Author Topic: Archbishop John Sentenced To Two and a Half Years in Prison  (Read 11983 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BoredMeeting

  • Loving the Life of a Council Member
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 722
Re: Archbishop John Sentenced To Two and a Half Years in Prison
« Reply #90 on: May 17, 2012, 10:47:17 AM »
Hey, hey, hey. Good-bye.

Offline Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,017
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South (OCA)
Re: Archbishop John Sentenced To Two and a Half Years in Prison
« Reply #91 on: May 17, 2012, 12:24:52 PM »
Rakovsky--I think your analysis is spot one; while it is unlikely that the letter was dictated, perhaps the authorities demanded that he write something to implicate himself and the good bishop, and this is the result.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 12:25:15 PM by Second Chance »

Offline serb1389

  • Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,123
  • Save Oh Lord your People! And Bless us all!
Re: Archbishop John Sentenced To Two and a Half Years in Prison
« Reply #92 on: May 17, 2012, 01:20:58 PM »
Now what should someone do if they are a treasurer and the organization expels them?
Isn't it obvious that if someone is expelled from an organization they must turn over the funds to the organization?

Here, the Treasurer was the person with control over the funds, it was his account, and the Diocese said they couldn't pay the debts because the money was in the Treasurer's account. So the Treasurer in fact did take out the money and did turn it over like he was supposed to do.

Here is Deacon Toni's response to the above said. The link on preminportal's Website has been removed much to my chagrin. I've asked them several times to give me the file with this letter, but they won't. Deacon also wrote a nice piece on obedience, which I translated but they removed that as well. This makes me wonder a bit ... but the message is cut off.

*Deacon Tony is currently serving a five month prison sentence in Macedonia because his former Spiritual Father, ex- Bishop of the Povardarski Diocese in the Macedonian Orthodox Church, now imprisoned Archbishop Jovan of the "Orthodox Ohrid Archdiocese"convicted to one year jail time for embezzlement of Church donations, advised Tony to illegally withdraw Diocesan funds. This letter was written one month before the Deacon Tony was to leave for prison as  response to Bishop Jovan Vranishkovski's publication on his Website.

Letter written by Deacon Tony Petrusevski: A response to a letter written by the excommunicated Bishop John  (Jovan) of the OOA regarding his prison sentence.

Written on July 7th, 2006 – On the Orthodox
PreminPortal (Deacon
Tony granted ** permission to translate his reaction)

 "The "OOA" – "Orthodox Ohrid Archdiocese"
 recently published an Archpastoral Letter in
try and explain the court proceedings in which I
 participated as the primary accused.
 Archbishop Jovan's letter places the court case
 political context. Besides, all of these stories
 have been avoided if "someone" was not after
When I began my studies in the Orthodox Seminary
 College "St. Clement of Ohrid" in Skopje,
 Macedonia, I
never would have imagined that I would be
 this quickly in my first two years; that I would
already have garnered seniority of five days
 and a criminal indictment with a five month

=== message truncated ===

Same as above. -Serb1389.
As I remember from yesterday, in the rest of this supposed letter, Deacon Toni Petrusevski writes that he knew it would be illegal for him to withdraw the funds, but he did it anyway because he was listening to the bishop.

I find this strange, because as I explained above, it seems that the natural thing to do if you have money in your own account that now belongs to an outside organization is to take the money out and give it to the proper owner, which is what he did when it was given to the court the next working day.

So it seems strange to me that Deacon Toni would say in a letter that he knew it was illegal to take the money out of his own account if the purpose was to give it to the Court for distribution to the proper owner, which is what he or the bishop did the next day- the first working day.

i'm not gonna lie.  I lost you here buddy.  Could you explain it another way?
Sure, Serb.

My main question is: Can you please respond to the full text of what the Deacon Treasurer Petruseski wrote in his letter supposedly admitting his own guilt?

OK, here goes. Lichnidos says the Treasurer committed a crime. Lichnidos quoted in full a letter that says that the Letter is from Deacon Treasurer Petruseski. This letter says Peruseski knew that he was acting illegally and committing a crime.

You and I and others on this forum are doubtful that Petruseski committed a crime.

Petruseski's supposed letter says that his illegal act was taking money out of Petruseski's own bank account, and that he knew it was illegal when he was doing this.

Why do we doubt that this act was illegal?
1. I doubt that this was illegal because if:
2. A person is a treasurer of an organization
3. The person has the organization's money
4. The organization does not have control over the money
5. The organization expels the person from the organization
1. The person has to give the organization its money back.
2. To give the organization its money back, the person has to take the money out from his own account.

Mr. Petruseski did all those things I listed above, and the money was given to the court the first business day after he took the money out.

So: (A) it does not sound to me like what Mr. Petrusevski did was illegal.
And (B) because of this impression(A) when Mr. Petrusevski supposedly writes in the letter that Lichnidos quoted in full, where Petrusevski knew he was acting illegally when he took the money out, it seems strange that Petruseski would write what this supposed letter supposedly says.

Dear Serb:
What part of what I wrote above do you not understand?
What do you think about the supposed letter by Petrusevski where Petrusevski supposedly said he knew he was acting illegally when he withdrew the money?

1.  Now it definitely makes more sense.  So no more confusion. 
2.  To be honest I did not analyze it at all.  You have truly outdone yourself by actually analyzing the information & the facts given. 

In general I have to say/tell you that whenever I see letters against bishops, I take them with 1/10 a grain of salt.  I have known so many disgruntled clergymen who have written these kinds of letter b/c they have a bone to pick or b/c they get something out of it.  I'm not saying that the bishops were even in the right in those situations.  many times they were not.  but the issue always is:  what is YOUR involvement, and more importantly, how do you want to solve the situation.  His solution has turned out to be: put the bishop in jail & keep him there until we figure something better out.  The idiocy of it has me completely turned off to the subject.  Did I read the letter?  Yes I did.  But I just read it as a person who already understands the situation on higher levels & looks at his letter as a bunch of....fill in your word of choice here. 

I almost feel like we are reaching the same point in two different ways.  You through your analysis & me through my intuition & life experience.  The same point being:  This whole thing stinks to high heaven. 

Hope i've answered your questions.  Thank you for your analysis!