Competing Visions for Gay and Lesbian Catholics

Sometime in the 1980s, after attending a Dignity USA Mass for gay and lesbian Catholics, I found myself in bed with one of the attendees, a religious guy who firmly believed, as I did then, that the Church’s teaching on same-sex relations was skewed. As we emerged from a tangle of top sheets, “Luke” looked me straight in the eye and announced that he had something to tell me. “Have you heard about the latest message from Our Lady of Medjugorje?” he asked, his look becoming very serious. He was referring to the alleged apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary to six children that began in June 1961 in the small mountain village of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that have continued to the present on an ad hoc basis with one or two of the original children. Luke informed me that the Virgin’s latest message had to do with the primacy of love in human relationships. The message, according to him, seemed to suggest that if spiritual love sometimes slips into the physical realm, it still maintains its spirituality, even if the physical expression violates the cold letter of Church law. In other words, the Blessed Virgin of Medjugorje approved of our bedroom gymnastics because there was real “love” there, even though there wasn’t real love, because after that experience, Luke moved on to other men, and I went on to forget about him as well. The visions at Medjugorje have never been approved by the Catholic Church. Some Catholic thinkers and commentators like Malachi Martin have always condemned the apparitions as having “suspect” origins. I was an on/off again member of Dignity Philadelphia in the 1980s. At the time I was interviewing Father John McNeil, author of “The Church and the Homosexual,” digging deep into John Boswell’s “Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality,” and going out to lunch with Bishop John Spong of the Episcopal Church to get his take on the “new” theology that freed homosexuality from the sin-drenched world of the Old Testament and the writings of Saint Paul. Simply put, part of that new theology maintained that the sin of Sodom was not about consensual same-sex relationships per se but about the sin of inhospitality and rape, et cetera. In the 1980s, I attended a Hans Kung lecture at Temple University, got the Swiss theologian’s autograph, and reported on the lecture in a way that highlighted Fr. Kung’s views on sexuality: if “love” is in the equation, there’s no sin, gay or straight. (Fr. Kung, who never wore his priestly collar, lived openly with a woman in violation of his vow of celibacy.) In 1979, his status as a Catholic theologian was revoked by Pope John Paul II and the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith because he had “departed from the integral truth of the Catholic faith.” Dignity was founded in 1973 after Sister Jennine Gramick, a co-founder of (the pro-gay) New Ways Ministry along with Fr. Bob Nugent (now deceased), wanted to organize “gay friendly” Masses for a Philadelphia friend named Dominic Rolla, an early gay rights figure in the city. Together with Fr. Paul Morrissey and Fr. Myron Judy, both Philadelphians, the group started to have Sunday evening Masses in local Episcopal churches. Dignity Philadelphia currently meets weekly at St. Luke and the Epiphany at 330 South 13th Street. Dignity Masses originally adhered to a traditional structure: the celebrant was a validly ordained male priest; there were occasional processions with banners. The hymns, however, were always more “Protestant evangelical-style” than orthodox Catholic. Bad Mass music became the norm in Catholic churches after the Second Vatican Council. That’s when exquisite Latin hymns were replaced by tommyrot songs like “On Eagles’ Wings.” For a brief time after its founding, Dignity Masses seemed very much like the parish Masses in most Catholic churches. Over time, many Dignity chapters across the US began to change the Mass, especially as the larger gay movement grew more “woke.” Dignity liturgies followed suit like an obedient servant. In May 2023, Dignity Philadelphia celebrated its 50th anniversary. The event was highlighted in a recent issue of Billy Penn: “Step inside the recreation center at Saint Luke and the Epiphany on Sunday evenings and you’ll find a traditional celebration of mass. Except in this case, the priest is a married woman,” the article begins. The writer neglects to mention that the Catholic Church does not recognize women priests, despite the existence of a worldwide organization known as Roman Catholic Women Priests, or women who have been “ordained” to the priesthood by disobedient rogue Catholic bishops who want to remain anonymous. “…Dignity Philadelphia has been progressive in allowing married people, women, and LGBT people to lead mass, as well as involving lay people in leadership decisions.” In the left progressive world of woke theology, the so-called “priesthood of the people” has become a popular concept, allowing anyone who feels called to say Mass to do just that. This philosophy essentially abolishes the priesthood as it has been understood for 2,000 years. “Hymns and prayers are modified to include gender-nonconforming language,” the Billy Penn article continues. Years ago, at my last Dignity Philadelphia Mass, I heard “Mother God” in conjunction with the traditional “Our Father” at the beginning of the Lord’s Prayer. I resolved then and there never to return to Dignity Philadelphia. Changing the words of the founder of Christianity was tantamount to the greatest heresy ever. Liturgical corruption and innovation, gender ideology, and the socialist idea that anyone who feels called to say Mass can say it — all of this was certainly not Catholic. Let’s reverse course and take a look at the other gay and lesbian Catholic organization that receives much less publicity than Dignity: Courage and Encourage. The Philadelphia Courage website states that “Courage members are men and women who experience same-sex attraction and who have made a commitment to strive for chastity.” Encourage is for parents, spouses, siblings and friends of people who, as LGBT, “are looking for help to keep the faith and keep their family bonds intact.” You won’t see Courage at June Pride events, but the group is big on annual religious retreats held at various cities in the United States. These three-to-four day retreats include daily Mass, lectures, panel discussions and welcoming receptions. The leader of Philadelphia Courage group, Fr. Chris Rogers, currently pastor of Saint Patrick’s Catholic Church in Kennett Square but who worked as an assistant pastor at Saints Philip and James in Exton, Pennsylvania, where I went to grade school. Liturgical corruption and innovation, gender ideology, and the socialist idea that anyone who feels called to say Mass can say it — all of this was certainly not Catholic. It should not come as a surprise that Courage gets very bad rap in the gay and lesbian press. An article from “Lavender” in June 2010 posits, “…But then, Courage pelvis-gazes in a time wrap. It was formed in 1980 under the aegis of Terence Cardinal Cooke, Archbishop of New York, with Father John Harvey as Founding Director. That was soon after Anita Bryant’s anti-gay campaign galvanized social conservatives, setting the tone for an anti-gay backlash exacerbated shortly thereafter when the AIDS crisis hit…” The odd juxtaposition of Courage with Anita Bryant definitely sets a tone. The writer then attacks the priests who serve the Courage population: “The priests deserve some pity. They don’t know themselves. They supposedly always have held to celibacy, so the expansive nature of sexual awakening healthily channeled is shut off to them — arrested development… In essence, these priests and their adherents have been emasculated.” The writer then makes an awful confession. He admits that he faked his way into Courage membership by telling the moderator he was a Catholic blue collar guy whose breakup with his girlfriend had caused him to experience feelings of attraction to the same sex. Unlike Dignity, potential Courage members usually go through a short screening interview prior to membership. The spy then goes on to critique the men and women he meets in Courage meetings. “A very troubled man in his 20s — who had utter contempt for pro-gay activism — literally seethed with anxiety about social pressures he felt were out there in the world that wanted him to go the way of homosexuality — hence, away from salvation. He had visited various priestly orders on a quest for his life’s purpose. Although he clearly and naturally presented as straight and masculine, he was hyperconscious that others ‘would know.’ It gnawed at him.” In 2012, Hartford’s “The Rainbow” quoted a Dignity member’s view of Courage: “Courage’s falsehood is that gay people cannot live full, loving lives and express themselves [sexually] in a loving way.” Courage is a form of spiritual violence, the Dignity member added. Dignity Philadelphia and Courage are on my mind because of certain developments in the Catholic Church, most notably in Germany, where German Catholic bishops recently endorsed the blessing of same-sex unions. While such endorsements go against Church teaching, Pope Francis has refrained from penalizing the German bishops. The Catholic Church in Germany has been undergoing a woke revolution for a number of years. As a result of this radicalization, the Church there has lost more than a half a million members. People are leaving because the Church no longer has a spiritual dimension. Traditionally, the Catholic Church has always been a force against the culture of the age. This is no longer the case in Germany, where the Church has “married” the culture. In October, the sixteenth General Assembly of the Ordinary Synod of Bishops, or the Synod on Synodality, will open in Rome. Many of the participants have been specifically appointed by Pope Francis. Top on the list for debate are the blessing of same-sex unions and women priests. Critics see the Synod as the beginning of the “Anglicization” of the Catholic Church. Will the Synod approve the blessing of same-sex couples? If so, what will happen to Courage members who are trying to live the tenets of their Faith when it comes to chastity? Should they throw in the towel and join Dignity, where they can feed on gender ideology and delight in a drag queen saying Mass because the drag queen felt called to do so? I asked Father Kyle Schippel, a Courage chaplain, what he thought about the upcoming October Synod and the possibility of support for the blessing of same-sex unions. “Regarding the Synod, I can say that Courage is watching it closely. We know that true freedom comes from following Jesus, so we always want to hold that up as a priority. And living in the right relationship with Him is the key to that freedom. We are confident that Church teaching is timeless and enduring; and that the Holy Spirit remains firmly in leadership of the Church. “We continue to encourage our members to pray for the Synod, of course,” he added.

Cemeteries

Har Jehuda Cemetery is a 27-acre Jewish cemetery on Lansdowne Avenue in Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania. Julius Moskowitz, a Russian Jew, founded the cemetery in the 1890s as a burial ground for Eastern European Jews. A large portion of Har Jehuda borders the backyards of about fifteen row houses on Bond Avenue, the street where my father and mother began their married life. Har Jehuda had magnificent trees that, to my five-year-old eyes, seemed different than any tree in the neighborhood. They were tall and expertly pruned narrow trees that somehow reminded you of landscapes in Israel. A high wire fence and a small border wall with a pathway on top of it marked the border of the cemetery facing our backyard. Children often walked along the top of the wall because it afforded a good glimpse into the heart of Har Jehuda. During one walk along the wall, I spotted an old woman kneeling by a tombstone. Her face was close to the earth; she wore a black scarf on her head and she was weeping copious tears. Curious, I studied her for a moment then walked away so as not to be noticed but when I returned a few minutes later, she was still sobbing. Not being able to feel or relate to that kind of pain at age five, I still felt a nagging, mild distress inside. The image of that old woman kneeling by a tombstone has stayed with me all my life. When my family moved to the farmlands of Frazer, Chester County, there was another cemetery near our house. Philadelphia Memorial Park on Phoenixville Pike is a bronze flat marker cemetery although there is a small, older section of upright markers, some with pictures of the deceased attached to the tombstones. This upright marker section is no longer used and most, if not all, of the tombstone pictures have fallen off. The ten-acre non-sectarian cemetery has a massive bell tower that rang out hymns at various times during the day. The hymns would resound throughout the area with great power, although a neighbor of ours complained about the music, calling it a religious infringement on his rights as an atheist. He would often complain to me when I went to his house (I was the neighborhood paperboy) to collect the weekly subscription fee. “That tower has to go!” he’d grumble, as if I had anything to do with the programmed generic songs that didn’t quite strike me as hymn-like at all. Philadelphia Memorial Park, founded in 1929, became the repository of hundreds of bodies in April of 1951 when the American Mechanics Cemetery at 22nd and Diamond Street in Philadelphia, was uprooted by the Philadelphia Housing Authority for the construction of a housing project. In her 2012 blog, A Journey into the Past, Patricia Marie writes: “When Mechanics was opened between 1848 and 1849, the location at 22nd and Diamond Street was considered a rural area. After the Civil War, industry and housing took over and when the city wanted to build housing projects, it was cheap and easy to take over old cemeteries. Headstones were disposed of and bodies removed to mass graves in other cemeteries and then it was discovered that all bodies were not removed but built upon. If a lot owner had the money to move their loved ones, then they could do so. Most people did not have the money, therefore, their loved ones were removed by the city and placed elsewhere in mass graves.” Not far from Philadelphia Memorial Park is Haym Salomon Memorial Park, a Jewish Cemetery opened in 1883. Singer Jim Croce, who grew up in the Bywood and Drexel Hill section of Upper Darby, is buried here. Croce died in a plane crash on September 20, 1973, after performing at Northwestern State University. Philadelphia Memorial Park was a great place to ride your bicycle or take a long walk. In the spring, the cemetery became alive with the scent of flowers and freshly mowed grass. There, among the hills and fields of Chester County, the cemetery was a good place to observe the occasional circling hawk or the low flying pheasant. In the wintertime with the grounds blanketed in snow, Philadelphia Memorial Park became the perfect solitary escape, made for personal reflection when you wanted to get away from the mayhem of a large family. Graves were dug around-the-clock in Memorial Park. The sight of small “digging” tractors and gravediggers carrying shovels put you on notice that your life was not forever. Even more disturbing was the sight of a fresh grave with mounds of soft earth coming to a slight peak topped with colorful wreaths with the name of the deceased on gold or silver ribbons. Dear Dana, Forever Loved Little Gregory, Always in Our Hearts Precious Aunt, You will Always be Remembered Philadelphia Memorial Park was also very much about the living. I learned how to ride a bicycle there. Later, there were driving lessons with my mother or father. The Park was also an infamous necking and smooching nook (on summer evenings, the action accelerated considerably). Out with friends during hikes we would try not to walk over fresh graves but approximate where the interred coffin was underground and then walk around it. When we didn’t get this right and inadvertently “stepped on” someone, we would mumble a cursory, “I’m sorry.” Visiting this place of death was not depressing but often had the opposite effect of making us more gung ho for life. A friend of my brother’s who died by suicide at age 20 in 1972 is buried in Memorial Park. James H. Dye, Jr., was a rare specimen of a human being, articulate and intelligent well beyond his years. During the Presidential Election of 1964, he and I would engage in boyish political debates. I’d lampoon him for the Barry Goldwater stickers he put all over his bicycle while he would shake his head in mock disgust at my support for Lyndon B. Johnson, the president who would show his gall bladder operation scars to reporters and photographers just one year later. As a boy, I was often brought to the Nickels family’s burial plot at Westminster Cemetery in Bala Cynwyd. Westminster Cemetery was founded by the Danish Catholic Church in the mid-1860s but reopened as a non-denominational cemetery in 1894. The family tombstone was purchased by my great-grandfather, William Bartholomew; it is centrally located in the so-called Catholic section. An older family plot can be found in Saint Mary the Assumption Cemetery in Roxborough. It’s a small churchyard cemetery that holds the remains of my great, great grandparents, John and Catherine Schnitzius Nickels, both born in Germany around 1830. My great aunt was always taking me to Westminster when she wanted to see if the gravesite was in good order. Was the grass cut? Were the weeds pulled? Had too many birds defecated on the tombstone? She’d bring me to Westminster and talk about our long buried relatives, and she’d also show me — for the one hundredth time — how her name was already chiseled into the tombstone with a birth date and a black space for the year when she would die. The blank space, of course, always made her death all the more certain. (One can always fantasize that they will be the first to beat the Reaper). She had her name engraved, I suppose, to make sure that when she died her name would be listed just the way she wanted it to be listed. Survivors don’t often get things right when it comes to death and funerals. (Always a meticulous dresser, my great aunt was nevertheless buried in a multicolored housecoat, garish beyond belief, when she died at age 97. The housedress was something she never would have worn in life.) It’s to her that I owe my fascination for history and tradition, as well as for my fondness for cantaloupe, sliced fresh oranges and liverwurst and onion sandwiches. In his poem, ‘My Grandmother’s Love Letters,’ the poet Hart Crane writes: Yet I would lead my grandmother by the hand Through much of what she would not understand; And so I stumble. And the rain continues on the roof With such a sound of gently pitying laughter.

Biden Messes with Title IX

From Frontpage magazine Presidential Meddling With Title IX May 8, 2024 by Thom Nickels It appears the pundits, the political prognosticators, the Election Day seers and news consultants were wrong when they predicted Joe Biden would not be the 2024 Democrat nominee for president. One recalls how many of them pontificated that Biden would be pulled from the roster at the 11th hour, and how somebody new would take his place: Oprah, Michelle Obama, Governor Newsom, or an unnamed celebrity from The View or Hollywood and Vine. I recall these “prophets” claiming to know “absolutely” that Biden would not be the Dem candidate, the one pictured smiling and waving under a rain of confetti at the DNC. “I cannot reveal my source,” these pundits often said, “But I can tell you that it will happen: Biden will be replaced.” Biden will not be replaced barring a miracle or a slip of the shoe as he descends Air Force One. That’s because he is the ideal Dem candidate—his mind is an open funnel waiting to be filled with ideological instructions from his staff of woke advisers. Biden is a man without moral values. He carries a rosary in his pocket but highlights abortion (aka child sacrifice) as his favorite “sacrament.” Biden praises the policies of the gender ideology and transgender activists, and then transmits that message to ‘middle America’ with a mouth full of mush, blabbering about “equity” when his real intention is to open a window to allow the government to force K-12 trans boys on girls sports teams. With that end in view, Biden’s morally bankrupt ship of state has added a multi-thousand word addendum to Title IX, in which biological sex is redefined to include gender identities. This fact alone should sound every alarm bell in the nation. The original 1972 Title IX law forbids discrimination based on sex in education, but under the new rules—due to go into effect in August—Title IX will also protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Sexual orientation is one thing, gender identity quite another. They may be distantly related in a left progressive sense but they are hardly kissing cousins. The two placed together like cooing doves illustrates how the Biden administration loves stitching together opposite polarities in order to formulate bold radical agendas. What this agenda wants to do is create a window to allow trans male athletes on women’s sports teams in grades K-12 and up. Some Republican states were quick to spot the ruse. Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, for instance, issued an Executive Order against the administration’s revision of Title IX. Sanders’ order states that Arkansas will follow state laws on gender identity and discrimination, not the new federal law. Arkansas law does not require school officials to use students’ preferred pronouns, and states that trans athletes may be legally barred from competing in sports aligning with how they identify. “My message to Joe Biden and the federal government is that we will not comply,” Sanders said during the signing. “Arkansas already has several commonsense laws on the books that directly contradict President Biden’s new Title IX rule.” Supporters of Biden’s Title IX reforms like to say how the additions are okay because they do not include a federal reversal of statewide bans on transgender athletes. While this may be technically true, the fact remains that the transgender section of the reform was merely put on hold, as if the administration opted to wait for possible pushback before proceeding further. But given that Biden has already made the most radical Title IX adjustment– replacing the word sex with gender in framing the revisions, as well as throwing government support behind the enforced use of pronouns—anyone “with eyes to see” will deduce what lies ahead: a full blown green light for transgender males to occupy women’s sports. The people, as they say, will not be fooled. The state of Tennessee has taken the lead among 22 other states in suing the federal government for its weaponization of Title IX to promote what many call “fringe sexual politics.” Twenty states is nearly half the number of states in the nation, proof that something is seriously “rotten in Denmark,” especially the “transgressive” fact that policy making belongs to Congress, not Biden’s executive branch. The Biden administration is clearly guilty of dangerous overreach. Biden’s Title IX revisions would also require language restrictions on any teacher who wishes to use grammatically correct pronouns. If Johnny, a K-12 student somewhere in Virginia, demands to be referred to as “they,” a teacher who refuses to “obey” Johnny could be fired for violating his civil rights. Biden’s Title IX revision also allows free access to the bathroom of a student’s choice, depending on the gender the student — at that moment — identifies with. We can easily envision bully sexual athlete Butch X following cheerleader Jennifer into the ladies room because his testosterone levels at that point identify as “female.” The Advocate, the nation’s leading LGBTQ magazine, quoted a Biden administration official who stated that the transgender clause related to athletics in new Title IX rules “is still ongoing,” which seems to confirm that Biden officials are waiting to see what happens regarding the new rules before pushing for more radical change. Opposition to Biden’s Title IX revisions continues to mount. The always outspoken Senator John Kennedy (R-L) said that Biden’s rewriting of Title IX means that, “Activists can weaponize Title IX to force schools to prioritize the comfortable education of the boy with gender dysphoria above the academic and emotional well-being of the dozens of girls who would rather not share a locker room or learn about puberty alongside biological boys.” Kennedy also stated that “President Biden’s new rule defeats the purpose of Title IX. By interpreting Title IX to be about protecting ‘gender identity’ instead of physical gender, President Biden will place countless women and girls in uncomfortable—or even unsafe—learning environments. In Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican who sued the Biden administration on behalf of the state, said that “Texas will not allow Joe Biden to rewrite Title IX at whim, destroying legal protections for women in furtherance of his radical obsession with gender ideology.” Paxton added that “This attempt to subvert federal law is plainly illegal, undemocratic, and divorced from reality.” In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis said in a social media video that “Florida rejects Joe Biden’s attempt to rewrite Title IX. We will not comply, and we will fight back.” In Oklahoma, Ryan Walters, that state’s superintendent of public instruction, announced that the state is “pursuing all actions to oppose this illegal and unconstitutional move by the Biden administration.” America is growing more conservative when it comes to transgender issues. A 2023 Rasmussen Report stated that most Americans oppose the transgender agenda—which has nothing to do with loving your trans neighbor or wanting to relegate trans people to second class citizenship—but which has everything to do with what Biden is attempting to do in Title IX. Americans by a 3-to-1 margin oppose gender identity bathrooms, the forced use of pronouns and the participation of biological men in women’s sports. Even Joe Biden’s beloved liberal, Jesuit pope, Francis of Rome, has called gender ideology “the ugliest danger of our time.”

Letter to an Orthodox Bishop during a time of change and disruption

October 20, 2022 Bishop Matthew St. Nicholas Patriarchal Cathedral of New York 15 East 97th Street New York, NY 10029 Dear Bishop Matthew, I write as a parishioner (and tonsured Reader) of Saint Michael the Archangel Russian Orthodox Church in the Northern Liberties neighborhood of Philadelphia. I have been a member of the parish for almost a decade now, having come over from Roman Catholicism. The pastor of Saint Michael’s at that time was the Rev. Vincent Saverino (now deceased). The parish at this time was well attended by today’s standards. In 2010, for instance, attendance was nearly 300 on feast days and at least 60 people on a routine Sunday. While the pandemic had a disastrous effect on church attendance, Saint Michael’s never closed its doors but soldiered on with weekly Divine Liturgies. A small but stalwart group of parishioners continued to attend Divine Liturgy at this time, choosing faith over fear thanks mainly to the leadership of the present pastor of the parish, Fr. Luka. Father Luka is to be credited with keeping the church open during the pandemic. His leadership in this regard served as a beacon for those who may have had reservations about attending church. Prior to the pandemic, there were problems at the parish, so allow me touch on a little parish history. After Fr. Vincent Saverino’s death, assistant priest Fr. Gregory Winsky was appointed pastor. Fr. Winsky had an engaging teaching style. His most notable accomplishment was the institution of weekly book and film clubs where parishioners could learn about Orthodoxy and its place in American culture. Fr. Winsky also restored many traditional elements of the liturgy that had been eliminated before he became pastor. But one Sunday something unpleasant occurred at a church council meeting. A council member, quite out of the blue, accused Fr. Winsky of not “participating” in the life of the parish and neglecting to show interest in the lives of parishioners. This council member scolded Fr. Winsky for his “detached and cerebral” pastoral style. Fr. Winsky was accused of not reaching out to parishioners. This was not a gentle criticism but more along the lines of a scathing critique. The council member’s outburst set off a chain reaction. Almost immediately, other council members jumped on the bandwagon and offered their own criticisms. What had been a normal council meeting had turned into a sort of ‘employee review,’ with these council members in the seat of judgment and berating the priest as if they were his bishop. What struck me then—I am also a member of the church council—was the fact that the council members who agreed with Fr. Winsky’s primary accuser were all friends of the accuser. They socialize together at coffee hour, and they have a tendency to make sure that their friends are elected to Council when the time comes to elect new members. (I should note that 3 Council members all belong to the same family.) This led to Fr. Winsky’s decision to retire—I believe he would not have done so had he not been attacked in such a fashion. Once Fr. Winsky announced his retirement, a search was conducted for a new pastor. That’s when Archpriest John Vass of Baltimore brought Fr. Luka to the parish so he could meet parishioners, tell his personal story, and answer questions about his background. That initial ‘get acquainted’ meeting went well, although some voiced concerns about Fr. Luka’s Serbian background and his accent. Some parishioners wanted a “Xerox” copy of Fr. Vincent Saverino, a handful of others had visions of a young priest with a family. Criticism arose concerning Fr. Luka’s accent, the length of his sermons, his seeming aloofness and “inability” to mix and mingle with parishioners at coffee hour. While some of these criticisms might be attributed to cultural differences, a core group of council members exaggerated the importance of these things and began to see them as major negatives. They were already certain that Fr. Luka was not a good fit for the parish. Once again, this was the same core group that had (harshly) critiqued Fr. Winsky and sent him into retirement. Ironically, this core group is composed of people who do not attend church regularly. With a few notable exceptions, this group stays away from church for weeks at a time, sometimes months, but will then attend on a Sunday when a council meeting is scheduled. Sometimes they will show up at Divine Liturgy during or after Communion, after missing several weeks, just to be present at a council meeting when an important vote is to take place. These absences have nothing to do with the pandemic but continue to be an issue. At the last council meeting, a vote was taken—with Fr. Luka present— regarding Fr. Luka’s future at St. Michael’s. Because this group of parishioners voiced their concerns to Archpriest John Vass in Baltimore in such a persistent manner, the council president was told by Archpriest Vass that the meeting could not be adjourned until a vote was taken and a firm decision reached. It is one thing to voice complaints and then seek solutions, but sadly this council meeting metamorphosed into an ugly group stoning as members of the so called core group doubled down on their complaints about Fr. Luka. The various complaints were all highly subjective and personal, and ultimately impossible to verify: You never visited my dying father; you never called my ailing mother; you never went to the hospital; you didn’t seem to show any interest; you didn’t call me up when I needed help, etc. etc. etc. The complaints were what they call a “he said/she said operation. Personal grudge seemed to be at the base of it all. Yet even if true, they were correctable and not fatal errors. This core group has never liked Fr Luka, so of course any slip up he might have made at St. Michael’s was magnified one hundred times. As I understand it, in the council president’s letter to you, it was mentioned that Fr. Luka’s “attitude” drove a deacon away from the parish. Fr. Luka did no such thing. The deacon in question challenged Fr. Luka’s authority and had run-ins with a number of people in the parish, myself included. He was a rather divisive figure who even orchestrated an emotional outburst and walk out at one council meeting when he didn’t get his way. It concerns me how council members, who are supposed to be “role model” Orthodox, can stay away from services week after week and then return to church and have the arrogance to call the shots. If Fr. Luka is replaced with a new pastor, it is my belief that over time this core group will once again express dissatisfaction and begin their ‘pastor critiques’ all over again. Fr. Luka is not the problem. The Church Council is the problem. Respectfully (Yours in Christ), (Reader) Thomas Nickels