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

Slava Isusu Christu! (How come no one ever says 'Glory Forever' on this forum?)

But, Our Lady's Slave, a name which I think is interesting, you are right--so..., where is the food? Just kidding:)

When I was a member of the Ruthenian Church a priest-monk told me a story of visiting an Orthodox monastery: "One day I went to an Orthodox monastery and everything went well, until they asked me 'why are you a Uniate?' to this I replied spontaneously--'where is the food?'--to which the subject changed and things went back to normal." For me, Our Lady's Slave--I do not need all the "facts" or "Synodical decisions" to support my bishop--only Love. Since you mentioned "both sides"--why is Vladyka's side being neglected in the media or on the forums, except for a small report by an Alaskan media outlet? Seems strange to me. Does that mean Vladyka is guilty and that the Synodical Kangaroo Court is Canonical? We shall see?

God Forgives.

In Christ,


Robert, Chief Sinner

I would have thought that your language describing the meeting of the OCA Bishops is rather inflammatory.

Perhaps we should abandon this thread before it becomes too much of a political one - albeit about Church politics

A Kangaroo Court: A kangaroo court or kangaroo trial, sometimes likened to a drumhead court-martial or Drumhead trial, is a sham legal proceeding or court. Kangaroo courts are judicial proceedings that deny due process in the name of expediency. The outcome of such a trial is essentially made in advance, usually for the purpose of providing a conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all. From Good ole' Wiki

In +Nikolai's View Ala His Recent statement--that is what the Lesser Synod court is in this matter. His Grace is not being given due process.

This is above all a Canonical Matter--as the hierachs battle it out the Forum Moderator can move this topic if he so pleases.

The fundamental issue for the contemporary Church is what does it mean to be a modern Eastern Christian Church in the 21st Century American context--valid issues you think.

In Christ,

Robert, Sinner

Admin's Note:

1. This is a valid issue for discussion as canonical issues are not secret. There is no reason to delete the thread.

2. Robert Horvath's reference to the OCA Synod of bishops who are looking into this matter as a "Kangaroo Court" lacks charity.

3. Those who wish to defend Bishop Nikolai are free to do so. The man deserves the presumption of innocence before the Synod of Bishops, even though the charge against him seems very legitimate. [Ordaining a convicted sex offender is something a bishop should not do and is suitable grounds for a charge that might lead to removal. Forgiveness of "youthful indiscretions" is free from the Lord for those who repent sincerely yet the penalty for past sins does remain.]

4. Let us all remember to pray for our brethren in the OCA as they address this issue.

IC XC

I will apologize for "Kangaroo Court" as its particular context is secular law. And I am sure the the Kangaroos are not happy either.

Thank you for keeping the thread going as a way to look at the canonical issues at hand.

I cannot formulate an opinion on Vladyka's actions on making this man a reader. All I can say is that I would need to know more about what the canons say about this. I am sure that the canons define the character of clergy as a pre-requisite--and that those standards are pretty high. But, the hierarch can use economia if the person has demonstrated repentance--of that I am sure. In the contemporary Church these individuals cannot be made clergy, because they cause great scandal to the faithful, on that I agree, but the Lord still loves them and calls them to salvation and deification in Christ. And you are right about prayer. I still believe in a God who answers prayer.

Thank you Administrator for your prudence.

I pray all of you will forgive me. I realize I am learning more each day and am always open to differing views.

In Our Lord,


Robert

And you follow that up with a back handed insult, along with describing people clearly in anguish as a lynch mob and Fr. Michael Oleksa (a highly respected priest) as someone "pulling strings" to get what he wants.

If Bishop Nikolai is innocent of the various charges having to do with the reader, the finances and everything else; he will be cleared. The people disobeying authority at this time are not the "Americanized" laity, but the bishop himself. I think you should consider that. I think you should also consider the fact that Archbishop Job (Archbishop Job!) had to prostrate himself before Bishop Nikolai.

AMM:

To be honest I was really thinking about Kangaroos--you know the hopping and boxing kind with pouches and all that:) I am not sure it was a Freudian-slip because I know all of the hierarchs are living the Gospel the best they can--we are not perfect.

I really do think a mob-mentality has developed around Vladyka Nikolai.

Father Michael is a great sociologist, has made great communication videos, knows about inculturation and missiology, has a reputation in Alaska and all over the world. You are right, however I disagree about his, in my view, un-Orthodox understanding of inculturation and mission praxis--especially in regard to how to allow traditional Native religion to be legitimately imcorporated into Orthodox life and custom. Many people mistakenly believe that the Orthodox missionaries gave carte blanche to everything Natives did and accepted all practices. If Orthodoxy is a medicine can one apply the medicine of other forms of spirituality outside of the Church to attempt to heal the human soul? This is a question of spiritual theologians. Father Michael's on the air characterization of the relationship between Vladyka and the people as one of a battered houswife to an abuser is spurious at best. His frying pan metaphor was almost a backwoods Southern image, which reminded me of my grandmother when she hit my granpa on the head once for talking about a woman he thought was cute--boy she got him:) But, both propoganda machines are working. And essentially the one who wins get Alaska. I have no doubt at this point the Metropolia will win--but, I don't think Vladyka is going anywhere, in other words we will just have another Orthodox hierarch in Alaska with a his own ministry outside of the official structure of the OCA in whatever capacity, UNLESS he submits to Syosset and something is worked out--hopefully, something does work out.

And in regard to the former Reader, I think I am still waiting to learn more about the canonical issues in that situation. I know that people are saying there are financial indescretions on all sides--I will wait to see what happens in that regard as well. And I am sure Vladyka Job was doing what His Eminence' conscience determined at the time--that is His Eminence' business not mine.

The main issue for me is that ALL sides are heard in this issue. All sides are polemical and defensive right now--after the smoke clears or not maybe we all can go to the pub together and debate like they did in ancient Byzantium over Christological issues.

Just some thoughts.

In Our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ,


Robert

This situation does not look like it will be resolved peacefully any time soon.

http://www.oca.org/News.asp?ID=1493&SID=19

Please pray for a miracle of grace.

The answer to your question is "no." The reason he is being investigated is that Bishop Nikolai tonsured a convicted child molester to reader. That decision alone calls into question his faculty of judgement. Also, there are allegations that he engaged in sexual and financial improprieties. Hence, an investigation is warranted. To further that, he was first asked, then ordered, to step aside from his post and his diocese.

Bishop Nikolai, in response, has refused to co-operate by stepping aside. Instead, he has remained in his diocese and at his post. This is in direct violation to the obedience that is expected of any cleric in such a situation. It also makes it appear that he is more concerned about maintaining his own name and position than maintaining the good of his diocese and the Church.

I suspect that how the rest of the OCA's hierarchy responds to this situation will determine if the OCA is a viable organization. Namely, is the OCA capable and willing to clean its own house?

-- John

From what I've read, I think technically speaking Bishop Nikolai may be right, but it does appear he may be using the technicalities of the canons to circumvent what is in the best interest of his diocese. I have the feeling the synod is going to gather and depose him.

Lets all remember that during the consecration service of a bishop in the OCA, the candidate makes the following promise:


Thus, Bishop Nikolai is in violation of this oath by not obeying the directive of the Holy Synod to leave Alaska.

A priest once said at a retreat that sometimes those who are most rigid are the very ones who are struggling against a particular sin. It is like the parable of the beam and the speck in the eye. If we are rigid toward those who have a certain failing, then oftentimes we see or we think we see our sin reflected in them. Only sometimes, their sin might be small but we have magnified it in them, and we despise them because we ourselves are guilty.



While we pray for Bishop Nicoli, let us also remember to pray for the former governor of New York too. He desperately needs our prayers.



Saintly Bishops lead by the example of their lives and their love of their flock.

May we be blessed with saintly Bishops who are willing to lay down their lives for their flocks like St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp.

"If we are rigid toward those who have a certain failing, then oftentimes we see or we think we see our sin reflected in them."

That is often the case. This is not limited to morality, but at times it plays a factor with politics and business.

Terry

Terry's principle is true sometimes, but not necessarily always. I speak from experience, being sinful myself.

Fr. Serge

First off, this was not a "questionable ordination," as readers are not ordained, but tonsured. Quite a distinction. This does not excuse the act, by any means, however! Although I might understand what Archimandrite Isidore was saying, it does not excuse making this person a reader-everyone IS redeemable-if it is Goid's Will-however, "everyone" should not necessarily be tonsured a reader, or ordained to the priesthood!

As to the above-I dont know what Moscow or Jordanville could do for the OCA-in many ways-you reap what you sow-this seems to me to be one of the results of extreme modernism, minimalism, and ecumenism. In other words, permissiveness in the extreme.