The strange, sad case of the defrocked deacon, Lev Puhalo

[Kollyvas]

(coughing). Is that why +Bishop Tikhon (OCA) would not accept gleb podmoshensky as a hieromonk or the former clergy of Ben Lomond? LOL!
R

[Kollyvas]

Actually, the Holy Canons call for the deposition of those who would do so, and it is almost never seen in the Oikumene, for it is a schismatic act. As a matter of fact, this seems like the only instance the OCA has done such a thing in recent history.
R

[moschonisi]

I know nothing about "personal relationships" of other people, as enquired about by you. Your paragraph does sound, however, as if you are wishing to delve into the realm of slimy speculation.

You need to review the topic of this discussion to find the slime which you refer to above… He has been directly (or more often indirectly) promoting an exceedingly anti-Athonite agenda through pseudo-theological polemics for a long time!

I wish nothing for Mr Puhalo other than he:

• first start minding and dealing with his own business and issues, and,

• second, if he is guilty of acts that are lamentable, to cease and desist such acts and deal with the reality of whatever creeping or crawling invertebrate is within him that makes him behave the way he does.

His intelligence will indeed be his TRUE downfall one day. Mark my words! And he will take others down with him, both spiritually as well as organizationally.

But then what do I know? I am just an older immigrant man…

[moschonisi]

And for the record... here is what one finds in Mr. Puhalo's own monastery "history:"

"...In 1980, a small group of Canadians of Romanian descent, living in the Chilliwack area, came to the monastery and asked if they could worship in the monastery chapel. At this time it became necessary to provide a priest for the community and, since Deacon Lev was of Serbian descent, the monks turned to Bishop Iriney of the Free Serbian Orthodox Church. Bishop Iriney, who was himself quite missionary minded, agreed to ordain Deacon Lev as priest for the new parish and for the monastery. While the non-Serbian parish (and the later additions to the mission) could not, according to the constitution of the Serbian Church, be enrolled officially in the Serbian Church, Bishop (later Metropolitan) Iriney was determined to make the mission possible in any way he could."

FYI, Deacon Lev is Lazar Puhalo... NOTE: His deposition is discussed nowhere within but he is instead magically representing himself as a deacon in 1980!

SO, he went from a deposed deacon to a priest? Hmmmm...

Later on...

"Because of the increase in non-ethnic parishioners and clergy, the Canadian Orthodox Monastery and its mission eventually passed, together with a segment of the Greek Traditionalist Church, into the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The Western exarchate of the Greek Tranditionalist (Old Calendar) Church had been given the opportunity of merging with either the Polish Orthodox Church or the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, with whom they already in communion. The Ukrainian Orthodox was reborn in Ukraine under the venerable Metropolitan Mstislav, its first patriarch and Metropolitan Evloghios of Milan was to become its missionary exarch for Europe and North America. It was during this time that Fr Lazar was consecrated Bishop by Metropolitan Evloghios of Milan, and two other hierarchs. His eminence was elevated to the rank of Archbishop during the tenure of Patriarch Volodymir."

So, he goes from a deposed ROCOC deacon to a priest in "Free Serbian New Gracanica Diocese" to one of the God knows how many Greek Traditionalist Churches diocese, to the SCHISMATIC KP (that is, Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate, UOC-KP, which NOBODY recognizes), and then becomes bishop and Archbishop and ends up in OCA???

Are you kidding me?

WOW! Christopher Colombo had an easier route as he was discovering America...

Does this not raise ANY suspicions? What was OCA thinking? Was he re-ordained, re-consecrated, etc. etc. etc.? OCA is not in communion with either KP or the Old Calendarists discussed above. So, what happened? I mean since he claims to be some type of hierarchal authority do we not have a right to know?

His name and quotes are being used by all kinds of modern-day American saviors such as OCL and Pokrov and ...

Inquiring minds want to know!

[Kollyvas]

As a general practice, what does often happen is that a cleric falls out with his synodeia and is suspended/is on the verge of suspension. Suspended is not deposed. He then hops jurisdictions and is received, uncanonical in itself but a reality of warring jurisdictionalism. Since that cleric is received elsewhere prior to deposition by his old synodeia, he isn't "deposed." Here mr. puhalo was received AFTER deposition by ROCOR. After deposition, it is the general practice of almost ALL jurisdictions to not receive such people as "clerics." True, some resister jurisdictions and "claimant" jurisdictions tend to be freer in their observance of these types of Canons, but, in general, oikonomia can not be exercised when that exercise would be to abolish the Canon (s) altogether--that's a general rule. I have nothing to do with ROCOR.
R

[moschonisi]

...a hostile reference to "personal relationships" which was not an attempted euphemism for homosexuality...

Now, now, what are you tellings us my dear older non-immigrant friend and what personal knowledge in homosexual euphemisms are you referring to?

That is not very nice... (or, is it?) Where did you come up with that kind of wrong implication?

[joasia]

Well, I have a question. Is it the practice of the Orthodox tradition that when a cleric is deposed(aside from the conflicting jurisdiction), that it should be considered a deposition, just the same? After all, many people argue about jurisidictions, but everybody seems to state that they follow the Orthodox traditions of the holy fathers. So don't the rules apply to everyone, even if they don't agree with the other jurisdictional stance? Can't they at least agree about a deposition of a cleric?

You see, this is where I get confused. Aren't we suppose to consider the Orthodox clergy as legitimate(under Orthodoxy) despite the jurisdictions? But the jurisdictional fractions seem counter productive. It's like we're fighting ourselves. The catholics and jews and pagans...not to forget the demons...must be laughing with glee.

All I see are men who disagree with each other and anathamize each other...but they all claim to be Orthodox.

It's very confusing. I don't believe that I am not Orthodox because I am with a synod that others consider schismatic because they are having talks with the MP. My faith is not weakened because of the jurisdictional activities. So what makes me Orthodox??? The jurisdiction or my faith???

Andy calls me an heretic because I don't believe in ecumenism, which by the way, Met Philaret, Archbishop Averky and St. John Maximovich opposed and made clear statements against it. I guess then, he would label them as heretics too.

So we all claim to be Orthodox and the other is an heretic. How ridiculous is this becoming??

Maybe we need a catastrophe, in order to bring us together, because we have all gone over the deep end at this point.

In Christ,

Joanna