I don't understand why the holy synod did not depose + Demetri?
He retired. It is refered to in the timeline:http://www.orthodoxattorneys.org/docs/TimelineFinal.pdf
and he was listed as retired on the official website:http://www.orthodoxattorneys.org/docs/exh/Ex_24_-_Bishop_DEMETRI.pdf
Someone who was involved told me that assurances were given at the time that +Demetri would not be taken out of retirement. He focused on the assurances given by the Metropolitan, so I don't know if he can corroborate that the bishops all signed off on the agreement. I'll ask.
The official word was that the "Policies and Procedures" adopted would be followed in this matter. Have they?http://www.orthodoxattorneys.org/docs/exh/Ex_22_-_2003_0714_statement%20re_Bp_DEMETRI_fr_Arch.pdf
That's not an idle question: they were adopted by the Board of Trustees, and are used as a sort of legal disclaimer for disconduct by clergy. If not, when a clergyman commits an act that everyone considers serious (the law isn't considering the seriousness of +Demetri's action in comparison to anything else. Another court isn't going to either), let's say rape, a court can, and most assuredly, based on the precedence of what is happening to the Vatican's diocese's, will, hold the Archdiocese liable for damages for fostering an hostile environment, blah, blah, blah...
It is quite right that the Canons forbid that someone be punished twice for the same offense;
His Synod of Bishops seems to have punished him twice...
1. A period of excommunication
2. A period of exile.
They didn't punish him at all. He was put on retirement pending the criminal procedings, per the policies. When he was convicted, he tendered his resignation, which the Synod accepted. The alleged restrictions put on his serving were the terms of his retirement.
Email from "Abdullah Khouri" whose warnings and prophecies have so far come true.1. You speak of Abdullah Khouri as if he is some kind of clairvoyant holy man. Why?
Perhaps his accuracy in making the call?
Would you even care what he had to say if you and he didn't share the same opinion of Metropolitan Philip?
I am sure plenty in the Vatican's Boston Archdiocese share the same opinion on the matter. But maybe they just have something personal against Met. Philip.
2. Be honest with us, Tamara. You care nothing for Bishop Demetri or about the fact he is now in the U.S. You're just using him as a front for your REAL agenda, which is to continue your complaint against Metropolitan Philip. There's certainly much about Metropolitan Philip's recent, apparently heavy-handed management of the Antiochian Archdiocese worthy of your and my complaint. I just want you to be honest with us, if griping about Metropolitan Philip is all you REALLY want to do, and not hide behind the facade of self-righteous indignation toward Bishop Demetri.
So Metropolitan Philip wants to become the Orthodox Cardinal Law. That's enough to grip about. Just ask the Vatican's Boston Archdiocese.
IOW, Tamara, I think you're using the Bishop Demetri case as yet another piece of evidence to prove that Metropolitan Philip is too hungry for power to be fit to serve as your Metropolitan.
Of course the case of Bishop Demetri being another piece of evidence (see the Timeline) that proves, if true, that Metropolitan Philip is not fit to serve as anyone's Metropolitan is off point.
I was appalled when Cardinal Law was reassigned to the Vatican. Did you have any thoughts on the matter?
The courts have. But then, in the interest of full disclosure, I might mention that a benefactor of our parish, a millionaire, is not even Orthodox, but a communicant with the Vatican. He gives to us, he says, because he knows "that the money will be put to good use. If I give it to my church, it will go to pay off lawsuits for paedophile priests." I doubt that he will make that distinction between sodomizing boys and gropping women, and, if the Policy and Procedures weren't followed and the archdiocese is opening itself liable for damages, I guess we stand to lose some support.
Then again, it might not come to that: someone from the parish involved on the Archdiocese level with a financial background (and the father of 5 daughters) back a while made the statement that Fr. Allen left a bad taste in his mouth, and he wasn't going to swallow backsliding on the promises Met. Phillip on the +Demetri matter. So, like our beloved Bishop (not auxiliary) Mark's letter to the legal team for the Archdiocese, and the fact that criminal and liability law in the U.S. are outside Met. Philip or Damascus fiat, Englewood is going to find itself in a corner on this as well.
It promises to be an interesting convention come July.
No, I don't think he is a clairvoyant, he is just someone in the position to know what is happening.But you're just SO transparent.
What I find really interesting is you think you have the ability to read my mind. But you don't, so knock it off.
Fortunatly for Tamara, at times so is Met. Philip:witness the Bright Friday debacle.