Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Fw: [rocaclergy] concerning F.Konstantin

Expand Messages
  • The Stephens
    I asked for Fr. Quentin s permission to forward FOR THE RECORD to the orthodox-synod list and he granted it. Please post. Thank you, Fr. Seraphim Stephens
    Message 1 of 14 , Mar 5, 2001
      I asked for Fr. Quentin's permission to forward FOR THE RECORD to the
      "orthodox-synod list" and he granted it. Please post.
      Thank you,
      Fr. Seraphim Stephens
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Quentin de Castelbajac" <quencast@...>
      To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
      Cc: <rocaclergy@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 5:12 AM
      Subject: [rocaclergy] concerning F.Konstantin


      > FOR THE RECORD
      >
      > 1. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff never has been, nor is he now, suspended
      > from priestly duties.
      > 2. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been relieved of his duties as the
      > spiritual director at Lesna convent, although an official ukase has
      > still not been issued to him.
      > 3. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has not served anywhere since he returned
      > to France on February 13, 2001, because he is ill, due to a heart
      > condition.
      > 4. A false charge was brought against Fr. Konstantin alleging that
      > he
      > didn't permit some spiritual children to go to church, when bishop
      > Amvrosi was being commemorated. With the consent of abbess Macrina, this
      > allegation was officially repudiated by the 3 sisters involved in the
      > charge.
      > 5. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been offered a position as pastor in
      > the diocese of San Francisco and Western America by bishop Kyrill. He
      > has not yet responded to this offer.
      >
      > It is sorrowful that even during Great Lent, some people engage in
      > spreading defamatory rumors instead of confirming facts.
      > Fr. Quentin Lyon, France, March 4, 2001
      >
      > This e-mail is STRICTLY PRIVATE, and intended only for members of the
      "rocaclergy" mailing list. It is NOT the OFFICIAL OPINION OR POSITION of the
      Russian Orthodox Church outside of Russia.
      >
      > The list charter states that this post or information in it may not be
      forwarded without the express permission of it's author by any means of
      transmission to any person or entity that is not a member of this list.
      Violating this charter is grounds for immediate dismissal.
      >
      > "rocaclergy" is managed and owned by Priest Seraphim Holland
      (seraphim@...), with the blessing of Bishop Gabriel.
      >
      > Post message: rocaclergy@yahoogroups.com
      > Subscribe: rocaclergy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > Unsubscribe: rocaclergy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > List owner: rocaclergy-owner@yahoogroups.com
      > URL to archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rocaclergy
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
    • Rev. John R. Shaw
      ... As it turns out, he was warned by the Synod (and by the Metropolitan) that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he does not, any services he
      Message 2 of 14 , Mar 6, 2001
        On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, The Stephens wrote:
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Quentin de Castelbajac" <quencast@...>
        > To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
        > Cc: <rocaclergy@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 5:12 AM
        > Subject: [rocaclergy] concerning F.Konstantin
        >
        >
        > > FOR THE RECORD
        > >
        > > 1. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff never has been, nor is he now, suspended
        > > from priestly duties.

        As it turns out, he was warned by the Synod (and by the
        Metropolitan) that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
        does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.

        > > 2. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been relieved of his duties as the
        > > spiritual director at Lesna convent, although an official ukase has
        > > still not been issued to him.
        > > 3. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has not served anywhere since he returned
        > > to France on February 13, 2001, because he is ill, due to a heart
        > > condition.

        When, two weeks ago, the priests sent by the Synod went to Lesna
        and asked to see Fr. Konstantin, his matushka refused to admit them on the
        grounds that he was "suffering from a heart condition". Both priests said
        that they would be understanding, since they too suffered from the same
        ailment. But they were refused.
        Then a short time later, when the Synodal representatives met with
        the nuns, Fr. Konstantin suddenly entered the room, in a belligerent mood,
        and showed no outwards signs of illness.

        > > 4. A false charge was brought against Fr. Konstantin alleging that
        > > he
        > > didn't permit some spiritual children to go to church, when bishop
        > > Amvrosi was being commemorated. With the consent of abbess Macrina, this
        > > allegation was officially repudiated by the 3 sisters involved in the
        > > charge.
        > > 5. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been offered a position as pastor in
        > > the diocese of San Francisco and Western America by bishop Kyrill. He
        > > has not yet responded to this offer.

        It would appear that Fr. Konstantin's recent behavior has put an
        end to any such "position" being offered.

        > > It is sorrowful that even during Great Lent, some people engage in
        > > spreading defamatory rumors instead of confirming facts.
        > > Fr. Quentin Lyon, France, March 4, 2001
        > >
        One can heartily agree with this. However, based on eye-witness
        accounts, it would be hard to find the "protesting clergy" innocent of
        such rumor-mongering.

        In Christ
        Fr. John R. Shaw


        > > This e-mail is STRICTLY PRIVATE, and intended only for members of the
        > "rocaclergy" mailing list. It is NOT the OFFICIAL OPINION OR POSITION of the
        > Russian Orthodox Church outside of Russia.
        > >
        > > The list charter states that this post or information in it may not be
        > forwarded without the express permission of it's author by any means of
        > transmission to any person or entity that is not a member of this list.
        > Violating this charter is grounds for immediate dismissal.
        > >
        > > "rocaclergy" is managed and owned by Priest Seraphim Holland
        > (seraphim@...), with the blessing of Bishop Gabriel.
        > >
        > > Post message: rocaclergy@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subscribe: rocaclergy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > Unsubscribe: rocaclergy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > List owner: rocaclergy-owner@yahoogroups.com
        > > URL to archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rocaclergy
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • trepatschkoj@aol.com
        In a message dated 03/06/2001 6:57:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, ... The above would imply that celebrating the Divine Liturgy (or any other service) only has
        Message 3 of 14 , Mar 6, 2001
          In a message dated 03/06/2001 6:57:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
          vrevjrs@... writes:


          > that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
          > does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.
          >
          >

          The above would imply that celebrating the Divine Liturgy (or any other
          service) only has Grace if the local bishop is mentioned. I was always
          under the impression that services were for praising God first and foremost,
          and not the bishop. The fact that the bishop is commemorated during services
          is for the purpose of praying for him since he is a sinner just like the rest
          of us whereas God is without sin. It's unfortunate that many believe that
          prayer to mankind is more important than prayer to God.

          In Christ,
          John Trepatschko


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Joachim Wertz
          No. Praying for and commemorating the Bishop is part of the link to apostolic succession without which the Church cannot stand. He may be a sinner like the
          Message 4 of 14 , Mar 6, 2001
            No. Praying for and commemorating the Bishop is part of the link to
            apostolic succession without which the Church cannot stand. He may be a
            sinner like the rest of us, but he needs our prayers for guidance, just like
            the rest of us. What do you mean by "prayer to mankind"? Liturgically we are
            not praying TO the Bishop, but praying FOR him. The apostolic succession
            represented by the Bishop means not only the laying on of hands, the Father
            to Son transmission of the office, but also the transmission of the
            tradition of the Faith. Very good reasons for one to pray for those who bear
            these burdens.
            In Christ,
            Joachim Wertz

            ----------
            From: trepatschkoj@...
            To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] Fw: [rocaclergy] concerning F.Konstantin
            Date: Tue, Mar 6, 2001, 8:04 PM


            In a message dated 03/06/2001 6:57:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
            vrevjrs@... writes:


            > that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
            > does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.
            >
            >

            The above would imply that celebrating the Divine Liturgy (or any other
            service) only has Grace if the local bishop is mentioned. I was always
            under the impression that services were for praising God first and foremost,
            and not the bishop. The fact that the bishop is commemorated during
            services
            is for the purpose of praying for him since he is a sinner just like the
            rest
            of us whereas God is without sin. It's unfortunate that many believe that
            prayer to mankind is more important than prayer to God.

            In Christ,
            John Trepatschko


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


            Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            Click here for Classmates.com
            <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=163100.1330039.2920210.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700074598:N/
            A=524804/*http://www.classmates.com/index.tf?s=2629>
            Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
            <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Rev. John R. Shaw
            ... The above message was my reply to the rocaclergy list. The original message to which I replied on rocaclergy had been forwarded there from
            Message 5 of 14 , Mar 7, 2001
              On Tue, 6 Mar 2001 trepatschkoj@... wrote:

              > In a message dated 03/06/2001 6:57:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
              > vrevjrs@... writes:
              >
              >
              > > that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
              > > does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.
              > >

              The above message was my reply to the rocaclergy list. The
              original message to which I replied on rocaclergy had been forwarded there
              from "orthodox-synod", but the "rocaclergy" list is supposed to be
              confidential, only for list members, and not forwarded to other lists--at
              least not without permission.

              "Rocaclergy" is also supposed to be only for ROCOR *priests*, and
              not others in their households.

              In Christ
              Fr. John R. Shaw
            • trepatschkoj@aol.com
              No Father that is incorrect. I replied to your message which you posted on the synod list. I do not have access to the rocaclergy list. John Trepatschko In
              Message 6 of 14 , Mar 7, 2001
                No Father that is incorrect. I replied to your message which you posted on the "synod" list. I do not have access to the rocaclergy list.

                John Trepatschko

                In a message dated Wed, 7 Mar 2001 9:05:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Rev. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> writes:

                << On Tue, 6 Mar 2001 trepatschkoj@... wrote:

                > In a message dated 03/06/2001 6:57:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
                > vrevjrs@... writes:
                >
                >
                > > that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
                > > does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.
                > >

                The above message was my reply to the rocaclergy list. The
                original message to which I replied on rocaclergy had been forwarded there
                from "orthodox-synod", but the "rocaclergy" list is supposed to be
                confidential, only for list members, and not forwarded to other lists--at
                least not without permission.

                "Rocaclergy" is also supposed to be only for ROCOR *priests*, and
                not others in their households.

                In Christ
                Fr. John R. Shaw


                Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                >>
              • trepatschkoj@aol.com
                P/S: Below is the message (part of it) I responded to Father John. If you carefully look at the header it is addressed to the synod group. I recommend
                Message 7 of 14 , Mar 7, 2001
                  P/S: Below is the message (part of it) I responded to Father John. If you carefully look at the header it is addressed to the "synod" group. I recommend being more careful before making accusations.

                  Subj: Re: [orthodox-synod] Fw: [rocaclergy]concerning F.Konstantin
                  Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 9:57:44 AM Eastern Standard Time
                  From: "Rev. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...
                  To: orthodox synod <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>

                  On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, The Stephens wrote:
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: "Quentin de Castelbajac" <quencast@...>
                  > To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Cc: <rocaclergy@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 5:12 AM
                  > Subject: [rocaclergy] concerning F.Konstantin
                  >
                  >
                  > > FOR THE RECORD
                  > >
                  > > 1. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff never has been, nor is he now, suspended
                  > > from priestly duties.

                  As it turns out, he was warned by the Synod (and by the
                  Metropolitan) that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
                  does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.

                  > > 2. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been relieved of his duties as the
                  > > spiritual director at Lesna convent, although an official ukase has
                  > > still not been issued to him.
                  > > 3. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has not served anywhere since he returned
                  > > to France on February 13, 2001, because he is ill, due to a heart
                  > > condition.

                  In a message dated Wed, 7 Mar 2001 9:36:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, trepatschkoj@... writes:

                  << No Father that is incorrect. I replied to your message which you posted on the "synod" list. I do not have access to the rocaclergy list.

                  John Trepatschko

                  In a message dated Wed, 7 Mar 2001 9:05:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Rev. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> writes:

                  << On Tue, 6 Mar 2001 trepatschkoj@... wrote:

                  > In a message dated 03/06/2001 6:57:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,
                  > vrevjrs@... writes:
                  >
                  >
                  > > that he must commemorate the local bishop, and that if he
                  > > does not, any services he celebrates are without Grace.
                  > >

                  The above message was my reply to the rocaclergy list. The
                  original message to which I replied on rocaclergy had been forwarded there
                  from "orthodox-synod", but the "rocaclergy" list is supposed to be
                  confidential, only for list members, and not forwarded to other lists--at
                  least not without permission.

                  "Rocaclergy" is also supposed to be only for ROCOR *priests*, and
                  not others in their households.

                  In Christ
                  Fr. John R. Shaw


                  Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                  >>



                  Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                  >>
                • Rev. John R. Shaw
                  ... My apologies then! The person I replied to, must have been the one who moved the posting. I believe they said something about doing so with the permission
                  Message 8 of 14 , Mar 7, 2001
                    On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 trepatschkoj@... wrote:

                    > No Father that is incorrect. I replied to your message which you posted on the "synod" list. I do not have access to the rocaclergy list.

                    My apologies then! The person I replied to, must have been the one
                    who moved the posting. I believe they said something about doing so with
                    the permission of Fr. de Castelbajac--from the rocaclergy list to the
                    orthodox-synod list, and not vice-versa.

                    In Christ
                    Fr. John R. Shaw
                  • frandrew@telusplanet.net
                    ... There you go again, Fr John! Spreading around your assumptions without checking the facts. Bishop Kyrill offered Fr Konstantin a parish in the Western
                    Message 9 of 14 , Mar 7, 2001
                      > > > 5. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been offered a position as pastor in
                      > > > the diocese of San Francisco and Western America by bishop Kyrill. He
                      > > > has not yet responded to this offer.
                      >
                      > It would appear that Fr. Konstantin's recent behavior has put an
                      > end to any such "position" being offered.
                      >
                      > > > It is sorrowful that even during Great Lent, some people engage in
                      > > > spreading defamatory rumors instead of confirming facts.
                      > > > Fr. Quentin Lyon, France, March 4, 2001
                      > > >
                      > One can heartily agree with this. However, based on eye-witness
                      > accounts, it would be hard to find the "protesting clergy" innocent of
                      > such rumor-mongering.

                      There you go again, Fr John!
                      Spreading around your assumptions without checking the facts. Bishop Kyrill
                      offered Fr Konstantin a parish in the Western America diocese on Thursday,
                      March 1, 2001.

                      With love in Christ and in His Truth!
                      Fr. Andrew
                    • trepatschkoj@aol.com
                      In a message dated 03/07/2001 1:34:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, ... Father John: I do not know if you have or not, but did you clear this up on the
                      Message 10 of 14 , Mar 7, 2001
                        In a message dated 03/07/2001 1:34:57 PM Pacific Standard Time,
                        vrevjrs@... writes:


                        > My apologies then! The person I replied to, must have been the one
                        > who moved the posting. I believe they said something about doing so with
                        > the permission of Fr. de Castelbajac--from the rocaclergy list to the
                        > orthodox-synod list, and not vice-versa.
                        >
                        > In Christ
                        > Fr. John R. Shaw
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        Father John:

                        I do not know if you have or not, but did you clear this up on the
                        "rocaclergy" list also. The message with the misinformation you sent to the
                        "synod" list, had the "rocaclergy" group down for a "copy to" (i.e. CC:)
                        so I assume they also received the same misinformation. It would probably
                        be a good idea to apologize to the priest who was unfairly accused of giving
                        out information from the "rocaclergy" group to members of his family.

                        In Christ,
                        John Trepatschko


                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Rev. John R. Shaw
                        ... And I spoke with a source close to Bishop Kirill about this on Monday, March 5, 2001. In Christ Fr. John R. Shaw
                        Message 11 of 14 , Mar 8, 2001
                          On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 frandrew@... wrote:

                          > > > > 5. Fr. Konstantin Fedoroff has been offered a position as pastor in
                          > > > > the diocese of San Francisco and Western America by bishop Kyrill. He
                          > > > > has not yet responded to this offer.
                          > >
                          > > It would appear that Fr. Konstantin's recent behavior has put an
                          > > end to any such "position" being offered.
                          >
                          > There you go again, Fr John!
                          > Spreading around your assumptions without checking the facts. Bishop Kyrill
                          > offered Fr Konstantin a parish in the Western America diocese on Thursday,
                          > March 1, 2001.

                          And I spoke with a source close to Bishop Kirill about this on
                          Monday, March 5, 2001.

                          In Christ
                          Fr. John R. Shaw
                        • Rev. John R. Shaw
                          ... I made no accusations against any priest. I merely said that other members of the household should not use the rocaclergy list. In Christ Fr. John R.
                          Message 12 of 14 , Mar 8, 2001
                            On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 trepatschkoj@... wrote:

                            > In a message dated 03/07/2001 1:34:57 PM Pacific Standard Time,
                            > vrevjrs@... writes:
                            >
                            >
                            > > My apologies then! The person I replied to, must have been the one
                            > > who moved the posting. I believe they said something about doing so with
                            > > the permission of Fr. de Castelbajac--from the rocaclergy list to the
                            > > orthodox-synod list, and not vice-versa.
                            > >
                            > > In Christ
                            > > Fr. John R. Shaw
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > Father John:
                            >
                            > I do not know if you have or not, but did you clear this up on the
                            > "rocaclergy" list also. The message with the misinformation you sent to the
                            > "synod" list, had the "rocaclergy" group down for a "copy to" (i.e. CC:)
                            > so I assume they also received the same misinformation. It would probably
                            > be a good idea to apologize to the priest who was unfairly accused of giving
                            > out information from the "rocaclergy" group to members of his family.
                            >
                            I made no accusations against any priest. I merely said that
                            "other members of the household" should not use the rocaclergy list.

                            In Christ
                            Fr. John R. Shaw
                          • trepatschkoj@aol.com
                            In a message dated 03/08/2001 6:33:31 AM Pacific Standard Time, ... If that is what your conscience tells you Father, so be it. In Christ, John Trepatschko
                            Message 13 of 14 , Mar 8, 2001
                              In a message dated 03/08/2001 6:33:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,
                              vrevjrs@... writes:


                              > I made no accusations against any priest. I merely said that
                              > "other members of the household" should not use the rocaclergy list.
                              >
                              > In Christ
                              > Fr. John R. Shaw
                              >
                              >
                              >

                              If that is what your conscience tells you Father, so be it.

                              In Christ,
                              John Trepatschko


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Rev. John R. Shaw
                              ... I did forward a copy of the previous letter to the rocaclergy list, BTW. In Christ Fr. John R. Shaw
                              Message 14 of 14 , Mar 8, 2001
                                On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 trepatschkoj@... wrote:

                                > In a message dated 03/08/2001 6:33:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,
                                > vrevjrs@... writes:
                                >
                                >
                                > > I made no accusations against any priest. I merely said that
                                > > "other members of the household" should not use the rocaclergy list.
                                >
                                > If that is what your conscience tells you Father, so be it.
                                >
                                I did forward a copy of the previous letter to the rocaclergy
                                list, BTW.
                                In Christ
                                Fr. John R. Shaw
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.