The Grinch Who Came to Dinner…

Don’t forget… the Grinch came disguised as Santa Claus… the archetypical “good guy”… likewise; Jonas Paffhausen comes to us garbed as an ordinary Orthodox monastic… when he is truly a HOOMie in drag!

A friend of mine made a good suggestion… juxtapose some of the matters of public record concerning Jonas Paffhausen with his official bio. Well, it IS interesting, to say the least.

Firstly, it is claimed that he worked for Russki Palomnik (Russian Pilgrim) at the Publishing Department of the Patriarchate of Moscow and all Russia. That is not completely the truth. Russki Palomnik was a publication of the renegade deposed priest Gleb Podmoshensky. I am informed by friends in Russia that there were no official links between the MP and Mr Podmoshensky. What “links” there were only coincidental… Podmoshensky had contact with some in the MP, nothing more. That is to say, Mr Paffhausen either worked for Podmoshensky’s Russki Palomnik or for the MP, but, not both. The former is more probable than the latter. This makes one of the claims in his official bio very tenuous, indeed.

James Paffhausen (later, Jonas Paffhausen in monasticism) was never a member of the brotherhood at Valaam Monastery, per informed sources. He was only a long-term resident there. This is not unusual in Orthodox practise. Many pious laity reside in monasteries for a longer or shorter period without embracing the monastic life per se (a good example being Admiral St Fyodor Ushakov). There are those who live in monasteries who shall never be admitted to the actual brotherhood, under any circumstance (such as Lyova the Fool at Jordanville).

There is no mention of his connection with the deposed clergyman Gleb Podmoshensky in his official bio. As it is well-known that Paffhausen spoke in favour of admitting the CSB/HOOMie lot en masse, this omission is puzzling and disquieting. Gleb Podmoshensky was suspended from the priesthood by the ROCOR Holy Synod on well-founded morals charges. Furthermore, Podmoshensky was later deposed from the clergy for defying this order of the ROCOR Holy Synod. The entire St Herman Brotherhood left Platina CA after the morals charges were laid, except for Damascene Christiansen and Gerasim Eliel, both of whom are closely connected with Jonas Paffhausen.

Ergo, Jonas Paffhausen has an obligation to disown and repudiate his connection with Gleb Podmoshensky and ask forgiveness of the Church. As he concealed his intimate working relationship with someone who was publicly known to all as a deposed clergyman prior to being elevated to high episcopal office, he has the obligation to resign and retire to his monastery to work his repentance (as an ordinary monk, not as the abbot of the house, it should be added).

We have not even got into the connection of Jonas Paffhausen with the HOOMies. There is no need, for the charges concerning his connections with Podmoshensky are serious enough to merit his resignation, or, lacking that, his removal. As for his connection to CSB/HOOM, that is attested to by Matushka Nina Stroyen, the widow of Fr Basil Stroyen and a member of the board at St Tikhon Seminary in South Canaan PA (she said such more than once to me in a recent telephone chat). Her word is sufficient… she is one of the “elders” of the Church, and has been around longer than most of us. If she sees danger in Jonas Paffhausen, we would be wise to listen to what she has to say.

If this man is not removed, we shall have “hell to pay”… literally. God help us.

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Wednesday 30 September 2009

Albany NY

We Must All Stand Together

Don’t mess with the best! The HOOMies have a surprise or two awaiting them if they muck about with real Orthodox Christians and their friends…

I had a nice chat with a lawyer, yesterday. She was pointing some things up for me, and I think I learned a great deal. Unlike some others I could mention I know that there are many things in this world that I don’t know squat-doodly about. One of those things is the law. So, I was “all ears”, as they say. To keep it simple, I should state whether things are matters of public record or my conjecture based on the public record. If I do this, I would be immune from legal harassment. It would not stop them from making my life miserable or airing my dirty laundry, for, like it or not, that is not illegal… it is immoral, and the law doesn’t deal in morals, it deals in legalities.

All of us should keep that in mind. We can stop the OCA legal eagles from harassing us, but, we cannot stop OCA clergy and their allies from issuing gossip, innuendoes, and personal attacks unless it strays into libel or slander… and my lawyer friend was quick to point up that these fellows rarely do that… most are brighter than Raymond Velencia (you are more likely to deal with a Karlgut, Garklavs, or Burdikoff, who are sharpies… give the devil his due).

Bert and Harry ask, “What’s the deal?”

So, what is a “matter of public record”? Well, here is a partial list:

1. Russki Palomnik was not an official publication approved by any bishop. It was an unofficial production of Gleb Podmoshensky, produced after the date of his deposition, a fact known by James Paffhausen.
2. Gleb Podmoshensky had been deposed by the ROCOR Holy Synod prior to James Paffhausen’s trip to Russia and such deposition was a matter of public record and duly publicised by the Synod. Therefore, James Paffhausen knew that Mr Podmoshensky was in a state of rebellion against the Church.
3. The members of the brotherhood of the St Herman Monastery in Platina CA left, due to the morals charges brought against Mr Podmoshensky, except for Damascene Christiansen and Gerasim Eliel (both of whom are close to Jonas Paffhausen).
4. James Paffhausen was only a long-term guest of Valaam Monastery; he was never an official novice or monk there.
5. David Brum was received into the OCA at the chapel of Jonas Paffhausen’s monastery in Point Reyes CA in 1997. Mr Brum subsequently became Secretary to Metropolitans Feodosy Lazor and Herman Swaiko.
6. Earlier this year, Jonas Paffhausen stated in Moscow that no one was left from the former administration except for a house-cleaner and some secretaries. Who was with him in Moscow? Leonid Kishkovsky… the head of the OCA DECR under Metropolitans Feodosy and Herman… and continued in that post by Jonas Paffhausen. Interesting assertion, nicht wahr?
7. The funds for the Koumentakos case legal bills and the trips to Moscow and Georgia were not in the budget submitted for public scrutiny on oca.org.
8. The CFO of SVS was named the Treasurer of the OCA. Is she going to hold both offices concurrently? A “search” for a new treasurer had been announced on oca.org. How many other candidates were interviewed? How are the conflicts of interest going to be avoided?
9. Alexey Karlgut attempted to get Kristine Koumentakos to sign legal papers dropping her lawsuit against the OCA.
10. Igor Burdikoff resigned as Treasurer of the Diocese of NY and Washington (or NY/NJ) after questions were raised concerning 125,000 USD supposedly spent on the bishop’s residence.
11. Igor Burdikoff was named Administrator of Holy Cross Monastery in Niagara Falls NY. Said monastery bolted the OCA for HOCNA. Were these two facts interrelated?
12. Mr and Mrs Robert Kondratick named the OCA as defendant in a lawsuit… then, they pulled it… but, this suit has not been withdrawn definitively…
13. Robert Kondratick was deposed as a clergyman, then, rehired in lay status, at a salary higher than that earned by many priests.
14. Raymond Velencia was named to the Metropolitan Council whilst he was still involved in litigation.
15. Raymond Velencia directly sent an e-mail to the Metropolitan Council based on material derived from confidential counselling sessions and confessions.

Eric Iliff (1981-2007). “They all have names and faces…” Vechnaya yemu pamyat!

One could go on. However, all of the above is a matter of record… all is attested (I also have no wish to bore you with a long laundry-list). There is more, but, it is either not attested, conjecture, or hearsay. If one repeats the last, one runs the risk of legal action by the OCA (this warning is VERY serious… PAY IT HEED!). The Iliff affair is a case in point. I would steer everyone to:

http://www.pokrov.org/

Once there, type in “Iliff” in the search box. You shall find it enlightening… reflect on the fact that Mr Iliff committed suicide whilst his litigation was pending… read the material and come to your own conclusion.

I wish to state publicly that I am not perfect. There are many sins on my plate. You see, the first tactic they use is, “See, look at what this person has done, therefore, they are not telling you the truth”. I have received no money from the Church, I am receiving no money from the Church, and I anticipate receiving no money from the Church in future. Is this true of those issuing attacks on the common faithful? Hmm… In any case, those accusing us of being sinners are sinners themselves! However… I fully expect that if I do not cease posting on the current Church situation, there shall be those who shall air my every peccadillo and “secret”. Nevertheless, I must step forward… someone has to speak out. As Chukcha would say, “Chukcha says we all go on whale hunt… however… only one throws the harpoon”. Perhaps, my effort will be a failure… I have every confidence that others would step forward, in that case.

The Sinking of HMS Victory on 4 October 1744 (Peter Monamy, 1745). The ship of the OCA is sinking, yet, the officers won’t let the crew go to the boats… reflect on that!

I fear that things are going to get worse as the Syossetites realise the pickle that they are in. It is a situation directly analogous to the one that broke out in 1918 and 1919, when Bishop Alexander Nemolovsky lost his head in the crisis surrounding the Russian Revolution. The funds dried up suddenly, so, properties were mortgaged and imprudent loans were made, resulting, in the end, of the loss of much real estate, leading to much confusion and bitterness  amongst the faithful and clergy in the Church. It took YEARS to repair the material damage (the spiritual and psychic damage was incalculable).

The ship is sinking. The Honesdale loan is not paid off, donations are down, and the economic downturn has not helped matters. The “sinking” of the OCA is going to affect all of American Orthodoxy in one way or another. Yet, there is nothing that our confrères can do to help matters. They can only help by picking up the survivors… for only those who wish to be helped can be helped.

We must stand together in this… for the consequences of losing the OCA to the HOOMies shall set back Orthodoxy in this country for centuries, if not permanently.

God help us all.

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Wednesday 30 September 2009

Albany NY

The Cost of Discipleship

Get Behind Me, Satan! (Ilya Repin, 1895)

The Koumentakos case points up something for us… the fact that the OCA (in particular) shall go to any length to “win”. This brings certain consequences to all who question the veracity of the current OCA party-line. Before we begin a discussion of this, please, click on the following link to read the article on practise in the Paris group, for its behaviour is identical to that of the OCA.

http://02varvara.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/the-curse-of-nice/

Read it? Good… Any of us who speak out or otherwise discomfit the Syosset/SVS cabal (the unity of these bodies was shown by the recent naming of the SVS CFO to be OCA Treasurer) shall find that these people do not hesitate to use the sacraments as weapons. Indeed, it has been done for many years, usually by denying someone communion under shaky pretence coupled with subtle (or not-so-subtle) pressure to leave the parish. If you find this statement “extreme”, please, click the link again to reread the above article. It is revelatory and there is not an idle word in it.

One reason why there has been no open retaliation as of present against whistle-blowers is that Jonas Paffhausen, Benjamin Peterson, their HOOMie allies (including Gerasim Eliel, the putative Bishop of Alaska), and the SVS lot are Godless California Positivists, not Orthodox Christians, in philosophy. That is, the first tactic of such people upon encountering opposition is to ignore it. “It shall go away”. It is part and parcel of “positive thinking”. If the opposition persists, if that does not work, a whispering campaign is launched against the poster. All sorts of juicy and “interesting” tit-bits concerning the opposition are aired, usually through third-parties such as the moderators of Internet fora such as the Orthodox-Forum (that is why the Velencia case is so interesting… he has been stupid enough to air such himself, directly… which has, no doubt, earned him the ire of Bobby K and the Syosset inner circle). If that does not work, it goes to the third level, which is not uncommon. Then, communion is withheld. There is always a “reason”, and do not forget that the OCA is now run according to the so-called “Brum Doctrine”, which states that all matters are to decided by the Central Authority (a fact that the OCA lawyers conveniently left out of their briefs).

This was not the practise in the old Metropolia; it was not advocated or used by decent people of merit such as Metropolitans Leonty Turkevich and Iriney Bekish, Archbishops John Shahovskoy and Kyprian Borisevich, or Fr Basil Stroyen (“Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?”). As an older friend of mine said in relation to the Velencia case when I said, “What would the old Metropolia have done?” she relied, “They would’ve ripped his head off”. Who brought this cancer into the Church? The answer is contained in the article linked above… Aleksandr Dmitrievich Schmemann brooked no opposition to his heretical notions. ANYTHING was allowed… “The end justifies the means”. Don’t forget that he started out by stabbing his mentor, Georgi Vasilyevich Florovsky, in the back in a manoeuvre to gain influence at SVS (which, at that time (in 1955), was nothing but a set of hired-rooms at the Reed House in Union Theological in Manhattan). It went downhill from there…

As the situation deteriorates, no doubt, Syosset shall send some of its most-trusted minions about the various parishes to “rally the troops” and to “shoot dissenters”. Mind you, I am certain that no physical coercion shall be used. Anyone who thinks that it shall be used is fevered and melodramatic and deserves a long rest in a home for the feeble-minded. In any case, physical intimidation was tried in Mayfield in the 80s… it not only didn’t work, it backfired so badly that it scared off the Syosset gang. That being said, there is no doubt that the Syosset commandoes shall do their best to make your life miserable. They prefer to air dirty laundry (we all have it, bar none), launch accusatory gossip, and, in general, engage in character assassination. They never engage the merits of what is raised by their opponents, for they are usually in the wrong, egregiously so in most cases. No one is going to face physical threats… nevertheless, one should be careful in dealing with clergy from outside of the area.

Be careful in sharing personal details with anyone, but, be especially wary if clergy or Syosset apparatchiki become curious. Never speak to them without having a lawyer present. These people are not nice; do not act as though they are. NEVER trust an OCA priest… the briefs filed in the Koumentakos case confirm that the OCA Central Authority does not believe in the sanctity of confessions and counselling… most priests are weak human-beings. I fear that most would throw a parishioner to the wolves to relieve pressure on them… THAT is the end-result of two disparate, but, related, trends. The first is Godless California Positivism… you can sniff this out by the fact that its practitioners do not believe in confession, they believe in “therapy” (and therapists, I have found, do not believe in confidentiality, as a rule). Reflect on the fact that Timothy Blumentritt was a “therapist” (thanks to “you-know-who” for the correction on the name!)… say a prayer for the soul of poor Eric Iliff! The second is the nihilism taught by the example of Aleksandr Dmitrievich Schmemann. Taken together, what is a poor fellow to do? It requires courage to swim against the tide… and although many do so, there are many who do not.

There are some priests of whom you should be especially wary of. First, there is Alexey Karlgut… do not take my word for it, ask Kristine Koumentakos! She shall give you the “Full Monty” on this particular piece of work. He is known for being involved in pressuring people to sign settlements in legal cases. Never speak to this priest without having a lawyer at your side. If you choose to talk to him, at any time, on any topic… be forewarned, do so at your own risk. Another priest of this ilk is Alexander Garklavs, the present Chancellor of the OCA. He is of the same cloth as Karlgut… treat with him at your own risk. A third is Igor Burdikoff, who is, perhaps, the cleverest and most dangerous of the lot. He NEVER accuses people directly; he ALWAYS works through third-parties… this makes it particularly difficult to nail him down or to defend against him. A VERY smooth and unctuous sort, he has the widest insincere “sincere smile” in all of creation. Iggy was forced to resign as Treasurer of the Diocese of NY and Washington (or, was it NY and NJ… the legal name doesn’t matter… the facts DO matter)… there was a matter of some missing 125Gs… Oh, I can’t say that he pocketed it, but, there has been no real audit or investigation by independent and outside bodies, either. I would call these three the Unholy Trinity. Beware them all, but, beware Burdikoff most of all. He is the most lacking in scruples (ask the priest from Jersey that was attacked by him at the ’07 Diocesan Assembly!) of the lot and the most clever. He is singularly lacking in education and manners, but, don’t let that fool you. As a friend of mine said, “None of these fellows are nutters; they are too good at looking after Number One to be nutters”.

In short, we are in for “interesting times”, and the full import of that old Chinese curse is probably apparent to most of us by now. Reflect on the fact that the Unholy Trinity was in good odour under Herman Swaiko and that they are in good odour under Jonas Paffhausen… nothing has changed and we are fools, indeed, to think otherwise. Mix these opportunists together with the cultist Stepford Wife HOOMies and you have a heady combination… only don’t call it Orthodox, if you please!

Why did we deserve such? God help us all…

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Tuesday 29 September 2009

Albany NY

Shall You Do This For Kristi… “If Not Me and You, Then, Who?”

If not me and you, then, who? If we are supine and silent… we deserve what we get! Get riled and get movin’. It is how all the crises in the Church were solved… the good people amongst the faithful got up and were counted. We should do likewise!

Kristine sent me the following in an e-mail. She is not only angry (understandably), but, she is right to point up that the priest involved has never suffered even censure from the OCA hierarchy.

******

BOYCOTT

St Matthew Orthodox Church in the Kings Contrivance Village Center of Columbia MD is having a festival 3-4 October 2009. The proceeds benefit their church building fund. The presiding priest of the parish, Fr Raymond Velencia, has been sued by a former parishioner for abusing the seal of confession and discriminating against her in the workplace, among other things. Fr Velencia has yet to be disciplined by his superiors. DO NOT attend or support this event in any manner. DO NOT share personal information with this priest. Go to pokrov.org and put the priest’s name in the search box or Google “Fr Raymond Velencia” to read for yourself.

Source:

Personal e-mail communication from Kristine Koumentakos of Monday 28 September 2009

******

DO pass this information on to as many people as you, even if they live far away from this event. It tells us volumes about Jonas Paffhausen… who is probably going to be attending this event.

In confidence, and with full trust in the veracity of my assertion, I, now, can state with sad clearness that Jonas Paffhausen is definitely and obviously NOT in favour of the traditional confidentiality of confession and counselling, as he has never criticised or censured Raymond Velencia. No member of the OCA Synod of Bishops has ever criticised or censured Raymond Velencia. No member of the OCA Metropolitan Council has ever criticised or censured Raymond Velencia in a public manner (with the possible exception of Mark Stokoe, who has posted information on this topic on his website). No priest or deacon of the OCA has refused to serve with Raymond Velencia.

This is reprehensible. It tells us much concerning Mr Paffhausen, none of it good. I had a recent telephone chat with Matushka Nina Stroyen, the widow of Fr Basil Stroyen, one of the most influential Metropolia priests of the 60s through the 80s. I agree completely with one of her statements, which was that Herman Swaiko might have been an embarrassment and self-centred, but, that he was Orthodox to the core. In comparison, Mr Paffhausen is not Orthodox, rather, she stated that he is a cult-like figure; she made it clear that he was nothing but a HOOMie (I would say that he is a “HOOMie in Orthodox drag”).

KAUFT NICHT BEI JONAS PAFFHAUSEN!

JONAS PAFFHAUSEN DELENDA EST!

We must do it for the good of the Church and the good name of the Lord Christ. Otherwise, we have no right to call ourselves Russian Orthodox Christians.

Kristine, do not lose heart… there are thousands with you. This is an egregious and flagrantly offensive transgression of what the Church stands for. God shall not be mocked, although there is a long and painful road ahead of us before we can slay this particular dragon. It shall be difficult, and we have not seen a tithe of the bitterness and strife that shall come of this.

Christ drank the cup to the dregs… St Innokenty asked us, “Shall you swallow a kopeck’s worth?” Indeed… shall we?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Monday 28 September 2009

Albany NY

Postscript:

Because of the nature of the current events in the Church, my attention has been focused solely on internal Church matters. I do NOT apologise for this, as it is a matter of duty. All of us, together, have an obligation to find the truth, and, if need be, remove those who are obstructing it. To be blunt, Jonas Paffhausen is steering the Church away from good order and traditional governance. We must do everything that we can to remove this evil man before he does more damage. God have mercy on us all!

Let’s Put the Toddlers Back into the Nursery Where They Belong!

Babies are cute… but, they belong in the nursery whilst the adults are in the drawing-room!

There is a great deal of content on the Internet concerning Orthodoxy. Unfortunately, all too much of it is written by novices. Sadly, these newbies are led astray by clergy who are, in the most part, disgruntled former Evangelical Anglicans. The blind leading the deaf, dumb, and blind…

“Chukcha says you must know something before you teach it. However… if you don’t know it, don’t do it, Chukcha says”.

“They do think that they DO know it, Chuk”.

“Chukcha says a child is not an elder… however, child has place… but, not in charge of hunting party”.

In short, these people have been coddled, told that they are the future of Orthodoxy, and promoted far faster than they should have been. This is particularly so in the OCA and AOCANA, where the konvertsy are unaware that they are being used by the lot at SVS and the crowd about Philip Saliba. Most of the konvertsy (these are not all converts, but, a particular lot, mainly former Evangelical Anglicans and Evangelical Protestants) write on the Fathers, the canons, and Orthodox spirituality. They actually think that hot-air extravaganzas such as Chambesy have meaning… I can assure them that at least 99 percent of the laity has not heard of this chatter-fest, and neither have most priests, bishops, or monastics… God save me from conferences, seminars, dialogues, and “workshops” (the last being the most satanic and dreary of the lot).

I am here to say that, in the main, their output is meretricious and without merit. Basically, one can categorise it as “Orthodoxy as seen through a distorting heterodox lens”. There are two glaring instances that leap out at one. Firstly, the konvertsy have an overblown affection for the Staroobraztsy (Old Ritualists). They do not understand that the Old Ritualists stand in judgement of the Church, that they are nothing but Protestants with a funny liturgy. Secondly, the konvertsy are soft on Uniatism. They look down their long noses at ethnic Orthodox and castigate us for a “lack of love” (that IS what some snot-nosed konvert said to me). Listen up! The papal confession has tried to destroy the Orthodox Church… at many times, in many places. Uniatism is one of the weapons that they use against the Church. The konvertsy are unaware of great heroes of the faith such as Patriarch St Germogen of Moscow the New Martyr and Hieromartyr St Maksim Sandovich of Lemkovshchyna, who gave their lives in fighting popery and all its pomps and trumpery.

One of the most egregious examples of such is Orrologion, which is put out by one Christopher Orr. I have it on good information that he was only received into the Church in 2004, yet, he has been posting since January 2006 on Church topics. That is to say, he started to post before he had internalised an Orthodox weltanshauung and understanding. What is worse, this smarkach (po-nashemu for “snot-nosed kid”) is unaware that his spiritual development started regressing when he started to air his immature and unfounded opinions in public. It is never easy for any of us to be castigated (I would say to Mr Orr that there were those who set me right, I am only doing the same for you… God willing, you shall see that), especially when one has been stroked and cooed to by experts.

Mr Orr, you have been fed the party-line by the Schmemannites at SVS. I can assure you that most of what you think is true is not, and that, due to your lack of knowledge concerning the full situation, you do not realise it. For instance, you are unaware that the Schmemann family mostly rejected the lunacy taught by Aleksandr Dmitrievich. You are unaware of his identical-twin brother Andrei Dmitrievich, you are unaware of how Hilarion Alfeyev failed miserably in the Osborne crisis (Fr Mikhail Dudko was sent by Moscow to right things… which he did), and you are obviously bereft of any knowledge of the Russian reporting in the Church (because you lack facility in Russian, the language used by most Orthodox Christians).

Hieromartyr St Maksim Sandovich of Lemkovshchyna (died 1914)… murdered by the papists for opposing Uniatism. Eternal be his witness and memory! (Christopher: Pray for St Maksim’s intercession to bring you light… it shall help… trust me in this!)

Can you redeem yourself? Certainly… but, I doubt that you are willing to pay the price. You should end your blog… you have nothing of substance to add to the discussion until you acquire an Orthodox heart. Obviously, you lack such. The prayers and services must live within you as second nature, and this cannot be attained in a short time. Indeed, it is a work of some years, the consensus being that it takes at least five to seven years. Be quiet… pray… do good… live the life of the Church… live a good Christian life in the context of your personal and work life. If you read, if you must, read the lives of the saints, especially the New Martyrs. I would suggest that you start with the lives of St Germogen and St Maksim, two saints murdered by the papists. Then, move to St Ilarion Troitsky the New Martyr (on his icon, it reads Bez Tserkva… Nest Spaseniya… indeed!) and the Royal Martyrs.

Go to St Nick’s and light a candle at the kiot to St Seraphim and pray. Reflect on the fact that you have this lovely church to pray in because of the generosity of St Nikolai the Tsar-Martyr. Be grateful to him for the gift of Orthodoxy… for, if it were not for his munificence, we would not have Orthodoxy in the lower-48 USA. Admit to yourself that you have been on a wrong path since you began your blog and be sincerely repentant. We have all done likewise, Mr Orr. You are not the first, by any means, nor, sadly, are you going to be the last.

You may think me harsh… however (as Chukcha the Wise would say)… these toddlers are presuming to lecture at the MDA whilst they are still mewling and puking babes in soiled and nasty nappies. They need to be caught, given a bath, put in fresh nappies and jammies, given a bottle, and put in their playpen in the nursery. In the meantime, we grownups can repair to the bar, enjoy an adult beverage, and have some mature conversation. I LOVE children… however, they have their place, and their place is not butting into adult affairs until they are grownups themselves.

Earth to Christopher and those like him:

GROW UP!

You shall find that there are many of us ready and willing to help you. God keep you.

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Sunday 27 September 2009

Albany NY

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words Department… 25 September 2009

Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral of New York of the ROCOR has taken the Kursk Root Icon to Russia. Look at the size of the crowd for the procession! There are THOUSANDS present! There are more people here than there are in most American Orthodox archdioceses… reflect on that and understand why all those who bloviate concerning “American Orthodoxy” are all wet.

This humbles one… these people had many options… watch TV, listen to the radio, visit friends, go to work, read, go to the shopping mall, or potter at the dacha… instead, they are HERE. Make no more sarcastic and condescending comments about the Church in Russia until you can muster a crowd of THIS size.

WOW!!!

Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev (1946- ) of Moscow and all the Russias, the de facto spiritual head of the Orthodox Church, at the procession. Russia is the centre of Orthodox civilisation, being the largest, strongest, and most influential Orthodox state. Therefore, it is no surprise that Vladyki Kirill is the leading hierarch of the Church throughout the world. Numbers do speak…

There are more people here present than there are on the entire legitimate canonical territory of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul… ponder that… it tells us something, no?

Meet Chukcha… the Russian Jed Clampett

Could this be Chukcha? If not, it’s one of his relatives!

Some of you have asked me about Chukcha, one of my stock characters (every columnist comes up with several to illustrate points, such as the late Mike Royko’s Slats Grobnik). He is a stock-figure in Russian humour, being a simple-wise man. His closest analogue in American pop culture is Jed Clampett of the old sitcom on the telly, The Beverly Hillbillies. Like Jed, Chukcha may be from the back-of-the-beyond (therefore, prone to “cement pond” and “fancy-eatin’ table” malapropisms), being from the Chukchi Republic in the extreme east of the country (above the Arctic, no less), but, he knows which end is up, and don’t try to prove otherwise, by God.

Here is a typical Chukcha story:

“Chukcha has gone to Moscow. There is socialism there. It is impressive. Everything is done for the betterment of man. However… Chukcha even saw this man”.

In short, Chukcha is no one’s fool. He knows the reality behind the showy rhetoric (sounds familiar, huh?). That is, Chukcha has character… he is real. Another figure in the Chukcha stories is the Russian geologist. The geologist plays something of the same role played by Banker Drysdale in the Beverly Hillbillies. For all his education, he is often outwitted by Chukcha, or Chukcha shows his superiority. For instance:

Chukcha and the geologist were out hunting. The geologist sighted a polar bear. Chukcha shouted, “Run!” The geologist ignored Chukcha and shot the polar bear. Chukcha came up, shaking his head. “Russian hunter, bad hunter. Now, we have to drag bear 20 kilometres back to village. However… Russian can drag bear all by himself”. Chukcha stamped off…

Of course, Chukcha and his friends probably showed up after the Russian had been forced to drag the bear long enough to learn a lesson. One of the identifying “tags” of Chukcha is the word “odnako” (“however”). Chuk’s wisdom usually follows.

What would Chukcha think of the Syosset gang in the OCA? For that matter, what would Jed Clampett say? “Oo dawgie… I WOULDN’T do THAT if I were you”. Reflect on the fact that the SVS/Syosset mob is made up of the “educated and sophisticated”, whilst Chukcha and Jed are “ignorant and simple”.

My money is on Chukcha and Jed… what about you?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Thursday 24 September 2009

Albany NY

Don’t Bet on Crosby’s Horse!

Crosby’s horse… where he always is… at the rear of the pack!

There has been some bleating and special pleading heard from certain quarters concerning the appointment of Raymond Velencia to the OCA Metropolitan Council. We can’t do anything about it, “our hands are tied”, all because of “procedure”. Hmm… Take a look at a typical example (the name has been changed to spare the author deserved embarrassment).

Does the OCA Statute allow for a diocesan bishop (or the Metropolitan) to overrule the Diocesan Assembly’s election of delegates to the Metropolitan Council? Does anyone, i.e., the Holy Synod, the Metropolitan Council itself? Who, if anyone, can remove a sitting member of the Metropolitan Council and for what cause(s)?

Depending on the answer(s), this could be a situation where hands are tied due to the actions of the DoWA’s Diocesan Assembly, i.e., a situation similar to Sudan’s membership on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR).

The Oarsman

22 September 2009

What vacuous and fatuous nonsense! It is obvious that the Oarsman has little experience of the real world and what happens there every day in plain sight. I reiterate, all that was necessary was for Jonas Paffhausen to have rung up the Washington Diocesan Assembly and have said, “That bastard is out. Choose someone else”. Trust me… Velencia would have withdrawn his name, with a fulsome speech thanking the assembly for its trust, and a candidate acceptable to Paffhausen would have been elected. As I said, it happens every day. It’s called “politics”, Mr Oarsman, and such piffle as “procedure” would not be allowed to stand in the way of Mr Big’s desires.

We see that in the current OCA Synod of Bishops meeting. Tassos has been an utter failure as Treasurer, his special pleadings have fallen on deaf ears amongst the faithful. Donations are down, not only to the Central Administration, but, to other church bodies, as well (SVS has been particularly hard-hit, and as all OCA bodies live from hand-to-mouth (there are no Episcopalian-style endowments, despite noise to the contrary), they are in a BAD way). They are making noises about how he was only a place-holder, etc, etc. Oh… who did they tap for Treasurer? The CFO of SVS, a consummate insider… hmm… the “new broom” is looking increasingly like the “old broom”… is another Honesdale National loan in the offing? It looks like the old gang doesn’t care for appearances, anymore. (I pity poor Fr Michael… if he is made a bishop, he is going to have to decide whether to stand with these boobs or to stand tall like Bishop Job did… THAT shall be a hard decision!)

One can feel some pity for Mr Tassos… he is the latest victim to be thrown from the train by the cabal. Who’s next? I’ll say this, it won’t be Kishkovsky, and it won’t be Garklavs. Of course, Bobby K sits in Venice, waiting out the expiration of the statute of limitations on his crimes in New York State… are the hands of the SOBs (Synod of Bishops, not “sons of bitches”… although the latter seems more accurate, nicht wahr?) tied there, as well?

In any case, Mr Oarsman, the so-called Metropolitan Council is not a canonical body. It is a creaky knockoff of Prodie organisations… (Chukcha says, “However… they do it better… they follow their rules”.) One can say that it is nothing more or less than a contemporary resurrection of the Holy Governing Synod (a body vilified by those of the Oarsman’s ilk, incidentally). How ironic! The body that they view as embodying “democracy” in the Church is nothing but a soulless revivification of the one historical Church institution that they hold up to obloquy!

“However… may I say something?”

“Sure, Chuk, what is it?”

“In Soviet days, we had wonderful constitution. It was full of very nice things… However… Chukcha says what is written is not important. What is done is what’s important. No one acted on those words… no one was free. Chukcha says character and deeds matter. Procedure and words do not. However… watch out for those who say otherwise”.

I agree with Chukcha! What about you? Hey, Oarsman! Get your nose out of the books and start living. One of the things that you could do is to stop reading that self-serving drivel from SVS and start emulating the saints… the real saints… like St Aleksandr Nevsky!

Friends and neighbours, let’s look at a real saint. What follows is an excerpt from the film Aleksandr Nevsky. It’s called, Arise, ye Russian People! Click on the link for nine minutes of good watching. By the way, Oarsman… I follow St Aleksandr Nevsky, not the pompous Aleksandr Schmemann! You’d do well to do likewise.

“What’s Crosby’s horse?” you ask.

Oh… that’s simple. The late entertainer Bing Crosby was an enthusiastic follower of the ponies. Unfortunately, he became known as a supporter of the slowest oaters on the course. “Crosby’s horse” was not only the last horse; he was a horse with no chance of winning. You can see the analogy, can’t you?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Thursday 24 September 2009

Albany NY

‘Taint Necessarily So…

I believe the cats… however… do you believe the OCA’s lawyers? Hmm…

The OCA’s lawyers have given us an interesting point to ponder. Look at the quote below…

******

Key documents in the Koumentakos case (read about that story here) were posted on the internet on Friday, September 18th, just a day after it was reported that Fr Raymond Velencia, one of the major figures in the case, was elected to the OCA’s Metropolitan Council as the clergy representative from the Diocese of Washington. The documents include the OCA’s motion for Summary Judgement, and three affidavits from the key players in the lawsuit: Metropolitan Herman (in his capacity as Diocesan Bishop), Fr Joseph Lickwar, Chancellor of the then-Diocese of Washington-New York (and current Chancellor of the Diocese of New York-New Jersey), and Fr Constantine White, then-Dean of the Washington Deanery (newly-appointed as Chancellor of the Diocese of Washington).

The motion for summary judgement by the OCA’s attorney, John McAuliffe, states that as the OCA, as a matter of law, “did not employ Fr Velencia, nor have authority to hire, fire, retain, supervise, or control Father Velencia’s daily work activities”,  the OCA should be released from the Koumentakos lawsuit.  The motion argues on the well-known basis of In Jones v. Wolf (1979) decision of the US Supreme Court that “the First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits civil courts from resolving disputes on the basis of religious doctrine and practice”. Arguing that the “First Amendment further requires that civil courts defer to the resolution of issues of religious doctrine or polity by the highest court of a hierarchical church organization”. The lawyer argues that to the extent Koumentakos seeks to impose some type of religious or moral duty on the OCA to investigate these matters at issue, the Plaintiffs have wrongfully sought to “impose some type of religious or moral duty on the OCA”.

The judge agreed on the basis of this religious exception, and released the OCA from this case.

What has raised eyebrows, however, are some of the assertions in the motion.  “As set forth above,” McAuliffe writes, “(the) OCA is a New York corporation created by New York statute. It does not operate in the State of Maryland. Various dioceses around the country choose to adhere to the moral and canonical doctrine adopted and propounded by the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America. However, each diocese is a separate legal entity. (The) OCA has no more authority to regulate the diocese than it has to regulate Microsoft”.

The legal point may be accurate, but, where is the moral integrity behind such a statement? One can claim, perhaps accurately, that these are just the words of a non-Orthodox lawyer, not an ecclesiological statement, but, public words matter.  Is the OCA really only a collection of autocephalous dioceses? By allowing such statements, the OCA may win a battle, but, we risk losing the war.

Equally disturbing are the affidavits of Metropolitan Herman, [and] Frs Lickwar and White. If the OCA could accurately claim from a legal standpoint it did not have responsibility over the pastoral actions of Fr Velencia, that such matters were the responsibility of the Diocese,  one wonders how, in good conscience,  Metropolitan Herman, the Diocesan Bishop, Fr Lickwar, the Chancellor, or Fr White, the Dean, could then make the same claim?  Nevertheless, Daniel Shea, the lawyer for the Deanery and Diocese writes in his motions for summary judgement “….here as demonstrated by the supporting affidavits of record, these defendants have never expressly or impliedly consented to a relationship whereby either had a right to control the actions of Fr Velencia… in so far as defendant Velencia’s conduct in maintaining confidence as a counsellor or confessor”. What? Are there not 1,500 years of canons relating to the relationship of priest to bishop, to pastoral responsibilities, and to the relationship of penitent to pastor? Once again, where is the moral integrity?

The Diocese and the Deanery have all been released from the case, on precisely the same grounds as the OCA. The courts will not adjudicate matters of Church discipline. At present, only Fr Velencia and St Matthew’s House remain in litigation with Ms Koumentakos. The real question is will the Church even adjudicate these matters of Church discipline… or, is, as the affidavits would seem to suggest, no one is really responsible for anything.

All the documents of the Koumentakos case referred above may be found here.

Mark Stokoe

22 September 2009

Orthodox Christians for Accountability

http://www.ocanews.org/news/News9.22.09.html

******

There one has it… “….here as demonstrated by the supporting affidavits of record, these defendants have never expressly or impliedly consented to a relationship whereby either had a right to control the actions of Fr Velencia… in so far as defendant Velencia’s conduct in maintaining confidence as a counsellor or confessor”.

Perhaps, I am an idiot… a drooling and incoherent babbling idiot… I had the baroque notion that priests were responsible to their bishops, that priests were creatures of the bishop and dependent upon him. It IS correct that the Chancellor and Dean (not real canonical offices, in any case) were not responsible for Raymond Velencia. Of course not! They, like Mr Velencia, were nothing but ordinary priests… they were not and are not bishops (who DO have responsibility for their priests).

Chukcha is really shaking his head over this one… “However… I thought that the bishop of the diocese ran things and that all the priests reported to him?” “Well, Chuk, that is what all the rest of us think!” “However… if that bishop is not responsible… which one is?”

GOOD QUESTION!

This seems to say that priests in the OCA are independent contractors, responsible to no bishop for their actions; therefore, no bishop is responsible for their actions. Great, huh? The OCA is only a corporation in the State of New York; it doesn’t exist in the rest of the country! Wanna bet that if a parish said that it was not sending an assessment to a body with no legal standing in their state or province, they would receive a rocket by UPS Overnight Delivery the very next day? “Send the money now, you bastards! We got bills here in Syosset! You know it’s a high-cost area and we need the dough! Legalism be damned”.

Good question… it not only stumps Chukcha… it stumps me… it stumps all of us. Now, you see it… now, you don’t. We’re a legal body when it comes to taking money; we’re not a legal body when it comes to taking responsibility. The RCs were rooked by their lawyers… they should have hired the OCA legal eagles… However… if the RCs had used such a defence, they would have been CRUCIFIED. Could you have seen Cardinal Law using such logic? OUCH! They would have thrown him to the wolves.

Let’s call out Kojack to find out the truth! WHO is responsible? Perspiring minds want to know!

Now imagine that the late Telly Savalas (as the inimitable Kojack) is standing in front of the OCA Synod of Bishops. “Who luvs ya, baby? If Herman isn’t responsible, who is? Is it Jonas Paffhausen? He replaced Herman. Is it Dmitri Royster? He’s the oldest bishop. If all the bishops are independent, why did you adopt the Brum Doctrine saying that the Metropolitan is the top banana? What gives?”

If no one is responsible… then, there are no real bishops… if there are no real bishops… well, there is no real Church, either.

Congratulations, OCA… your lawyers have admitted in open court that you are a bunch of Protestants… rather nasty (and unrepresentative) Prodies at that. The bishops do not have the right to control the actions of priests as counsellors and confessors. That is breath-taking! Lutheran bishops have this right. Catholic bishops have this right. Anglican bishops have this right. Silly old me! I thought that Orthodox bishops had this right, as well. The OCA told me, didn’t they? OCA bishops (I wonder what the other bishops in this country think!) don’t have the right to control their priests, at least in the case of confessions and counselling. Their lawyers said so.

WELCOME TO PROTESTANTISM, OCA!

(I hasten to add that most decent Protestant people and clergy are just as aghast as I am concerning this. If I have offended you, I sincerely apologise. However… Chukcha would tell you that Orthodoxy is not Protestantism, and that Orthodox should act like Orthodox, not (badly-behaving) Protestants. Why doesn’t the OCA just bite the bullet the way the Episcopalians did? If there is corrupt clergy or staff… put ‘em in prison orange!)

This is disgusting. It strikes at the very core of what it means to be “Church”. If the bishop is not responsible… well, it means that there is no real bishop. If there is no real bishop… there is no Church.

P.U.! I smell something rotten in the room!

I BEG YOUR PARDON!

I stand for the Church… pure and simple. You can’t have it both ways. Either stand up and take responsibility for your minion’s actions, Jonas Paffhausen, or, stand exposed to the entire world as a fancily-dressed Prodie (I’ll take a real Prodie, any road… they’re bona fide and decent, at least!).

FOR SHAME, OCA!

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Wednesday 23 September 2009

Albany NY

“I Think Your Rhetoric Is A Little Too Far In Front On This One…”

A coin from Laodicea… a land famous in Scripture…

Someone actually wrote that to me… I shall be kind and leave them nameless (to you-know-who on the west coast: I forbid you to let the cat out of the bag!).

This allows me to comment on the above attitude, so, I have to say, “Thank you”, to the above correspondent. An acquaintance of mine said a wise thing, “What kind of repentance would we have if everything were easy? If all the world were full of people who agreed with us? That is *not* to say that they are right! But, wrong-idiots play their role in our own formation, even if they will not allow that we play a role in theirs!” That is so profound that I wish that I had thought it up myself! But, I didn’t… mille grazie to him who spoke it first… you know who you are! I raise my glass to you in salute! Prosit!

The person who came up with the title-line took me to task for not being “dispassionate”… I would say that Orthodoxy through the ages has been defended by the passionate and that the so-called “dispassionate” have been nothing but supreme pains-in-the-arse. Whom do we honour? St John Chrysostom… who told the Empress off to her face (yes, he was exiled for that… but, that didn’t stop him!)… St Nicholas of Myra the Wonderworker… who got so PO’d at Arius that he got up and cold-cocked him in the midst of a Church Council (the Council didn’t censure him… it had to admit that he was right!)… St Mark of Ephesus… who stood for the right at the “Council” of Ferrara-Firenze (the pope exclaimed, “All is undone!”, when he heard that St Mark had not signed the Act of Union)… St Aleksandr Nevsky… who stood against the papist invaders (and beat them at the Battle on the Ice)… St Dmitri Donskoi… who led the host on the Kulikovo Pole (and crushed the Mongol Hordes).

In short, Orthodoxy has been upheld by the passionate… by those who were not afraid to face the foe and do what was needful. Let us be blunt… a leader is responsible for his organisation and its actions. Anyone who hides behind “statutes” and gobbledy-gook about “democracy” is a coward and poltroon, and one has to say so, openly. Jonas Paffhausen need only have made a phone-call to the Diocesan Assembly of Washington to have expressed his dissatisfaction with the choice of Raymond Velencia… trust me; another choice would have been made. Ergo… it follows logically that Paffhausen agrees with Velencia’s actions in holding Ms Koumentakos up to public scorn and humiliation. His silence is connivance at Velencia’s actions, no doubt about that. Indeed, none of the so-called Metropolitan Council resigned in protest, so they are complicit, as well. Note well that Paffhausen has never even censured Velencia for this egregious breach of confidentiality.

My rhetoric is “overblown”… I think not. Why? For instance, there is a reason that Robert Kondratick was defrocked. It was because he destroyed records, misused corporate credit-cards for personal use, did not report such use as income on his tax-return, and diverted church funds for his private gain. Nice… Shall I mention that when the Episcopalians (a group that Paffhausen loves to bash, by the way) had a treasurer that did likewise, she was handed over to the authorities and she did prison time for her misdeeds? Who is justified in this case? I don’t think that it is the OCA… it’s the much-vilified Episcopalians (I am not speaking of theology here… I am speaking of practical actions). The word given out is that Bobby K has “secrets” concerning some of the bishops that have bought him immunity. Jonas Paffhausen involved himself by allowing him to continue as a paid official of the OCA (at a salary higher than that of many priests, I might add). Therefore, it is right to hold Mr Paffhausen to account. He can regain his good name by handing Bobby K over to the State of New York for prosecution… it is the only right thing to do.

After seeing this, I am supposed to be “dispassionate!” What utter and bilious rot. Scripture tells us that “the Kingdom of Heaven is taken by storm”, and that “the violent (passionate) lay their hands on it”. I know that this is not a direct quote, but, it conveys the meaning, which is the only thing that matters, in any case.

No… Dispassion and “balance” are not what the Good Lord wishes from us… rather, He wishes us to be white-hot in intensity. Remember what was said of the Laodiceans… “Since thou art lukewarm, I shall spew thee out of my mouth”… Amen!

Bring it on! Not only I, but, many others are ready!

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Tuesday 22 September 2009

Albany NY