1. The emails were sent from a church computer.
2. The emails were sent regarding church business.
3. The emails describe a conspiracy between a bishop under discipline for immorality and a priest misrepresenting himself as Bp. Mark’s friend and helper.
There are lots of email programs used in offices these days that are either ‘key loggers’ or capture data being processed through them. Most are used to catch people watching porn or doing private business on company time. We don’t know how the emails were obtained.
The last company I worked for had us sign an disclosure form that told us that we had no expectation of privacy on company computers. We brought laptops with wireless connections if we wanted to have private time in the cubicle. If Fester was using OCA gear for his conspiracy AGAINST the OCA then he only has himself to blame.
We do not yet even have an eyewitness account of Bp. Mark saying what he did. No matter. We don’t need to give a man a fair chance to be confronted in a court of law. It is interesting how Micxhelopulos now has become the ACLU of the Orthodox Church without confronting the real story.
Certainly he does not want to discuss why Fester is talking to Nikolai or Nikolai’s lavender hue. Do not forget Nikolai’s gay bimbo eruption and the attempt to cover it up.
But why are those great defenders of Fester’s privacy not just as indignant that Nikolai was receiving confidential documents, which he admits to having:
“That report of sorts written by Archpriest Garklavs was never given to me-never! I received it from pirated sources as I did many other documents during this process.”
They are OK with ‘pirated sources’ as he is quite happy with leaked correspondences from Archbishop Dmitri’s files. The morality they have is conditional- it is OK to sin when the sin fits the overall good. ‘By any means necessary’ seems to be the new strategy.
But, here is the big question for George- are you OK with what Fester was doing?
This is the big question. Even if you throw Maymon to the curb you still have some big questions.
= Should Fester be punished for conspiring with Nikolai?
= Should the OCA investigate the leak to Nikolai of the Sexual Misconduct Panel Advisory Committee (SMPAC) Report?
= Should the OCA investigate the leak to Rod Dreher of the Sexual Misconduct Panel Advisory Committee (SMPAC) Report?
= Why do Dreher and Nikolai deserve to have confidential documents of the OCA before even the Holy Synod gets a look?
Fester is a pink predator from the Lavender Guard of Kondratick. Remember it was Fester the Dark Wizard who assisted Kondratick back when Kondratick was covering up all the iniquities of the OCA’s management.
I will now start to show you some of the players in this pink puzzle. The difference is that I will not have to use my own sources. I can use what it publicly available to show you exactly the kind of madness Fester is part of and why he should be uncovered.
If Bp. Mark sent the emails and he obtained them by hacking an account, I would have to say that I would be more inclined to show mercy the same way I would show mercy on a priest who disclosed the confession of a sexual predator who refused to stop hurting others. Fester wants to rehabilitate Nikolai. What else do he and Kondratick have planned?
I think it's hard to defend or criticize +Mark without knowing the exact circumstances, but I don't think it looks particularly good for him. I mean, this is gmail, not a mail server they have running in the closet of the chancery. It doesn't look particularly good for him, but let's not get into how it looks for +Mark. I don't have any problem with using whatever information the Synod had as reason to remove Fr Fester from a place of authority. Even without the e-mails, there is plenty of corroborating evidence that he was engaging in the sort of "political" activism that isn't appropriate in his position.
ReplyDeleteThe jury is still out on Bishop Mark. I've met him several times as he used to be my bishop. He is observant with praxis and Tradition, on the other hand he appears to be lacking in people skills. There's a page on http://www.concernedorthodox.org/ about him.
ReplyDeleteHowever from what I've heard, I don't know why Nikolai isn't a layman.
As for using company email, you're right. Never do personal stuff on company time and computer.
Christ is risen!
ReplyDeleteI am broadly in agreement with what I have seen on this blog, though I have pointedly declined to take sides in what appears to be a political squabble in the Synod. But I do have to express a respectful but vigorous disagreement with one line of your commentary.
"If Bp. Mark sent the emails and he obtained them by hacking an account, I would have to say that I would be more inclined to show mercy the same way I would show mercy on a priest who disclosed the confession of a sexual predator who refused to stop hurting others."
The confidentiality of confession is sacrosanct. The nature of the sin being confessed is irrelevant. On this point the canons together with the more or less unanimous teaching of the saints and church Tradition are in full agreement. To weaken that confidentiality for any reason might discourage someone from taking confession, which would be a terrible thing.
And it is also worth noting that in the United States and most other developed countries sacramental confession enjoys a legal privilege of the same nature as conversations with one's attorney. Which is to say that nothing said in confession could ever be admitted into evidence in a court of law. Even if a priest voluntarily broke that confidentiality his "revelations" would be legally inadmissible.
While I might sympathize with the motive in the circumstances you describe, I think a priest who deliberately violates the confidentiality of confession would need to find another line of work. I for one would be most uncomfortable taking confession with a priest who had betrayed what our Roman Catholic brothers call "the seal" of confession.
Under the mercy
John