Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

This forum is for polite discussion of political and social topics that may be uncomfortable for inquirers and some members. This includes anything politically charged, conspiracy theories, and/or end-times theories. All Forum Rules apply.


User avatar
searn77
Jr Member
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed 24 November 2010 10:00 pm
Faith: Orthodox Old Calendarist
Jurisdiction: Metropolia of Americas & Brit. Isles

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by searn77 »

I stand by what I have already said, but I just thought I would bring this up too.

When a person replies to this thread and adds their opinion on how one shouldn't discuss Fr. Seraphim's alleged homosexuality, this thread gets pushed up to the top of the list again, people who have subscribed to this thread get an email that a new post is made, people who might not have seen the thread before are more likely to see it now, so ultimately your goal of not discussing this topic fails.

If one truly thinks that this topic should not be discussed, one should simply stop discussing it here so that this thread can die and get moved on down the list.

Troparion of St. Philaret of New York
Let us the faithful now come together to praise our father, protector and teacher the pillar of the Orthodox faith and firm defender of piety even the wondrous hierarch Philaret and let us glorify our Saviour Who has granted us his incorrupt relics as a manifest sign of his sanctity.

Matthew
Protoposter
Posts: 1812
Joined: Sat 21 January 2012 12:04 am

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by Matthew »

searn77 wrote:

I stand by what I have already said, but I just thought I would bring this up too.

When a person replies to this thread and adds their opinion on how one shouldn't discuss Fr. Seraphim's alleged homosexuality, this thread gets pushed up to the top of the list again, people who have subscribed to this thread get an email that a new post is made, people who might not have seen the thread before are more likely to see it now, so ultimately your goal of not discussing this topic fails.

If one truly thinks that this topic should not be discussed, one should simply stop discussing it here so that this thread can die and get moved on down the list.

Dear Searn77, I see your point, of course. However, it does not take into account the full situation. By your logic we should say nothing, in which case you invite us to censor ourselves and allow only one point of view to be presented in this community which is not right. Further, if one believes that something wrong is transpiring it is our duty, whatever the consequences, to oppose it by, at the very least, saying that we disagree with it and to explain why we believe it is unhealthy for sincere Orthodox believers who are cultivating Orthodox spiritual life. The Holy Fathers knew this. That is why the cure is often to draw attention to a spark lest by being left alone it grow into a devouring and destroying fire that claims many victims. Knowledge and the force of reason is a better cure than silence which clings to the hope that the wrong will wither of itself. That might occur, but it is an unwise gamble. For this reason, it is probably wiser to oppose it.

I understand your reasons for standing by your views. However, I think if you give it more thought you should at least feel some reason for pause when you realize that there are really NO LIVES of the Saints that discuss them having had a homosexual death-style (I daren't call that thing a "life-style"). It is extremely likely that a few of the countless saints which the Church honors had such a sin, but despite that, what lives of the saints can you think of that drag that up and call attention to it? I can't recall any. Does that not teach you that we ought not to "break new ground" with our modern "superior understanding" that touching on such subjects is unwise and of insufficient benefit to warrant our attention? As Orthodox, our guide is the well-worn Tradition of the Church, the true pattern set forth from of old. They didn't give that sin any limelight, so neither do the Faithful today. For as the Apostle said, "For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret" Ephesians 5:12. Would you now have us speak of it, and even support books that publish the matter, contrary to the divinely inspired counsel of Saint Paul the Apostle?

Please, dear brother, respecting your point of view, please reconsider. Otherwise, please explain how what I have said is wrong, and is not the tradition of the Church nor what the Apostle meant. I am willing to change if you have the stronger and more historically supported point of view.

Of your kindness please pray for me, as I you.

Symeon

Matthew
Protoposter
Posts: 1812
Joined: Sat 21 January 2012 12:04 am

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by Matthew »

On balance, I should add that the Scripture, the instructions of the saints and the canons of the Church do at certain points discuss the sin of homosexuality. So I am not advocating or suggesting a total blackout on the issue as a whole. What I am saying is that it is conspicuously absent from the Church's hagiography. When it has been been discussed in the Church, it is only in general terms without reference to any people in particular; rather, what we see is a diagnosis of a disease and a discussion of its nature, its consequences, and its cure.

Symeon

User avatar
searn77
Jr Member
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed 24 November 2010 10:00 pm
Faith: Orthodox Old Calendarist
Jurisdiction: Metropolia of Americas & Brit. Isles

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by searn77 »

Icxypion wrote:
searn77 wrote:

I stand by what I have already said, but I just thought I would bring this up too.

When a person replies to this thread and adds their opinion on how one shouldn't discuss Fr. Seraphim's alleged homosexuality, this thread gets pushed up to the top of the list again, people who have subscribed to this thread get an email that a new post is made, people who might not have seen the thread before are more likely to see it now, so ultimately your goal of not discussing this topic fails.

If one truly thinks that this topic should not be discussed, one should simply stop discussing it here so that this thread can die and get moved on down the list.

Dear Searn77, I see your point, of course. However, it does not take into account the full situation. By your logic we should say nothing, in which case you invite us to censor ourselves and allow only one point of view to be presented in this community which is not right. Further, if one believes that something wrong is transpiring it is our duty, whatever the consequences, to oppose it by, at the very least, saying that we disagree with it and to explain why we believe it is unhealthy for sincere Orthodox believers who are cultivating Orthodox spiritual life. The Holy Fathers knew this. That is why the cure is often to draw attention to a spark lest by being left alone it grow into a devouring and destroying fire that claims many victims. Knowledge and the force of reason is a better cure than silence which clings to the hope that the wrong will wither of itself. That might occur, but it is an unwise gamble. For this reason, it is probably wiser to oppose it.

I understand your reasons for standing by your views. However, I think if you give it more thought you should at least feel some reason for pause when you realize that there are really NO LIVES of the Saints that discuss them having had a homosexual death-style (I daren't call that thing a "life-style"). It is extremely likely that a few of the countless saints which the Church honors had such a sin, but despite that, what lives of the saints can you think of that drag that up and call attention to it? I can't recall any. Does that not teach you that we ought not to "break new ground" with our modern "superior understanding" that touching on such subjects is unwise and of insufficient benefit to warrant our attention? As Orthodox, our guide is the well-worn Tradition of the Church, the true pattern set forth from of old. They didn't give that sin any limelight, so neither do the Faithful today. For as the Apostle said, "For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret" Ephesians 5:12. Would you now have us speak of it, and even support books that publish the matter, contrary to the divinely inspired counsel of Saint Paul the Apostle?

Please, dear brother, respecting your point of view, please reconsider. Otherwise, please explain how what I have said is wrong, and is not the tradition of the Church nor what the Apostle meant. I am willing to change if you have the stronger and more historically supported point of view.

Of your kindness please pray for me, as I you.

Symeon

I understand that you all wanted to voice your opinions in regards to this discussion as did I, but when people post multiple times to this thread stating their opinion that they've already stated and add nothing new to the thread, it makes this thread popular again, and for no real good reason. So that's why I said what I said. I didn't mean that you shouldn't speak out against something you view is wrong, but that by repeatedly bringing up this topic and adding nothing new to the thread one is just making this topic more popular and more easy to reply to than if the thread would just die.

And you're right, I don't know of any recognized saints who have lived homosexual lives before living an Orthodox one. But no, in my opinion that does not teach me that this sin should be hidden and not talked about. It's not like I'm bringing a new teaching into Orthodoxy or trying to say homosexuality is okay, as you're right, it is a death-style and a terrible sin. But so is pride, so is anger, so is murder, etc. And in the lives of the saints, especially St. Mary of Egypt, we get to hear about her sinful life and how she repented of it, revealing how great and forgiving our God is. And while homosexuality might not have been talked about in the lives of the saints (at least not that I've heard of although I could be wrong), I don't feel like this would be kept hidden deliberately, while you and some of the others on here (correct me if I'm misunderstanding you) think this was done deliberately. So I'm sorry but I just don't see how keeping hidden the homosexual acts of a man before repenting and becoming a saintly man is a tradition of the Church (again, correct me if I'm misunderstanding you as I truly am not trying to misrepresent what you're saying).

And in regards to Ephesians 5:12, the Apostle Paul was talking to the Christians on how they should not partake in foolishness, fornication, covetousness, etc; how they should not be partakers of these sinful lifestyles or be partakers with those who do these sinful actions even in secret. He even says, "Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light..." Eph 5:7-8. So the Apostle Paul even mentions that the Christians in Ephesus were sometimes darkness, or in other words, he was saying that this community in Ephesus did partake in these sinful ways before they turned to Jesus, just like how Fr. Seraphim Rose engaged in homosexual tendencies before he became Orthodox and repented. So if anything, I think the Apostle Paul verifies what I'm trying to say.

Also, just out of curiosity, are there any other sins besides homosexuality that you feel should not be discussed as a part of a person's life before repentance?

And of course, I will pray for you as I hope you you will do for me.

Troparion of St. Philaret of New York
Let us the faithful now come together to praise our father, protector and teacher the pillar of the Orthodox faith and firm defender of piety even the wondrous hierarch Philaret and let us glorify our Saviour Who has granted us his incorrupt relics as a manifest sign of his sanctity.

Matthew
Protoposter
Posts: 1812
Joined: Sat 21 January 2012 12:04 am

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by Matthew »

searn77 wrote:

I understand that you all wanted to voice your opinions in regards to this discussion as did I, but when people post multiple times to this thread stating their opinion that they've already stated and add nothing new to the thread, it makes this thread popular again, and for no real good reason. So that's why I said what I said. I didn't mean that you shouldn't speak out against something you view is wrong, but that by repeatedly bringing up this topic and adding nothing new to the thread one is just making this topic more popular and more easy to reply to than if the thread would just die.

And you're right, I don't know of any recognized saints who have lived homosexual lives before living an Orthodox one. But no, in my opinion that does not teach me that this sin should be hidden and not talked about. It's not like I'm bringing a new teaching into Orthodoxy or trying to say homosexuality is okay, as you're right, it is a death-style and a terrible sin. But so is pride, so is anger, so is murder, etc. And in the lives of the saints, especially St. Mary of Egypt, we get to hear about her sinful life and how she repented of it, revealing how great and forgiving our God is. And while homosexuality might not have been talked about in the lives of the saints (at least not that I've heard of although I could be wrong), I don't feel like this would be kept hidden deliberately, while you and some of the others on here (correct me if I'm misunderstanding you) think this was done deliberately. So I'm sorry but I just don't see how keeping hidden the homosexual acts of a man before repenting and becoming a saintly man is a tradition of the Church (again, correct me if I'm misunderstanding you as I truly am not trying to misrepresent what you're saying).

And in regards to Ephesians 5:12, the Apostle Paul was talking to the Christians on how they should not partake in foolishness, fornication, covetousness, etc; how they should not be partakers of these sinful lifestyles or be partakers with those who do these sinful actions even in secret. He even says, "Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light..." Eph 5:7-8. So the Apostle Paul even mentions that the Christians in Ephesus were sometimes darkness, or in other words, he was saying that this community in Ephesus did partake in these sinful ways before they turned to Jesus, just like how Fr. Seraphim Rose engaged in homosexual tendencies before he became Orthodox and repented. So if anything, I think the Apostle Paul verifies what I'm trying to say.

Also, just out of curiosity, are there any other sins besides homosexuality that you feel should not be discussed as a part of a person's life before repentance?

And of course, I will pray for you as I hope you you will do for me.

Dear brother, you and I are agreed that in general terms there is a history in Scripture and the Church of encouraging people with general references such as "and such were some of you" of the apostle. As for St Mary of Egypt, they were of the natural kind. I have read in the lives of saints some references to "worse sins" or sometimes the word used is "unnatural" but it doesn't go into further detail. In fact, that last wording might have been in the life of St Mary of Egypt, too. But like I said, those are veiled terms that hide as much as reveal. The church has shown victory in repentance through such things. Discretion (respect for someone's privacy) is a morally sound tradition of the Church. Secrecy is a morally compromised tradition of the Roman Catholics. These are two different worlds. So I am not advocating or saying that the true Church practises secrecy. I haven't got a system or rationale about this all figured out. It is just that in a simple way I consider the hagiography of the Church as my guide and example and teacher, and it is as I said conspicuously absent; so why go beyond the boundaries set by the Fathers who exercised discretion in these matters. So that answers your last question: I don't have a list or a system here about what is or is not to be kept out of public view. I simply took note since this thread started up of the question, and I asked myself how I feel about it, realized that I don't see it in the history of the Church, and so I then explained what motivated me to take that position and why I think it is solidly attested to, to such a degree that it would be fair to encourage other brothers and sisters to avoid it too. That is all I am saying. I guess we just have two different ways of looking at this issue. I appreciate your kind and respectful tone. I hope I have not failed to do the same.

God bless.

Symeon

Haralambos
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed 21 March 2012 8:02 pm

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by Haralambos »

This article was written by someone involved with St. Herman of Alaska Monastery in Platina, CA. in it's early years and who had personal knowledge of the character of Fr. Seraphim Rose

A Defense of Hieromonk Fr. Seraphim Rose
This remembrance is in regards to a current useless debate, among some,who
who never personally knew Fr. Seraphim but who only 'know' what others
surmise at a distance about...him, about
the possible 'homosexuality of Fr. Seraphim', etc. It seems too, that
the motive of some of these nay-sayers, is to discredit/defame/blacken
Fr. Seraphim's person, and his spiritual writings, etc.
And, some of these in the worldly/modernist/eccumenist -Orthodox camp,
refuse to accept sound Orthodox Patristic teachings....which is what Fr.
Seraphim was all about.
As with the Toll-Houses, as with all that he studied and taught and lived,
Fr. Seraphim never taught his own private views, he rather only taught
others, what the Holy Fathers preached.
I personally had much contact with both Fr. Seraphim (born Eugene
Rose), and, with Fr. Herman (born, Gleb) Podmoshensky, both a bit before
they founded their Platina monastery, in San Francisco,and much more so,
over a long period of years, up until Fr. Seraphim's passing, when they
resided at their Platina monastery, and I also kept contact with others
there,...who kept me posted as to what was going on there, even after Fr.
Herman took his monastery and ran with that vagante 'Met. Pangratios
Vrionis' and it's off-shoot, 'Christ the Saviour Brotherhood', under Vincent
Rossi (originally, The Holy Order of MANS, cult).
In those Platina days, what I saw in Fr. Seraphim was a very sincere and
somewhat severe ascetic; an intellectual mind, a linguist who could read and
pray, translate in many languages, so he didn't understand why everyone
couldn't, a man with a very high IQ, one truly engaging in a daily battle
with his flesh (as we all are supposed to do, but few of us really do).
He was entirely dedicated to God and the Church.Especially, he was on a
mission to learn and then share, Patristics,i.e. what the holy Fathers lived
and taught.
Surely, his neglect for his body and his own health, were what lead to his
early death. Of that I know. I had visited with him about two weeks before
his final collapse, when he invited me into his humble cell. And, I was at
his funeral too.
I saw absolutely no signs at all,...in all those long years, that he lead
any secret unspiritual life-style, though as it proved to be later on, Fr.
Herman ...did.
One example: Someone who participated in a St. Herman Summer retreat, told
me later, that when he and Fr. Seraphim walked alone, up the mountain from
the monastery, he asked Fr. Seraphim's spiritual advice about his own vexing
homosexuality, to which Fr. Seraphim responded.....as a huge rattle snake
made it's sudden appearance and rattling near them; ready to strike them, in
the brush, "See that snake!....just as we now must flee that snake, so FLEE
homosexuality!"....as they both ran from the spot...Hardly the words of a
practicing homosexual, ...of one who condoned or excused it!
Fr. Seraphim was always ...denying himself, in all ways ....sleep, hard
physical labour, no heat in his tiny cell, etc, etc, etc.... and
for monastics especially, that ALSO means, NO sexual excitment or
'activity', EVER, with anyone! And too, he lived, daily, in...strict
monastic...OBEDIENCE to his monastic partner! Thus, he had to endure the
failings of his partner, and to not judge him,but only judge himself.
Even the entertainment of such lustful thoughts, is impossible. And
THAT is what Fr. Seraphim practiced.
Anyone and everyone who ever knew him, or was close to him WITNESSED what I
relate here!
It was years later, when I did borrow that book by his non-Orthodox niece,
that, "Seraphim Rose, The True Story and Private Letters" by Cathy Scott,
that I learned much about his pre-Orthodox, early childhood and life.
Yes, in his early youth, (for whatever reasons...anyone......develops/or may
be born with/etc.- whatever sexual attractions to ANYONE of either sex, a
very very complicated subject, i.e. human sexuality, etc. ..to say the
least), the personal letters in that book do prove that he had such erotic
love affairs with some other men. He even stated in one of his letters,
which are in that book, that, "I am a homosexual". But, he outgrew that
early phase of his life,even before his encounter with Orthodoxy, in his Zen
phase, when even in that spiritual discipline, pleasures of the flesh were
unacceptable., and seen as an obstacle to spiritual advancement.
However, from all that I have known or learned or studied, about Fr.
Seraphim, when he entered Orthodoxy, under the spiritual guidance of
St. John Maximovitch, (to whom, he must have confessed his previous sins,
before baptism), he radically changed completely and started his life long
repentance and theosis.
Orthodox Eugene Rose, was a new man, a new creature in Christ
And, for the monastic who is dead to this world, in the spiritual realm, it
doesn't matter whatsoever!....what his former physical/sexual attractions
were in his old life, whether 'heterosexual'.... or... 'homosexual'....he
gives it all up for Christ, and to attain the Heavenly Kingdom, to gain that
imperishable crown in the New Jerusalem. His life is one of DISPASSION, and
unattachment to things of the body and of this corrupted fallen world.
Fr. Seraphim was such a one.
But one of his heavy burdens, his albatross around his neck, HIS CROSS!, was
his weak and passion-filled monastic partner, Gleb (Fr. Herman)Podmoshensky,
who( as he related to me), from early childhood in chaotic communist-ruled
Latvia, (where his father and other family members, died martyric deaths at
the hands of the Reds), had a confirmed homosexual self-identity, and...
later on, he defended it as some sort of legitimate alternative life-style,
(as the militant gays do today),indeed, he even recommended it, i.e. to
become monastics, for all Orthodox males, who were 'homosexual', meaning that: they
could still have such sexual relationships, WHILE also being Orthodox
monastics, etc.
When Fr. Herman openly said such bizarre things to a group at a St.
Herman's Summer Pilgrimage at Platina, citing ....Greek or other
indiginous/'native', Orthodox-cultural life, where, he claimed, such
things were 'commonly accepted' by the local born-Orthodox rural
villagers, Fr. Seraphim left the lecture in obvious & open disgust. Many
witnessed that incident.
Such a defense, upset Fr. Seraphim greatly!, especially as both of the two,
routinely confessed to each other their sins,... plus Fr.
Seraphim was no dummy, and he could SEE the overt physical affection
that his partner showed to some young male pilgrims to the monastery!
with the excuse of the Russian 3 kisses, etc., prolonged
hugging, all of which monastics, either monks or nuns, should NEVER
do!), so Fr. Seraphim HAD to know of his partner's misdeeds, at least
with some of them... which caused him constant grief and sorrow, and
shame.
Fr. Herman, however, did most of his ....sexual adventures outside the
monastery, when he was on his... missionary journeys. At the
monastery, he was more careful, especially so with Russian boys from
San Francisco, as they might make big trouble for him down there in the
Russian community... which did later happen with one young Basil V.from
Burlingame.
But, with converts, Herman was bolder, as he could always claim that,
'What do you expect from crazy-converts!?' (i.e. they lie, they invent
fantasies, etc.) But as a true ascetic, Fr. Seraphim always blamed himself,
not others. The ancient monastic rule is: "To be hard on oneself and easy on
others". Fr. Seraphim always followed that. Fr. Herman did not.
From what was related to me, by a priest, very close to him, had Fr.
Seraphim lived a bit longer than he did, he was planning on leaving
Platina and his unrepentant/unstable partner and making or going to a
new monastery somewhere else. I surmise, this being because of Fr.
Herman's unrepentant/rebellious secret lifestyle .....the REAL reason
Herman was defrocked (as I was a witness to, myself and with a number of
other witnesses, and as one who gave my own sworn testimony on the Gospel
and kissing the cross, against Herman, to our Archbishop Anthony
(Medvedev)...in order to STOP Herman from continuing to do his secret sexual
misdeeds, and to thus, discourage and harm souls...especially of various
young men.) I have suffered much abuse and calumny from Herman and his blind
devotees, for my part in exposing him. He refers to me as,"'That Scum
Everiss".. for many years now. Though the official public reason for his
subsequent defrocking, was, 'for disobedience', (of which he was indeed
guilty of, that's true enough), that public charge was a cover-up, to
protect the public image of the church,...i.e. what bishops do –
Though the extreme shock of learning about Herman's sins, lead to Archbishop
Anthony's inner suffering much till he died, including all thevicious
slander directed against him, in this ROCOR western diocese by Herman, who
depicted him, as the persecuting/evil bishop, who was against the saintly
abbot! (i.e. Herman).
And that was what Archbishop Anthony got, for all his long years of loving &
devoted care and his archpastoral support for Platina and as he ordained
both fathers.
Yet, unlike what the Catholic bishops have done or not done in their
such cases, on orders from the Holy Synod, our Archb. Anthony DID
finally defrock Herman, but with great reluctance and after giving
Herman about 2 years or more to repent. Herman has never yet,
repented, but instead he lead Platina into schism, untill the brotherhood
could take no more, and they voted to join the Serbian church some years
ago. And at this present time, Herman lives in a small trailer or dwelling
in the tiny town of Platina,down the mountain from 'his' monastery, where in
his wheel-chair bound state now, some of the monastery brothers daily come
and help him......and also ask his..spiritual advice (!). And, Herman still,
legally owns the monastery property, in his name!But, Herman refuses to
recognize the Serbian bishop, as over himself, saying: "My only bishop is in
Heaven, St. John Maximovitch!". So, can we find fault, now, with Fr.
Seraphim, as by 'guilt by association'? ...i.e. was he co-guilty in the sins
of his monastic partner? I say, NO!
All the evidence that I know of, clearly shows Fr. Seraphim to have
been a genuine spiritual giant, a valid model for us all. However,...
he lived his early pre-Orthodox life, he spent the later and end
larger Orthodox-Christian part of his life, as a true ascetic and a giant of
a heroic Orthodox theologian. Fr. Seraphim LIVED the theology.
These are a few things, that I KNOW of, not wild & salacious speculation
as is coming from some others these days, of, my brief testimony – and which
others close to Platina and Fr. Seraphim have shared with me, over the years.
But sadly, for those.... few... who are today aware of, or semi-aware
of, Fr. Seraphim's monastic partner's sins and failings, ROCOR
defrocked former-Abbot, Herman,... I have seen a pathetic unChristian
effort to besmirch and blacken Fr. Seraphim's name too, as if by his
closeness to Herman, he too was guilty of the same secret sins of the
flesh. I KNOW such was not the case!
Fr. Seraphim and Herman Podmoshensky were/are two, VERY different people.
Fr. Seraphim was the true self--abnegating ascetic, and poor Fr. Herman...
just playing his own pompous deluded/in prelest, 'Holy
Starets' role and his own version of the 'monk', often appointing
himself, the spiritual guide of everyone, even when they never requested
that of him.
POSTSCRIPT: The dedicated monastic, gives up ALL physical/erotic/passionate
'attachments' to ANY other human being, no matter what sex they are! His
only love is agapia-love, as he must be above the flesh, not a prisoner of
it's lusts....which separate us from God.
They are eunuchs of God!...and that is what Fr. Seraphim Rose was, and how
he left this world. Memory Eternal Dear Father Seraphim!
Rd. Daniel Everiss

JHunt777
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue 12 May 2009 4:47 am
Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR

Re: Fr Seraphim Rose's alleged homosexuality

Post by JHunt777 »

It is hard to overlook the fact that Fr. Herman of Platina and Fr. Panteleimon of HTM were accused of doing and teaching practically the same horrible things at the same time. Fr. Herman was suspended in 1984 and Fr. Panteleimon in 1986 by ROCOR, and both have been accused of similar Geronda/Staretz complexes as well as teaching the acceptability of homosexual acts within "spiritual" relationships. The two monasteries certainly had a relationship of rivalry, but is it merely coincidence that both fell into the same homosexual sins and taught the same erroneous falsehoods regarding homosexual acts? Was their any written correspondence between Fr. Herman and Fr. Panteleimon that would indicate a shared belief concerning the subject, or a common source for these abberrant teachings and practices?

Locked