bothersome! I agree with you; it seems like a terribly hurtful thing to say. I will pray for +MH and the person that was so upset that they used such strong words. However, the intent of this section of this website is to allow people like you and me to share what's on their minds and hearts. We can't blame the author of this site for what others say. The point I was trying to make was that it seems to me you are fighting evil with evil. Both your emails contain an onslaught of outrageous and hurtful statements against the author. How does that make you different than the person that called the Met the devil? Rarely have I seen a post that I thought was fueled by hatred, but when I read your comments, I thought, wow, he or she sure seems to be fueled by hatred. Is that what you wanted me to learn from you? Although not an easy task, our Lord commanded us to fight evil with good. Your devotion to Orthodoxy is commendable, yet even though it is hard to take in right now, everyone who comments here (including the author) is just as devoted. Let's be at peace, and by all means, remind us to pray. I won't comment again, because I don't want to provoke or upset you further.
Grace and peace and love to you!
#220.127.116.11.1.2 Jodie Captein on 2007-12-05 15:22
Anonymous, if the bishops had been on the ball years ago, there wouldn't be a problem now. It is their abdication of responsibility that has brought us to where we are today. It is optimistic to the point of folly to assume that they will suddenly do what they have been so resolutely avoiding ever since Protodeacon Wheeler was first compelled to go public with his allegations. (BTW, arm waving is not argument, and will not persuade anybody, although it is always amusing to behold an online meltdown.) "You have no power!" It isn't about power, my friend. It is about honesty, or the lack of same from those who hold power.
#18.104.22.168 Scott Walker on 2007-12-04 18:14
Mr. P Why can't you just sign your name?
Please tell the Good Orthodox People that they are liars and thieves and the Devil to their faces. Please exploit yourself and tell them that your family has been Met. Herman's right hand men for over 30 years now, and that you have to protect them at all costs.
Please ask Mt Herman where the collection went to when my children saved there money, washed dishes, did the laundry and shoveled the driveways of neighbors to collect money for the children of beslan, please they have the right to know, when they stood so proudly at the altar with their stockings open... Please tell me where did the money go?
#22.214.171.124 Anonymous on 2007-12-05 08:44
Dear Ken! Does it bother you so much that I know the Met!??? Are you saying I stole the money? Are you saying the Met stole the money? Doen't God Know who took the money? DO YOU AND OTHERS CARE ONLY ABOUT MONEY? THIS WEBSITE IN CASE YOU DONT KNOW IS DESTROYING THE SPIRIT OF THE CHURCH! DO YOU CARE ABOUT THAT KEN? OR IS IT ONLY ABOUT PERSONAL ATTACTS ON WHO EVER? AND DONT FORGET TO STONE THAT PERSON WHO TOOK THAT MONEY WNEN YOU FIND HIM!! WOULD THAT MAKE YOU, AND OTHERS HAPPY? Sorry Ken I dont care about money or who took it. I think the answer to this problem, is that you and me and others need to pray that the holy spirit will guide the leaders of our church! prayer is the solution! your brother in christ
#126.96.36.199.1 Anonymous on 2007-12-06 05:14
I’m sorry for the quick response I provided while running out the door. I read it this morning and it did not address your issues. My response was to defend myself and I’m not sure you’re even talking to me. In the grand scheme of things, I am nothing and I am certainly unworthy of your attention if it is truly aimed at me.
I tried to quickly review the recent comments and I did not see anyone calling MH the devil. Yes, there are negative comments; there are bizarre and rude comments; there certainly could be such a comment, but I didn’t see it. I certainly don’t see anyone (except you) calling for “a stoning”. A Stoning? Why do you say that? Quite the opposite, I have seen people calling for resignation, restitution and repentance. I do see people who are extremely upset, disheartened and disturbed. This is a blog, a section for comments, and I see people venting their frustration, but again, other than your comments, I don’t see anyone calling for a "stoning".
It is somewhat ironic that you bring violence to the blog. I started a response back in Sept/Oct, but never finished it. I certainly don't condone violence, but my draft comments related to our Lord’s reaction to the money changers and those that defiled the House of God. To the best of my knowledge the event at the courtyard of the temple is the only time that Our Lord responded with some form of “violence”, (I believe that this event is recorded in all four Gospels). Strange how He told Peter to lay down his sword when they came to arrest him in the garden, but when it came to defiling the House of God, Jesus did not use only words to respond.
Dear friend, I have to tell you that I pray for you. I feel sorry for you and for your obvious anger. For me, I have moved on. Your OCA is not my OCA. Your Orthodoxy is not my Orthodoxy. I doubt that many of those who envisioned the OCA since the early 20th century could stomach what they see today. Personally, many might say that the Orthodoxy that I learned was not orthodox. While the Priest who helped lead me from darkness to Orthodoxy was with the “uncannonical” Ukrainians, it was his continued efforts in performing the “Matthew 25 work of our Lord” that led me to Orthodoxy. Perhaps mine is a very flawed view of Orthodoxy, but coming to the aid of those in need will always be a personal mantra.
My friend, if you chose to write a check for the $6 million or so dollars, I’m sure many will thank you. Yes, I certainly have commented on the whereabouts and restoration of missing funds. However, I’m afraid that money is definitely not the problem. If it were simply money, audits would not have been denied 10 years ago, or more recently the investigation by the 1st Special Commission would have continued unimpeded. No, as I’ve mentioned before, the Financial Scandal just helped to expose a deeper scandal within the OCA, a Moral Scandal. With little information available to me, I find that the financial numbers are fairly easy to track, and as you have offered, the dollars can be repaid. However, it is the moral crisis that is the true root cause of the problem. If the immorality is not corrected, guess what, your $6 million check will again quickly disappear.
Just one more short comment – I gave MH & company the benefit of the doubt for at least 8 months back in 2006. The action from the top to correct the OCA woes has been plagued, suspect and often irrational. Why would you retire the Chancellor and send him far away to sunny Florida? Where is Our Proskur Rose report? What happened to the first Investigation Commission? Paul Sidebottom? Paul Bodnar? ….. What the heck is going on??? Where’s the leadership???
Let me contrast that with a situation at work (we too have our problems and struggle daily). We heard rumors of an incident in one of our offices about a year ago. Within a few days, a small team was sent in to investigate what was happening. Without going into details, within 2 weeks, the Office Manager, Sales and 3 others were removed, a seemingly devastating blow to a small satellite office. Was there any hope left after the major housecleaning? You bet! It certainly was not easy and required significant investment, with resources being dispatched from other offices to try and stabilize the situation and recover. These folks put in many long days, nights and weeks re-tooling and re-training the office, however, the true key was the response and dedication from the remaining employees in that office. It’s those folks who responded and pulled together to make that office more successful than it ever has been. Strange, the remaining employees included relatives of those who had been removed. Difficult yes, but sometimes you have to put family aside to clearly see the truth. Tough love, yes, but truthful love is not always easy.
Praying for you and a peaceful Nativity,
#188.8.131.52.1.1 Ken Kozak on 2007-12-07 13:39
Dear kEN: Does it bother you so much that I know met Herman. Did he or I steal the money? NO KEN WE DID NOT! MONEY! MONEY ! MONEY ! God knows who took the money Ken! Please Ken when you find out who took the money please make sure you and this website stone that person to death! As for myself Ken I will pray that God will have mercy on that person or compassion on him! THIS WEBSITE HAS DESTROYED THE SPIRIT OF THE CHURCH....... AND SOME PEOPLE DONT CARE!!! THEY CARE ABOUT MONEY.... AND THAT IS SO SAD! .....iF YOU THINK i STOLE THE MONEY KEN PLEASE JUST INFORM ME HOW MUCH, AND I WILL REPAY YOU kEN! WITH LOVE IN CHRIST.
(Editor's note: Calm down. One cannot "destroy" the Holy Spirit. If a spirit is being destroyed, it is the spirit of delusion.)
#184.108.40.206.2 Anonymous on 2007-12-06 08:21
Good grief. Stop shouting at us. It's not about the money. It's not about Archbishop Job making a power grab. It is about lies from people who should be truthful. It is about a bishop in Alaska who mistakenly picked up the Tsar's job description and ran with it. And, most unfortunately, it is about people who prefer living in a Potemkin village and shrieking abuse to actually growing up and facing a real set of problems. How you can vent rage and hatred throughout your screeds and then close with a pious "With love in Christ" is beyond me, but maybe you learned it from the former bishop of the West. God forbid that any inquirer into Orthodoxy should happen to read what you have written, and think that it somehow represents the "spirit of the church".
#220.127.116.11.2.1 Scott Walker on 2007-12-06 12:32
Sorry to both anonymous posters, if you are referring to me (Ken Kozak), I have not posted on this "Evil" site since roughly mid-October. Truthfully, I have not had enough time to read all the articles and certainly not all the comments.
Yes, with what appears to be increasing chaos in the OCA, I have many comments in my head, but no time to compose. I also see little reason to waste time writting my thoughts, when there is no corrective action at the top of the OCA, but rather as I note, continued chaos and perhaps destruction.
Please be assured that when I post, I sign my name. You will find some short comments on the Orthodox Forum (a site where you must identify yourself).
PS. My lack of posting is definitely not related to having clergy members at St. Elia print out snips of my postings(and postings of other members of the parish) and keep them behind the altar. (I now understand why many continue to remain anonymous). I hope to soon have a break in the action and time to compile my thoughts again. Rest assured, when it comes to defending the children of Beslan, the 9/11 victims, Bibles & stockings for Russia, charities, orphans, widows....., I wont back down to intimidation of my writtings or a continual questioning and audit of my Financial records as Treasurer of the parish! (Yes, my financial numbers were right on!)
PSS. Did the OCA really accepted an award for their "generous" 9/11 donation? Is this for donating $85,000 of perhaps $275,000 donated, and then making the donation 6 years late? Is that the "1 dollar for you; 1, 2 dollars for me" counting strategy from cartoons"?
#18.104.22.168.2.2 Ken Kozak on 2007-12-06 15:50
Why do these people contiue to lie? I don't understand why the MC was told all is okay, he's really not getting paid. My gosh, if he is not getting paid, why are they afraid of litigation? If he did not have a salary contact as do all OCA full time staffers, why are they afraid. I hate to say it, but lies, lies and more lies will only lead to more trouble and more lawyers on the scene. I think we would be better off with a more seasoned leader. This one needs to go! He has real problem telling the truth.
#3.2 MP on 2007-12-03 10:12
What nationality is Paul Bodnar? Here's a different take. Non-Americans in an American environment often do not understand our American give-and-take culture fundamentally. They tend to want to be too authoritarian for our taste; thus ultimately behaving in disruptive ways. Then again, that fits right into the Syosset authoritarian, head in the sand, culture. Perhaps those at Syosset did not like getting a taste of their own medicine. One can only speculate since we are sure to get only spin. The Bible says, let your yes be yes and your no be no (Matthew 5:37). Wouldn't a little Biblical behavior be a refreshing change from this crowd of wafflers and obfuscators?
#3.2.1 Anon. on 2007-12-03 17:00
"Why doesn't the OCA announce such things itself? Have things really changed? Your comments welcome. "
Maybe because Fr. Andrew Jarmus is a good friend of the Bodnars and he needs to time to get over the shock. Nevermind writing a"neutral" press release.
Too bad about buying the house, but then the Bodnars used to have their own Real Estate agency in Canada.
In any event, this is not the way for a Church to treat her emplyees.
#4 Lida Kowalyk on 2007-12-01 18:48
This recent fiasco with Paul Bodnar does not bode well with me that the OCA is really getting it right. Why in the world try to "hire" someone before their immigration status has cleared? Did this not put the OCA in a very awkward position, to then "loan" him money, so that he could support his family, to only let him go, and now he doesn't have a job either. Wonderful. This just does not sound like good management folks.
I am not sure about what this "irritation" stuff is all about. If he was going beyond his job description, is there not a way to tell a person, and work with that person, and suffer with that person, at least just a bit, just a while, particularly since he was just hired, coming from a long distance, before the proverbial axe is lowered, before firing him first? Did Sysosset even have a job description for the secretary? Also, it sounds as if this Paul Bodnar is a talented fellow.
It sounds as if how the OCA "hired" Paul Bodnar and then "fired" Paul Bodnar is not the professional, or even charitable, way to go about things.
#5 Patty Schellbach on 2007-12-01 19:49
greetings in the love of Christ- could anyone provide some infomation on the new chancellor, Fr. Garklavs, just curious about his positions on the current crisis, if anyone has any insight, thanks
#6 john on 2007-12-02 11:16
Here is his first letter to the Church, from the OCA web site.
#6.1 Michael Strelka on 2007-12-04 09:03
My only opinion is that it must be disappointing for all.
I don't see how this has any correlation to the financial collapse of the OCA and I find anyone trying to draw parallels working the issue far too hard.
It would be important to hear from Mr. Bodnar himself, though, because of the fact the administration has such a credibility problem with all of us visavie its employees that blow a whistle. That would be Dn. Wheeler and Sidebottom, to name two. And that is the only concern I would express.
It would be important to hear from the OCA as well.
Just my two cents worth...
#7 Daniel E. Fall on 2007-12-02 20:09
In a latest OCA news story... "and identified over 20 additional persons as potential interviewee subjects." Here's my question: Why the HELL weren't these 20 people discovered earlier when Proskuer Rose was investigating?????!!!!!!!!!!! What did the OCA pay for??? You mean to tell me that the original special investigative committee "forgot" to interview these individuals??? This is looking like a cover-up more and more.
#8 Anonymous on 2007-12-03 18:17
There is going to be no attempt at finding the truth with this new Special Committee when the ONE person that can shed the most light WILL NOT be interviewed. That's right, Bishop Benjamin has no intention to interview Kondratick. Why?
#8.1 One of the Twenty on 2007-12-04 17:17
They want to close the case and name a villian. The rest skate.
Herman will say whatever it takes to get through a situation and then move on to the next party in South Canaan.
#8.1.1 MP on 2007-12-05 12:35
They have parties in South Canaan?
#22.214.171.124 anonymous on 2007-12-05 20:28
The Special Commission hardly "forgot" to interview these 20 individuals and others. When the Commission met face-to-face for the first time in Parma, Ohio in January 2007, hours were spent assembling a list of approximately three dozen witnesses who needed to be interviewed for a proper investigation. (It would not be appropriate for me to reveal those names at this time.)
Who would do the interviews, and when, were also discussed, as well as the order in which some of the witnesses would be approached, from a tactical standpoint. It was a detailed, professional, workable plan of investigation that likely would have produced a final report on this whole mess by October or November of this year, an agreed goal of the Special Commission, which recognized early on that it was imperative to report the truth to the whole Church without further delay.
As has been publicly reported elsewhere and confirmed by several other former members of the Special Commission in their written post mortems of what went wrong, within a day of the Parma meeting, the investigative plan was shot to pieces by leaks and by the Metropolitan's subsequent insistence that the Commission had no authority to do anything but review and regurgitate the limited efforts of Proskauer Rose, and by continued attempts at interference by others outside the Commission.
The resulting written report presented to the Metropolitan Council and the Holy Synod in March --- the same report that has not yet been publicly released by the Church --- was therefore merely an extremely limited interim report, putting into writing only whatever information and documents Proskauer decided to release to the Commission.
My very rough guess would be that these materials covered maybe 20-30% of what should have been covered in a proper investigation. So those who expect that the release of the 10-page (plus 3 pages of end-notes) March report will help end this scandal, answering most questions and instantly restoring trust, will be sorely disappointed. The ten-page report included a detailed restatement of Deacon Wheeler's allegations, a summary of the scandal at the beginning and the end, and a page or two of resolutions that were presented for action at the March MC meeting. Disclosure of factual findings from the documents turned over by Proskauer covered no more than 3 of the 10 pages, as I recall.
The bottom line: there is virtually nothing in the Preliminary Report from last March that has not already been publicly revealed, including information contained within the unauthorized posting of a summary of that Preliminary Report on the OCA website in October, a summary that was removed within hours (but was captured and published on OCANews.)
The members of the original Commission, once threatened and blocked in their investigation, decided to offer an interim report in March, and then seek authorization by the MC and Holy Synod to complete the investigation "without interference from anyone outside the Commission." This authority was granted by the MC and the Holy Synod in March 2007, but I was immediately removed from the Commission by the Metropolitan, and the Commission was stonewalled and mothballed.
Again, at the June MC meeting, the MC unanimously approved a decision that the Commission should restart its investigation "unimpeded" by anyone outside the members of the Commission, but the Commission was again blocked, as has been widely reported and commented on elsewhere. The resignations of Archbishop Job, Fathers Berzonsky and Reeves, and myself followed.
Now, as to your second question, as to why Proskauer Rose didn't interview the 20 or more witnesses identified by the new investigating committee, or the three dozen listed by the Special Commission --- remembering that it has been publicly reported that Proskauer interviewed only eight witnesses in their work that consumed in excess of a quarter of a million dollars --- gee, I just am reluctant to speculate. It is, after all, repeatedly insisted by the Metropolitan and others that Proskauer was working for the entire OCA and not for any individuals.
I guess you'll have to examine what is now known and draw your own conclusions.
#8.2 Gregg Nescott on 2007-12-06 10:01
Thanks for posting this important summary and much needed clarification of what happened with and to the Special Commission for daring to ethically, fairly, and responsibly try to investigate the facts and find out the truth. It is quite clear just what has happened (and keeps happening) to those who dared to stand up for truth, ethics, righteousness and accountabilty and who are selflessly and courageously trying to help the OCA and the faithful. It is also quite clear who keep fighting against full disclosure, accountability, ethics, and real change and repentance, and doing everything possible to twist reality to their own subjective opinions, bury the evidence, block any objective investigation, and blame and attack all messengers for daring to ask questions and demand the truth.
The latest development just shows that the Syosset Administration is in serious trouble. The assessments that are being kept in escrow would be sent to Syosset if the Metropolitan would just be open, honest and truthful. I still don't understand how a bishop of a city, or region can get away from not living within the same region as his flock. Just how cananocial is that? I believe the AAC has its work cut out for them. No one on this website has brought up the issue of another assessment which is being levied upon parishes to fund the AAC in November.
#9 cshinn on 2007-12-04 09:00
RE:Your reference to the next AAC.
Can someone please address the legalities of parishes (and dioceses) withholding assessments. When it comes time to issue credentials for the AAC will these entities be seated as delegates? Or will they be refused entrance and therefore not be represented in what possibly may be known as the AAC that almost took place.
Perhaps we have to look beyond the present and protect the voting rights of the Church, and by doing so, be able to start to make a change with a clear cut agenda and a clean sweep (perhaps an industrial strength shop vac would be more appropriate)
#9.1 Tina Rhodes on 2007-12-08 09:08
Section 4 - Requirements for Representation at the All-American Council
Every parish which has remitted all established assessments determined by previous All- American Councils for the support of the Church is entitled to elect delegates. The assessment must be paid in full by July 1st of the year in which an All-American Council occurs in order to have lay representation.
The Statute says nothing about Dioceses. It only addresses whether individual parishes have remitted their assessments, and then only regarding lay delegates. So, in the case of the Diocese of the Midwest, the parishes are continuing to send their assessments to the Diocese, as is required. They are being held in escrow by the Diocese. The parishes have met the statutory requirement for their lay delegates.
#9.1.1 A priest of the Midwest on 2007-12-08 20:00
The author does not allow comments to this entry