Tuesday, July 8. 2008
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
#1 Guileless on 2008-07-08 18:55
Archbishop Job has his faults as a leader, which he has demonstrated on several occasions during this interminable crisis in the OCA. But whatever his failings, his essential integrity always shows forth, and no less so than in this latest communication.
May God grant him many years!
#2 Kenneth R. Tobin on 2008-07-08 19:18
"....you are speaking plainly, and using no figure of speech, (Jn 16:29)" when you say dear bishop, "the crisis and scandal is not merely about financial accountability, it has to do with our very identity and life as Church," you are speaking with a prophetic voice.
The time has come for all good people to share what is in their hearts. We have heard from the Metropolitan who believes he has opened himself to us. We have heard from Archbishop JOB who has offered another vision inviting us to speak our minds without fear of earthly reprisal.
We have a choice. Fear God, by all means, but not other men. The scriptures gush forth with this truth, "fear not Zacarias,... fear not Mary, ...fear not Paul,... fear not daughter of Zion." Indeed, "there is no fear in love, for perfect love cast out fear.
(I Jn 4:18)"
I love my wife. I love my children and grandchildren. I love my Church. I love my retirement. It is time all of us to return to love. It is time to stop the fear, it is time take a stand. "I will not fear. What can man do to me? (Ps 118:6)"
What is in my heart is to say enough is enough. The time has come, we need a new beginning. We ask the Metropolitan to put aside any fear and enter into the joy of retirement.
#3 V. Rev. Thaddeus Wojcik on 2008-07-08 19:53
Thank you for your thoughtful words Fr. Ted ! As past dean of the Minneapolis Deanery and a true leader, I urge you to ask your fellow priests to consider holding an open forum for all to discuss the critical issues facing the OCA prior to the AAC. This is all the more critical since it appears that there are no Town Hall meetings planned for Minnesota-Wisconsin. As in any family, if sin and pain are not brought out in the open and addressed in the light of Christ, then there is little hope for understanding and reconciliation.
#3.1 Rdr Rick Wagner on 2008-07-09 21:24
As much as I love and support Archbishop Job I find it next to impossible these days to muster even the slightest hope of any real change. Frankly, I've had enough. The thought of standing at the AAC in November amidst the "vaudeville of klobuks," as Fr. Schmemann once called it, turns my stomach.
Forgive me, Vladyka, for my weakness of faith and pray for me that I may preserve what little I have left.
Thank you, Fr. Robert. After reading the Archibishop's letter I was left with such feelings of hoplessness but I couldn't quite put those feelings into words. You have hit the nail on the head and I agree with you. Archbishop apparently is respected by a lot of people, including the reaches beyond his diocese. I think that's why I found his words so disturbing. I just feel the OCA has failed and it's time to admit that. It's time to reunite ourselves with the mother church. Maybe at a later time, probably not during this generation, we can make another attempt at establishing an Orthodox Church in America.
#4.1 anon on 2008-07-09 12:11
Perhaps you misunderstand me. I have no desire to rejoin "Mother Church" as you put it. Why on earth would we abandon one fetid cesspool of corruption only to jump into an ocean's of it?!
Russia promises no solution to our problems of being a truly Orthodox Church in America, only an imposed "russophilia" mired in an utter helplessness to do anything about it.
The Church in Russia has just as many problems, scandals and pitfalls as the Church in America (if not more so) that size and distance belie. The same is true of most, if not all, of the Old World Churches. The grass is not necessarily greener overseas, so rather than stare at the horizon, we'd do better to set our own house in order. The Church everywhere will always face scandal and trouble, for the devil is working against it. To hope for some sort of ecclesial utopia is spiritually unrealistic and futile.
#4.1.2 Gregory Orloff on 2008-07-10 15:48
BOY OH BOY! DOES BISHOP JOB HAVE YOU SNOW BALLED! MORE GOSSIP! NO FACTS! NOTHING NEW! WHEN IS BISHOP JOB RETIRING? I HOPE ITS SOON! I HEAR HE'S A LONER! AND A PRANKSTER! AMONG HIS FELLOW BISHOPS? am i correct? he is the one suppying gossip to this website! as some one once said he's the bum thats destroying the church! I THINK THAT PERSON IS ON THE MONEY!
#22.214.171.124 Anonymous on 2008-07-11 16:05
Apparently the FBI is snowballed too as they continue their lengthy and expensive investigation of the Central Administration, RSK, the Metropolitans Theodosius and Herman and all the others involved in this mob.
These guys generally don't throw huge amounts of the taxpayers money into unsubstantiated charges. At this point, you might want to open your eyes and see that the one snowballed is you.
The Church cannot be destroyed, All Caps Anonymous Guy. (And please accept my congratulations on having made an attempt at using the shift key; could spelling, punctuation and rational thought be next? One can only hope.) Why is it that I can't help but think that the only person referring to the Archbishop as "...the bum thats (sic) destroying the church..." is none other than YOU, All Caps Anonymous Guy? Stay classy.
#126.96.36.199.2 Scott Walker on 2008-07-12 15:42
Congratulations on having been "snowballed" by Archie (see post below).
On a more serious point, thank you for referring to the Orthodox Church in___ (fill in the blank), and not the Russian Orthodox, Greek, Serbian, etc. Ours is supposed to be a universal church operating throughout the world to bring all mankind (and all of creation) to salvation and redemption. To profane our faith by assigning it ethnic identity is heretical, and those who do so deliberately are not practicing Christianity. Check the Creed and see that we are One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church--nothing else.
#188.8.131.52 Kenneth R. Tobin on 2008-07-12 09:35
Archbp. Job is clearly a man of conscience and good will, but it is beyond ridiculous to believe that anything of note will occur at the AAC. Let me take that back, the one thing of note will be that even at this late stage men and women of good will and intention can see what is happening without taking realistic steps to effect change.
We observe, we are disgusted, we complain, we seek the truth of what has happened but in the end we are essentially in the same place we were three years ago we just know more about it.
If Job had a conscience, he would have followed through with one of his resignations. He has done it on many occasions. when the going gets rough, he out of here. When he and his diocese set benchmarks, he wrote the check. He is a man who cannot stand up to any adversity - but then, who among the synod can? Nathaniel is running out of town, Dmitri caved in, Job has been running away from the truth for years, Tikhon cannot get Herman out of the house he should be living in, Nikon is clueless, Benjamin is going to write the report that Herman needs to justify all of HIS wants and wastes and Seraphim is just as bad as Herman, you think he is sincere, but lies like a rug. So you see, it's a very sad state. These men have their faults but remember, they are men. Not one of them has emulated any charity, love or compassion. It's just been a witchhunt!
#4.2.1 MP on 2008-07-12 05:55
I understand your point about the Synod members, but though +Job's resolve sometimes fails him at critical moments, he alone among the bishops has mustered enough gumption to help bring the issues we discuss to a head.
We could wish for more but we have what we have. +Job has a conscience and has demonstrated it often. His actions have not had the hard-edged resolve you demand and I would like to see, but neither have they been depraved and heartless.
His sensibilities shame the rest of the Synod in comparison. He admits his weaknesses, asks forgiveness and repents. He stands in the midst of the fray while I am only a an outside commentator. For me this is painful but essentially risk free. He does not comment without risk of reprisal. If I knew him personally I'm sure I'd be proud to call him a friend. He's undoubtedly a better man then I.
P.S. +Job doesn't hesitate to identify himself when he writes. It's hard to give credulity to statements made anonymously that attack the veracity and bravery of others. Who are you?
As I have mentioned previously on this website, +Archbishop Job not only has a modus operandi of conciliarity, he is also the lone bishop courageous enough to speak the truth, specifically the whole truth! His vote of "no confidence" in +Herman is akin to the man who told all the denial-ridden people around him that the emperor had no clothes on. I know that he personally would like to retire in a few years. However, I believe that he is our last, best hope for pulling ourselves out of this quagmire, and this latest archpastoral letter just confirms that!!
#5 David Barrett on 2008-07-08 20:22
The archbishop clearly hinted in his letter, as he has on other times, that he has an insight and knowledge of what has happened in order for him to make statements about what this scandal says about our identity.
Vladyka, time to spill it. Hasn't the time come?
#5.1 Anonymous on 2008-07-09 10:38
His criticisms of the new Liturgical translations well taken.However when the liturgical writers Chrysostom,Basil the Great to mention two,wrote in their instructions that certain prayers are to be read quietly,thats whet they meant...and not out loud for all to hear.The celebrant is directing those prayers to God on behalf of the people.It is a type of dialogue between the celebrant and God as it was between Moses and God (on the Mount).I am not and never was in favor of prayers being read out loud when the rubrics declare otherwise.Kyr (Lord) is used in the Greek Church and Carpatho Russian Church. I agree with with his other criticisms especially not being proof-read.Also,O Lord save the God-fearing is changed to...save the pious.Pious who??? Pious is an adjective.Blagochestivia does mean pious,devout,etc. Could have been written as ...God-fearing pious faithful,as one example....
#5.2 Retired Archpriest on 2008-07-09 17:45
God-fearing is an adjective, too. But maybe I should have written that "quietly."
#5.2.1 Anonymous on 2008-07-10 03:39
Church Tradition is only meaningful when it is living. Liturgical tradition is no exception. Otherwise, tradition ossifies and becomes dead form. Just my two cents...
#5.2.2 Inga Leonova on 2008-07-10 10:27
Dear Fr.: check the original Greek. Maybe the correct translation should be "pious."
btw, the latest version of the Divine Liturgy book has also changed the wording to: "...for this holy temple..." I am told that the word in Greek is indeed "house", which they should have left it as.
#5.2.3 Michael Strelka on 2008-07-10 10:33
With all due respect to the retired archpriest, it's naive and theologically and historically indefensible to believe that Saint John Chrysostom and Saint Basil the Great wrote all of the rubrics into their versions of the Divine Liturgies, as those services continued to evolved long after their lifetimes. Furthermore, historical documentation such as Saint Justinian the Emperor's novellas (written long after the two holy fathers' lives) reveals the so-called "secret prayers" were originally read aloud, and reading them "secretly" was in fact the innovation.
#5.2.4 Anonymous on 2008-07-10 15:53
Just as many priests and bishops supported the so-called "Orthodox" practice of laymen ONLY receiving Holy Communion twice a year (Christmas & Easter) which was thought to be "correct practice," IT WAS WRONG. Furthermore, St. Tikhon's promoted this as the true Orthodox practice. Well, in this case also, silent prayers are not really Orthodox in any manner. They are a wrong practice which crept in, probably via Rome, and now people want to keep a bad practice. Silent prayers were probably instituted to make the Liturgy quicker. Many priests don't even read what is referred to as silent. Reading all the prayers aloud assure everyone that the prayers are being read.
#5.2.5 Anonymous on 2008-07-13 08:33
I was a St.Tikhon's Seminarian in the 70's and NOT ONE OCA Cleric who taught there ever said that recieving the Eucharist twice a year was the norm.Not Arcbishop Kiprian,not the future Metropolitan Herman,in fact, only one priest,a Greek Archdiocese priest at that,expressed the opinion the for a seminarian,receiving communion once a month was sufficient.The Archbishop DID say that one should prepare properly,perhaps others who were seminarians at this time recall this?
#184.108.40.206 Anonymous on 2008-07-14 17:06
Several years ago after a Pan-Orthodox Bible Study I taught, I met an elderly Orthodox man who told me that he failed to see any difference between the Church's understanding of the Eucharist and the "memorial supper" celebrated at his daughter-in-law's Protestant congregation. His frustration was chiefly over this: Why couldn't he take communion in that church since it all sounded to him pretty much the same? Citing the Divine Liturgy as a guide, I recited the words of the "secret prayers" of the anaphora and the epiclesis to him. To my amazement, he had never even heard those words before in his parish! Moreover, a priest never taught or preached about it as far as he could remember.
That is precisely why I pray those prayers aloud... and so far God doesn't seem to mind the eavesdroppers.
How blessed we are to have a true shepherd among the wolves. Unlike other members of the OCA's synod of bishops, Archbishop Job continues to reflect the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth. Many years Vladika!
#6 Marc Trolinger on 2008-07-08 20:28
After reading Bishop Job's letter, I re-read Dcn. Eric Wheeler's "A Call for Accountability" (on this website, in "Documents"). Dcn. Eric summary of the crimes committed should be required reading for every member of the OCA, especially for any member taking on a position of leadership and responsibility in the future. This wanton abuse of power and authority should never be allowed again. And anyone, I mean anyone, who knew about these events, and remained silent, should either (1) confess and repent immediately, or (2) resign their positions of reponsibility and authority immediately. If you are a priest, deacon, or bishop. So be it. If you will not resign, then you need to be fired immediately. This cleansing is a must if the OCA is to have any hope of restoring any semblance of integrity going forward. Lord have mercy.
#7 Anon. on 2008-07-08 21:17
It appears that in spite of all of the talk and meetings that the Bishops have a real problem if "Having left the Spring Session of the Synod early (due to the consecration of Christ the Savior Church at the Chancery and my stubbornness in insisting on driving as usual to New York) I was saddened and greatly disappointed when I read that after my departure the hierarchs issued a statement of support for the Metropolitan's leadership and they expressed gratitude for his
perseverance." was done.
As one person expressed on the Orthodox Forum: "An unbelievable revelation! The Holy Synod actually voted confidence in +Herman's leadership at the Spring Session after His Eminence left. After all they know, have heard, have seen proven... they do this."
Our Heirarchs have lost our trust and any moral authority in this situation, and show themselves to involved in continuing to cover up and disregard the laity of our Church.
It appears that the only action we as laity have left is to stop all funds and donations to the Church as perhaps then they will listen. It is obvious that the Heirarchs do not care for the Truth of the scandal to be revealed. Perhaps when the funds stop, they will listen, or better yet as Proffessor Meyendorff sugguested, they should all resign, and I would sugguest that they donate their retirement funds to pay off the debts of the church that they have made.
Why have a Sobor in Pittsburgh, when it is apparent that the Holy Synod will only continue the coverup nothing will change, even though we have all these meetings and townhalls.
AXIOS! AXIOS! AXIOS! to Archbishop Job, a true leader and Bishop of the Church.
It is now time for the clergy and the laity of the Church to tell their Bishops: It is now time to for them to retire as they have lost our trust!
#8 Chaplain (MAJ) Nicholas A. Czaruk on 2008-07-08 21:57
I am happy that Job agrees with Paul Meyendorff and all of the bishops need to resign and then reelected or retired. Now we need a parish to sponsor this resolution. Who is willing to do so?
It is clear that NO ONE has confidence in the synod of bishops. They were quick to put the blame on someone else but most of them have been around for many years - Herman, Dmitri, Nathaniel, Seraphim, Job - all have tenure. The alternatives are clear - a new synod OR organizing a movement for parish by parish being accepted to another jurisdiction. Something needs to be done - an NOW!
#8.1 MP on 2008-07-09 07:50
As other posters have pointed out, Abp. Job is not perfect. But we don't need perfect leaders -- we need leaders who are willing to give the best of themselves and to do what is hard and personally unpleasant "for the good of the church."
Forgive me for sharing two half-formed thoughts that may be a bit incoherent ...
A few weeks ago on the Sunday of All Saints, our priest mentioned in his sermon that the vast majority of the saints we commemorate are martyrs. It got me thinking about that single moment when the martyr accepts to become a martyr. We'd all like to think we'd accept martyrdom in that moment, but would we? Would I? Do we accept the trivial trials that our comfortable lives present us with? Are we as a church accepting the trial before us?
We face the test of confronting truth and conforming ourselves to it, but truth comes with a cost -- vulnerability to civil and criminal penalties, embarrassment, loss of stature, giving up of positions of authority and power, the discomfort of being rejected and criticized by long-time friends and colleagues. So what do we do, what do our so-called leaders do? They tell us, with no apology or shame, that it is better [and better for the church!] to dissemble and avoid the truth than to suffer those consequences. At all costs we must be protected individually and corporately from legal liability, from public humiliation.
When we deny truth, we deny Christ. Those liabilities are a form of martyrdom, and our 'leaders' choose to deny Christ and preserve their own skins.
[Well, not their skins because, really, they're not about to be torn asunder by lions, but it's oh so much harder and more difficult to lose status than to die ... and the times are different, and the church is an institution that needs protecting, and what I'm saying is simplistic and naive ... on and on and on the excuses go.]
There's a lot of talk bubbling around in these discussions about 'the vision thing' [cf. Bush 41]. Recapturing, revitalizing and living the vision of the OCA is important, but I find myself wondering more and more whether it isn't a premature distraction. First we need to be honest about where we have been -- and getting that done has become an agonizingly prolonged process. Then we need to take an honest look at where we are. And only then can we figure out where we are, or should be, going.
If at the AAC we can rid ourselves of +MH and consider the SIC report [God grant that it be honest and complete!], maybe that's enough. So much of what has gone wrong in the OCA has been driven by grand plans. Some of those plans were cynical ploys, but even the sincere and good grand plans have led us astray. Perhaps what we really need is to elect a caretaker Metropolitan who is committed to serving only three years.
'Caretaker' cab have a sort of do-nothing, negative connotation, but what I have in mind is not negative at all. I have in mind someone who will, with the assistance and support of good people among the officers and MC and, even, HS, take care of helping us confront the consequences of the past and understand our present, and, in time, begin to think about the future. The few days of the AAC are not adequate to the task.
The examination needs to happen in each parish. We need to fix some very basic things [for example, there is ample evidence that our institutional approach to investigating and disciplining sexual offenders has been all about avoiding corporate liability rather than caring for victims].
Before we can think about what we should be, we need to simply be for a while. Day by day, in our lives and in our parishes, we struggle to be Christians and to be the Church. How refreshing if the central church administration and leadership took a period of time and just concentrated on being what we are rather than trying to become something.
I know that we've had reorganization and task forces and transition officers and that for some it seems like we should be ready to move on ... but an honest look at where we are, as Abp. Job provides in this letter, shows we're nowhere close to being ready to move on. And that's okay. After a major injury, you need a period of rehabilitation, and trying to run before you're ready just leads to greater, even irreparable, harm.
#9 Rebecca Matovic on 2008-07-09 05:02
#9.1 Rachel Andreyev on 2008-07-09 16:36
This says it all!
Met. Herman MUST resign! Those supporting him MUST resign. It's time to change the guard.
#10 Anonymous on 2008-07-09 07:46
I have developed great pessimism regarding the remediation of this scandal (and ensuing episcopal malfunction) - but Archbishop Job's letter provides great hope.
If there is at least one member of the Synod who can speak truth to power without fear of retribution, perhaps he can reach out to other bishops and appeal to the goodness within them. Perhaps he can inspire them. Perhaps he can become the laos' sponsor, championing the cause of reform (or rather, return... return to the way Christ's Holy Church should operate.)
I have skepticism (like, whatever happened to Midwest diocesan withholding?) but I take heart. Now it seems that there is the possibility that at the upcoming AAC, alongside Archbishop Job, we can finally throw a monkey wrench into Metropolitan Herman's decidedly evil plans.
#11 Rdr. Nilus Klingel on 2008-07-09 08:03
Thanks be to God. Many laity, and many priests, have spoken out . Now we have one of the Holy Synod adding his voice.
It should not have had to be this way. Those consecrated to be our leaders should have done the leading. But there is still time to change direction before the AAC.
Please, dear hierarchs-- join together in conciliarity and persuade your brother bishop, Met. Herman, to retire, for his own good and for the good of the OCA.
If you are reading this site, listening to the town halls, and reading whatever other correspondence comes your way from the faithful and clergy, you know that this is necessary for us to make any progress.
#12 Mat. Donna Farley on 2008-07-09 09:53
It's sad that Archbishop Job was forced into such a situation to go so far as to be treatened into seriously considering retirement as a way to avoid scandal. It just makes me wonder, is this a Holy Synod or a political body? How many of them really care about us parishioners, and how many just care about money and power?
#13 Anonymous on 2008-07-09 11:30
To be fair, Archbishop Job has submitted his retirement at least three times while he has been a bishop. Once while he was the Bishop of Hartford years before any of the financial scandals hit the Church. The Archbishop has a pattern of such emotional "highs and lows" but having said that, he had no other choice but to call his brothers on the carpet and let them know that if he was there (Nikolai too, for that matter) he, they, would have not been in favor of such a pandering statement.
And also please note that Archbishop Nathaniel (of the soon to be former ROEA of the OCA) was the chief panderist. What a nice parting gift for Herman to get a vote of confidence from the man who has been Herman's henchman recently, all within the time line of Nathaniel executing his exit plan. Makes perfect sense doesn't it that Nathaniel does not want the Synod to get in the way of him becoming a Metropolitan in the new Romanian presence in the USA.A fireall is a firewall is a firewall! It really does want to make you puke.
The last person to know that Herman has to go will be Herman. It would be best if he got the message at the Joint Meeting of the HS and the MC in September. It would be best if his brothers would finally say in public what they are saying in private, that Herman must retire. But at least Job has articulated what others don't have the courage to say.
Can one more bishop come forward and be the Hugh Scott to Nixon?
#13.1 A Senior Priest of the OCA on 2008-07-10 07:20
Is it known whether the support for the Met. was unanimous or was it a 51% / 49% or anywhere inbetween? If the vote was a split, do we know how each bishop cast his vote?
(Editor's note: The votes is recorded as unanimous - given that Archbishop Job was not present. The following is taken from the (as-yet) unpublished Minutes of the Synod:
Although His Eminence, Archbishop JOB was absent from the session at this time (he had asked for the blessing to leave early, because of other commitments), the Holy Synod of Bishops affirmed their confidence in the leadership of Metropolitan HERMAN, and thanked him for his perseverance." )
#14 Anonymous on 2008-07-09 15:26
Well, the letter at least explains a portion of Abp. Job's 'weakness', but his letter left me hungry for detail.s [sic]
Who got 2001 compilation reports in 2002 and what did they say? 02? 03? etc..
If the church misused funds as indicated by Tikhon's citation of the 2002 report, why didn't Job just write a letter then? Why didn't he tell all of us restricted funds were being used for operating expenses?
Who needs truth when its already reported? Why did he even bother to ask the question? Was the quest for truth so great that basic facts were overlooked?
The Bishop's words and timelines are as confusing as my misplaced periods.
Perhaps he can explain within 3 years?
Did he not understand the compilation reports or was he trying to take down RSK or what?
#15 Daniel E. Fall on 2008-07-09 18:17
Several commentators have suggested fleeing the OCA for other jurisdictions. In reality what is needed is the final establishment of a truly united Orthodox Church in the Americas. For a sobering and insightful discussion of some of the main issues and hurdles that need to be overcome before a united and consequential Orthodox presence in the Americas is obtained, I would recommend the talk and question and answer session by Met. Philip (AOC) during the recent St. Alban and St. Sergius Symposium at SVOS. The talk is posted on Ancient Faith Radio, http://ancientfaith.com/specials/svs_jan2008/. It is time to begin the dialog on unity again.
#16 Rdr Rick Wagner on 2008-07-09 21:54
Thank you Your Grace,
You have given us faithful cause and encouragement to continue our fight to have a more integral church.
As your letter starts out, I had made similar reference to Jesus spitting out the luke warm water on 6-27-08 on comment #5 on this site. It is a powerful analogy for what appears to be happening within our own OCA. We need effective change. For how can we really progress if the OCA does not assertively seek the changes that are necessary for its great integrity? +Herman continues to want to reign and his "inner circle," except you, appear to be granting him that wish. Your courage appears to be the exception within the Holy Syond with reference to the alleged support for +Herman while you were not physically at that discussion.
Your continual call to lift the OCA up to a better place may be this same courage which will greatly inspire the faithful to insist on effective change at the AAC. As retired +Lazar Puhalo had commented on this site, it is taking a concerted effort, with the faithful being involved too, to place our church where we do not have to have a lukewarm response to Christ's reality. If the Holy Synod of Bishops can only support someone who is past their time, they are continually hearing from the laity at the town halls and through other means, such as the petition, the faithful's continued opinion that +Herman's time is done.
If this request of resignation of +Herman is ignored by the time of the AAC, I doubt it will be a restive or peacefull AAC (but I am not talking about shouting, disrespect or chaos; I am talking about the arduous and difficult grasp for integrity). An upcoming peaceful AAC may just be the sign of lukewarm water that Jesus despised and spit out.
#17 Patty Schellbach on 2008-07-10 06:11
I don't keep an exact count by any means, but it seems to me that this thread may so far be unique for such a high percentage of contributors who have signed real names to their messages. Can that be seen as anything but healthy?
#17.1 Fr. George Washburn on 2008-07-10 10:12
Fathers, brothers and sisters,
I comment here with hope that our Lord will guide my words. I have only contributed a couple of times to OCANews, and I write now because, perhaps unintentionally, Archbp. Job has given voice to the OCA's whimpering end.
We languish because we accept the status quo even though it sickens us. We become less viable daily as a jurisdiction because we fear the results of positive action. We are dieing because we have not simply drawn a line and said: "Stop! We will no longer pay or obey."
To survive we must take the single step that will sweep the floor clean, throw ourselves on the mercy of Christ and seize the opportunity for a new start. The alternative is a slow painful death with little hope for resurrection.
We need to say "no more" and disgorge ourselves of the current tyranny.
We need to identify a bishop (only one is needed) who will hold the fort, guide us as a father and allow us to grow in Christ organizationally from the ground up, not the top down.
The hardest step! We need to prayerfully hammer out a common vision for the future of the OCA. We need to do this despite the fact that we start from wildly differing viewpoints and will be opposed by everything Satan can bring to bear.
We must rebuild prayerfully, physically and fearlessly in the certain and unshakable knowledge that we are the Orthodox Church in America which has faced death and Hell and overcome both with the strength and aid of our Lord.
WE MUST ACT NOW!
Warm regards with hope in Christ,
Did you see the movie "The Deer Hunter." Well, it takes place in one of the coal mining towns near Pittsburgh during the Vietnam war.
The AAC is scheduled to be held in Pittsburgh in November. Isn't that deer hunting season?
#19 Anonymous on 2008-07-10 10:20
Sadly I read: "Having left the Spring Session of the Synod early (due to the consecration of Christ the Savior Church at the Chancery and my stubbornness in insisting on driving as usual to New York) I was saddened and greatly disappointed when I read that after my departure the hierarchs issued a statement of support for the Metropolitan's leadership and they expressed gratitude for his perseverance."
I can only equate their action to the following:
"Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?" He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him. (John 6:70-71)
But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was to betray him), said, "Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?" This he said, not that he cared for the poor but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box he used to take what was put into it. (John 12:4-7)
Judas was a thief and forever remains in that category. The bishops who gave their vote of confidence to +Herman belong in the same category. As Judas was instrumental in destroying the only righteous being in history, so our bishops are instrumental in destroying any faith in the blessed church of our Lord. Without repentance may they enjoy the constant heat of Godís displeasure in eternity. May they also look longingly to Lazarus for relief. Is it worth all this? Is the Metropolitan worth all this?
#20 Very Sad and Dishearted on 2008-07-10 10:24
AXIOS AXIOS AXIOS! Vladyko +JOB
May God grant You even more strength and courage
to lead and rid the Church of evil men. May Dr PAul
Myendorff's proposal be implemented!
#21 Fr Alexander Lukashonok on 2008-07-10 12:03
OK, let us do the math if the Meyendorff plan is implemented.
Benjamin - re-elected
Dmitri - re-elected
Job - re-elected
Tikhon - re-elected
Seraphim - re-elected
Nikon- close but re-elected
Herman - ??? Would his diocese not re-elect him? It really comes down to his own diocese. Would they or not? They have not given any indication up to this point that they have a willingness to turn Herman out. Would be spearhead such a move against Herman? I don't see anyone.
So what really would be accomplished by this effort?
But, do not despair, the Holy Synod has new photos on the OCA website. See, things are changing. What are we worried about?
#21.1 A Senior Priest of the OCA on 2008-07-10 20:06
There is too much going against + Herman. He would be elected to nothing. He should have retired when the 1st investigation came out shown his complicity. If for no other reason, hiding the report and sanitizing it.
#21.1.1 Anonymous on 2008-07-11 08:43
The results you forecast above for the hierarchs other than Metropolitan HERMAN would be the fruit of Dr. Meyendorff's unaltered plan ... but that is not the motion that should be placed before the delegates of the 15th AAC. Each hierarch should face the a vote of no confidence from all of the delegates of the AAC, not just those from his diocese. The reasons each hierarch should face a binding vote of no confidence relates to each hierarch's actions or inactions as a member of the Holy Synod, not as a diocesan bishop. I also advocate that the number of ayes required to return a vote of confidence in a specific hierarch be at least three-quarters of the total delegates registered at the AAC and nine-tenths of the delegates from his diocese; otherwise, the vote is considered one of no confidence and the hierarch must retire upon the completion of the confidence/no confidence voting.
#21.1.2 Mark C. Phinney on 2008-07-15 16:07
I don't think there is a cannonical way to do that Mark ~Jay
After three years of mess, countless written pages and so on, I fear that we couldn't get three quarters of the delegates to agree even on the color of an orange.
#220.127.116.11 Anonymouse on 2008-07-16 19:07
Bishop Job is a man of strength and courage. May he continue to walk in truth as he serves our Holy Orthodox Church
Why is it that our hierarchy continue to constantly cover one another's backside? Are they all up to no good? Do they not fear for the salvation of their own souls??? Do they not know that the truth cannot be buried and that it always resurrects and becomes known?
Over the years I have often wondered why the good Lord was not using the OCA to move Orthodoxy in America. I no longer wonder why. I know why. Why would He. The leadership is apparently contaminated ignoring truth and accepting of abominations. Is that what leadership is all about? One can only conclude that the hierarchy is not any different than those in the secular world who willingly practice, permit and accept unacceptable behavior.
#22 Mary Lapadaat on 2008-07-12 15:57
You are absolutely correct, it's like the presidet of Exxon makes so much money, the profits are so high, who cares that some of the average blue collar workers cannot affort to buy gas to get to work - this is the same ethic that the OCA synod and administration has. It's all about them!
#22.1 MP on 2008-07-13 15:23
Thank God for this letter from Job. I've been out of it for a while, but in reading this very revealing letter, I see an icon.
An icon of Job in the Old Testament
An icon of a suffering servant
An icon of "just another man at God's mercy"
His hope gives me hope.
Eis polla eti, Dhespota! Thank you for sticking with it, hell on earth that it is.
#23 Alex on 2008-07-17 13:56
The author does not allow comments to this entry