www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News questionable ordination in Alaska

5. BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ORDINATION. The hierarchs decided that official "national" legal and psychological background checks will be required of all candidates for ordination. Legal background checks will be required at each level of ordination, for candidates entering The Orthodox Church in America, and for beginning seminary students. The psychological check will be required at the first instance.

Not at all, they're Americans!

I seek to retire from the active episcopate (God-willing) in three years, two months and one week (as of this writing). I am not capable � mentally, physically or spiritually to serve beyond that.

Sadly, this morning in a pastoral letter Archbishop Job announced his intention to retire.


http://midwestdiocese.org/news_080111_1.html

The problems in Alaska go beyond the story in this thread, and have a great deal to do with the bishop there.

January 11, 2008

Theodosius the Great

No. 10


ARCHPASTORAL LETTER



To the Faithful Clergy, Monastics and Laity of the Diocese of the Midwest:


My Beloved in the Lord,


GLORY TO JESUS CHRIST!


On May 31, 2007, I addressed a letter to you titled �A Sorrowful Epistle� for the purpose of good communication, information and our ongoing concern for accountability, regarded by many as being championed by the Diocese of the Midwest. My friends, I could easily title this letter �A Sorrowful Epistle�, as even my recent Nativity message to you, despite the brightness of the Winter Pascha. But it is not my intention for this communication to be a sermon, but rather a clarification regarding the reporting of the recent session of the Holy Synod. As usual, some of the comments and conclusions on the internet have been thoughtful and considerate, others inaccurate and speculative, others amusing and na�ve, others downright nasty and condemnatory.


I have stated several times that it is unlikely that an author of fiction, even the likes of Stephen King on his best day, could pen a story � with plots, sub-plots, colorful and shady characters, schemes, scenarios and plot twists, all characteristic of our on-going crisis in the Orthodox Church in America � that could be deemed credible enough for publication. Our on-going saga is too incredible, yet it goes on and on without any indication of an end.

The main purpose for the specially scheduled meeting was to issue a final ruling on the appeal of the former chancellor regarding his deposition from the priesthood. Of course, there were other items on the agenda, including the �investigation� of the widely-publicized alleged problems in Alaska. There was no report. Near the end of the meeting, a stunned Holy Synod listened to canonical charges raised by the Alaskan bishop accusing me of interfering in his diocese � obviously a most serious accusation. When the reading of the charges concluded, which called for a spiritual court which would lead to my deposition from Holy Orders, Metropolitan HERMAN asked for my response. I stated, �I have nothing to say.� It was only when questions were raised that I offered explanations in self-defense � explanations which I share with you now.

1. In late June or early July of last year, while driving my car I received a call on my cell phone from a priest, an old friend, who stated that he has information of great importance that he felt compelled to share with me as a member of the Holy Synod. In a nutshell, the information involved allegations which, if found to be true, could implicate the Orthodox Church in America, and the Holy Synod and Metropolitan Council in particular, in terms of liability in accordance with Alaskan State law. I stated that I would share the information with the Metropolitan, who, in accordance with the Statute of the OCA, is the only hierarch who can inquire about the life of another diocese. Since I do not possess a �legal mind� and because I could not take notes of our conversation since I was driving, I knew that I could not commit the information to memory. I asked the priest to jot down the main points and any pertinent information so I could give an accurate report to the Metropolitan. To my surprise this resulted in a 25-page document which has also, somehow, been made public.

2. I discussed this potential problem with His Beatitude and a few other hierarchs and we all agreed that a meeting was in order. It was set for July 24, at the Metropolitan�s residence in South Canaan, PA. Only one hierarch that I contacted was unable to attend. The purpose of said meeting was to discuss possible liability, not to discuss the Bishop of Alaska, as reported. No one cautioned me that there might be a canonical violation regarding interference into the life of another diocese. In fact, the priest in charge of investigations, who was present for a portion of the meeting stated that the meeting was a good idea and that we were acting most responsibly, in accordance with guidelines established by the Holy Synod.

3. Following that meeting and the meeting of the Holy Synod on July 31, I began getting calls from Alaska and from persons involved with the various alleged situations and from trustees of St. Herman�s Seminary. I wish to stress that I did not initiate even one conversation. If I received a voice-mail message, I returned the call as a courtesy, that�s all. People complained, they lamented, in some cases even wept. I listened, tried to console and when asked for advice, directed them to the Metropolitan and to the Holy Synod. I was asked in December why I didn�t contact the Bishop of Alaska, and others have speculated about that. I think the answer is obvious � the man, sixteen months earlier, tried to force me to resign from my position as bishop of my diocese and from the Holy Synod. I am sure that he would not welcome any information from me and I was not eager to speak with him.

I unequivocally deny that I interfered in the life of the Diocese of Alaska. At the same time I state vigorously that what has gone on and goes on in Alaska, allegedly and in reality, is damaging to my people of the Diocese of the Midwest, and that is certainly my concern. But I raised this concern in proper canonical order to His Beatitude as Primate of the Church for him to address the issues. This remains my defense.

4. Going back to the December 13th meeting, I explained to the bishops that in my nearly 25 years of episcopal ministry I have never, until that moment, been accused of interference in another diocese. Our Diocese of the Midwest is large and widespread. As any other, we have our share of concerns and difficulties. I don�t need to look for trouble; it finds me easily enough. While I never enjoy problems and trouble, I deal with them. I remain perplexed by the descriptions voiced by one of my brother bishops. Yes, I rely on the wise counsel of my Chancellor and Deans, also some trusted priestly friends. I guess that makes me �presbyterian.� I greatly value the deliberations and integrity of our Diocesan Council and decisions of our annual Assembly. By these I surmise that I value �democracy.� I always look toward the good of the Christian community on all levels: diocesan, deanery and parish. That must render me a �Congregationalist.� I try to listen to everyone; I try to keep an open mind, but always in the light of the Gospel and Holy Tradition. But ultimately, as expressed by President Harry Truman, �The buck stops here.� The final decision is mine and mine alone, and I accept the responsibility for each decision.

5. For about the last six years, especially the last two, interaction with the other bishops of the Synod has been difficult and our relationships strained. Most recently dealing with some in a proper spirit has been impossible. Yet I maintain before God and all of you, that I love them all. But the only occasions that I am at peace is when I commemorate them during Proskomedia. I pray that the same peace will prevail during face-to-face meetings. I have already stated in my �Sorrowful Epistle� that I am greatly offended by the �bishop bashing� frequently witnessed on the internet. But also disturbing are the attempts in various comments to separate me from the others, to seemingly drive a wedge between us. I know that people want to show support for my unworthiness, and their intentions are good, but inadvertently they make life more difficult for me.

6. On some occasions I have been accused of being ambitious and even of being envious of those in �higher places.� For people who know me, these concepts, at least initially, can be most laughable. If I can speak in terms of ambitions, I am pleased to share them with you:

a) I seek to retire from the active episcopate (God-willing) in three years, two months and one week (as of this writing). I am not capable � mentally, physically or spiritually to serve beyond that.

b) I seek to retire as the Archbishop of Chicago and the Midwest.

c) I seek to live out my days in peace and repentance. The following verse from St. Paul is most appealing:

��that you also aspire to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you�� (I Thess. 4:11)


7. It has been revealed on the OCA Website that the Diocese of the Midwest would release OCA assessment monies that have been held in escrow.

During the meeting of the Synod, when I was confronted with the possibility of deposition, two other factors weighed in: withholding and my style of leadership. Having been backed into a corner, figuratively speaking, I was hardly in a position to maintain a hard-line position. I had been giving thought during the session that, given that the deposition was complete but the new Investigative Committee announced that it was systematically continuing with its work and would have a report by March, 2008, perhaps the benchmarks established by our Diocesan Council had been essentially met and, giving the Committee the benefit of a doubt, the escrowed funds could be released. I should have liked to give the matter sufficient, prayerful thought, but, given my precarious situation, I had to make a split-second decision. I agreed to release the assessment money. I could not risk jeopardizing the integrity of our Diocesan Council by adding to or reinterpreting the established benchmarks. Please know, however, that thus far only the December 2007, payment has been released.

8. Much speculation and rumor has been circulating regarding my apology to the Bishop of Alaska. Permit me to offer clarification on this issue. Metropolitan HERMAN, desiring to reach some peaceful resolution to a most serious and volatile situation asked Archbishop DMITRI to chair a separate meeting with Archbishop SERAPHIM and Bishop TIKHON (as co-arbiters), Bishop NIKOLAI and myself. During said meeting, additional comments, questions and explanations were offered. Please know that no one at any time forced me to apologize to the Bishop of Alaska.

a.) Yes, I did offer an apology to him, for being a source of irritation to him, for upsetting him and causing him pain. I wish to be at peace with everyone. I stated again that my apology was for those reasons and not for interfering in his diocese of which I am not guilty.

b.) Yes, I did prostrate myself before him, begging forgiveness. I would do it again, in the same spirit that I wish to be at peace with everyone, and also to prevent our Diocesan Church from being confronted with further uncertainty and tribulation.

And now, how should I conclude this long, but sincere, letter to you, my brothers and sisters, my spiritual children? Perhaps I can once again refer to the withholding of our assessments � the result of a serious and often agonizing decision, accomplished in conciliar fashion, as is the custom in our Diocesan Church. Various people asked me as to what it has accomplished. My answer:


1.) We helped the Central Church Administration to begin the process of living within its means, after decades of frivolous spending and misplaced priorities. We have introduced the CCA to the notion of closer association with Sam Adams than with Dom Perignon.

2.) We encouraged and assisted the Central Church Administration to downsize and to reshape that which was a ridiculously top-heavy bureaucracy.

But, my friends those two points are only starters. The �flip side� of withholding is that I have become a very unpopular man with many, and unfortunately, I have exposed you, my friends, to ridicule and abuse. Sometimes it is not easy to remain a free man in the Midwest. But remain, we must; remain we shall. Unless there are additional changes, or, should I say, corrections in accordance with the Statute of the Orthodox Church in America, and something more than lip-service to seeking the truth, and finally, genuine re-evaluation of who we are as an autocephalous church and that we are not two million members strong, or one million, or 400,000, I do not place much hope in the effectiveness of the scheduled All American Council this year. I regret that I have been unable to do more to bring this crisis, for us in the Midwest now two and one-half years old, to an end. May God forgive me. I ask your forgiveness as well.


Faithfully yours in Christ,


=JOB

Archbishop of Chicago and the Midwest

This is indeed very, very sad. I have seen and heard Bishop Job on at least three occasions, and read a few things by him. He strikes me as being one of the great shepherds of the Orthodox faithful in North America.

In the grand scheme of things, I think what we are witnessing here, and with the recent clergy scandals in Catholicism, are indications of "stepped-up" demonic activity, i.e., stronger temptaions to drag down clergy and hierarchy, so as to pull apart the Church by souring the faithful. Clergy formation has got to deal with the issue of "spiritual warfare", and this is something which has been deficient in recent years.

Dn. Robert

Dn. Robert,

Sadly I must disagree. My (albeit limited) research on the topic indicates a significant influx of corrupt men into the clergy during the 60's and 70's. I think your suggestion assumes these men are men of good will who have fallen to temptation. I get no pleasure out of disagreeing but the facts are hard to deny. These men were corrupt from the get go and had no interest in spiritual things.

On the other hand, I think you are right in regard to those clergy who truly are of good-will...but the numbers of THOSE who have fallen into gross immorality is quite small.

I am speaking primarily in regard to the scandals in the Roman Catholic Church. I am not informed enough to speak to Orthodoxy.

Jason

I will say that if the OCA ends up breaking up given the way it is going, it actually in the long run would probably be a good thing for Orthodoxy in this country.

I would not be too quick to conclude H.E.'s retirement, nor the present scandals, would lead to the breakup of the OCA.