HOCNA: More than 75% Has Joined GOC-Kallinikos since 2011; Lawsuit and Eviction from Metropolitan Ephraim

American Metropolia: Diocesan Center Severely Affected by Hurricane Sandy
November 2, 2012
NFTU Radio: Storm Cancellation
November 4, 2012

HOCNA: More than 75% Has Joined GOC-Kallinikos since 2011; Lawsuit and Eviction from Metropolitan Ephraim

For a full timeline of events in the HOCNA schism, click here.

While NFTU is privy to changes that are taking place in HOCNA currently, a quick recap of the remaining parishes on the official Boston website is telling.

While certain listings have remained on the site which are no longer accurate, the numbers don’t lie: the overwhelming majority of HOCNA has already gone to the Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos after what appears to now be an undisputed confession of the name-worshipping heresy. Based on the presence in the directory, there are currently only 8 parishes with a presence of clergy who are reliably staying with HOCNA, and one of the priests runs two parishes, meaning there are actually only six parishes left with a full-time assigned priest that have remained loyal to HOCNA.

In short, the schism has left HOCNA operating with about 25% of its resources available in 2011 (before the departure of the Portland Metropolis), and the remaining clergy will have to cover an additional 5 reader missions (assuming they have not left).

Meanwhile, the parish of St Mark of Ephesus in Roslindale, the largest of the Northeastern HOCNA parishes, is suing Metropolitan Ephraim for the Church building after being given an eviction notice.

We include a letter below from Metropolitan Ephraim below describing the lawsuit from the 25th.


86 Country Club Road, Dedham MA 02026-5607
Phone: 781 329-6500; Fax: 781 329-6800
25 October /12 October, 2012
St. Symeon the New Theologian
My Beloved Orthodox Christians;
I has come to my attention that clergy presently uncanonically occupying the premises of St. Mark of Ephesus Cathedral in Roslindale, MA, have apparently been disseminating misinformation about the legal proceedings concerning the aforesaid Cathedral.
The Timeline provided below will dispel any misconception about who it was that started this sad chain of events:
September 16, 2012
Fathers Christos, George and Demetrius send a letter to the Metropolitan Ephraim withdrawing from the Holy Metropolis of Boston and the Holy Orthodox Church in North America claiming heresy and stating they have joined the Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece.
September 18, 2012
Father Christos sends a letter to Metropolitan Ephraim stating his parish’s intention to remain and use the property at Saint Mark’s…“ as we have been doing since we first purchased this property in 1975” [emphasis supplied]
September 21, 2012
Attorney Roy Bourgeois, of the law firm of Bourgeois White, sends a letter to Metropolitan Ephraim stating his firm was hired to assist Saint Mark’s in the “orderly transition of their parish and its property”. Attorney Bourgeois references the letter of September 18 that states Saint Mark’s parish purchased the property in 1975.
September 25, 2012
Attorney Nicholas B. Carter, of the law firm of Todd & Weld, representing Metropolitan Ephraim and the Holy Metropolis of Boston, sends a letter to attorney Bourgeois containing copies of the Deeds and legal documents that confirm that the property containing Saint Mark’s and Saint Anna’s are in the name of the Metropolis of Boston. Attorney Carter states that because Fr. Christos and the other clergy of Saint Mark’s unilaterally and voluntarily removed themselves and their parish from the Holy Metropolis of Boston they would be required to move, so that those parishioners that belong to the Holy Metropolis of Boston may re-occupy their Cathedral.
October 1, 2012
Attorney Bourgeois files a lawsuit in Suffolk County Superior Court suing Metropolitan Ephraim and the Holy Metropolis of Boston, claiming Saint Mark’s property belongs to Saint Mark’s Parish.
To put it briefly, the evidence is clear about who began the lawsuit.
In Christ
Ephraim Metropolitan


  1. Stan Ihoria says:

    I pray there are more defections to come and I anticipate them!

    HOCNA spin machine: “To put it briefly, the evidence is clear about who began the lawsuit”.

    This one line that summerizes a timeline that, if you pay attention, does not favor the cause of HOMB will be enough for the Panteleimonites/Ephraimites to latch onto.
    Are we really to gloss over the fact that HOMB sent St Marks an eviction notice, isn’t that a LEGAL document with LEGAL ramifications if not complied with?? Come on, even the spin from HOCNA is becoming sub standard these days! What are the parishioners who bought and maintained the building over the years supposed to do? They replied in the only manner that would protect them, and their church, seriously folks! Oh, by the way, check the by-laws, according to HOCNA, churches must be owned by the parishioners and cannot be owned by the diocese!

    • Steeley says:

      wrong. Read the by-laws again. The fact is the deed of the property belongs to the Diocese, otherwise why did the clergy who voluntarily left request said deed if they were the rightful owners? YOu see, they were moved by passion not by the Spirit, so now the courts will have to decide. You must pray to see what our Saviours answer is to you. Under the HOTCA, ALL of the Churches will have to belong to the Diocese, so to think that the property belongs to the priests or lay people, you are sadly mistaken. Within three years, all properties that have joined HOTCA will have to submit the same

      • disqus_r2QQBWj87o says:

        1) Met. Pavlos has properties registered under either the synod or the diocese.
        2) Met. Moses follow suit.
        3) A disenchantment between priest Carras/Met. Moses and Bp Demetrius ( see the post by priest Carras in Yahoo group about a visit by the Free Serbian Macedonian group with Fr. Panteleimon and Bp. Demetrius)
        I suspect a soon to happen splinter in the Kalinicos group. We have already people idolising this or that bishop. Whit all their BLASPHEMIES, the New Calendar groups are in a better position. The New Calendar heresies are vindicated , what a shame!!

        • GOC Raleigh says:

          While a healthy bit of pessimism is probably due — I am sure the demons are not happy about the sudden growth of our Synod and increasing unity among true Orthodox Christians — I can attest that administratively, things are progressing and the myriad pastoral issues arising from the departures in chunks of HOCNA to the GOC are being dealt with in a very pastoral manner and gradually. There have been numerous concelebrations between people who you would not have ever imaged concelebrating a few years ago. Glory to God for the changes of heart that are occurring. May He protect us from ourselves going forward all the same 🙂

          • Stan Ihoria says:

            Lost on many Father is that we have moved or are moving to unity in Christ. The anger and resentment to the Church which has done nothing but receive refugees, myself included is very disapointing.

          • Anonymous says:

            You’re thinking exhibits an abnormal cultic outlook. Why would demons care that people are flocking to a man (Pavlos of Astoria), who’s an ecumenist in practice and word? Why is it always the demons fault? Do these arrogant nut jobs ever admit any responsibility for anything?

      • GOC Raleigh says:

        In regards to the GOC of America under Metropolitan Pavlos (HOTCA is not really the name of the “jurisdiction” but is a corporate entity), it is true that originally the Constitution (c. 2004) was to have the diocese own the properties, but after we received numerous ROCOR refugees and also seeing how the lawsuits the Roman Catholic dioceses are facing can bankrupt a Church structure, and not wanting other parishes to suffer if one is sued for say a slip and fall or God forbid due to some type of clergy impropriety, the Constitution was amended in 2009 to change that (I was at that meeting).

        Basically as it stands now, each parish will own its own property, but will have uniform by-laws and a memorandum of agreement tying it to the Metropolis. There is a heresy escape clause exception of sorts as well and a link to the Synod in Greece.

        Fr. Anastasios

        • Stan Ihoria says:

          Bless Father,
          Thank you for the clarity on this, I was wanting to reply but I did not have these facts in order to do so.

        • GOC Raleigh says:

          Funny how someone gave my comment a negative rating. I merely stated the facts, not my own opinion on this one…maybe the negative voter doesn’t like the details of the property arrangements, but I am just the messenger, so don’t shoot me LOL

        • Anonymous says:

          Pavlos has fallen under the 1983 Anathema of Ecumenism, because he (and those with him) give Communion to heretics. These disobedient frauds bring the problems on themselves. It has nothing to do with demons. They’re right where the demons want them.

  2. HOCNA’s war chest is waning with each parish leaving. If HOCNA wishes to prosecute an eviction lawsuit, I hope they understand that contested eviction litigation can be a protracted and expensive process, as they probably may or may not remember in Ipswitch and Worcester, MA. Who is bankrolling them?

    • Photius says:

      Interesting comment from Portland, hope you are practicing what you preach. Remember we haven’t seen the end of the saga with Met. Moses & the GOC yet!

      • Photios, you sound cryptic. I am not sure what you are driving at. HOCNA is not ROCOR, and I doubt has the resources for a protracted legal war, unless their solicitor is working entirely pro-bono. Most landlords live in dread of having to go through a contested eviction proceedings.

  3. telecompros says:

    I look at this more as a long overdue implosion rather than a schism. I pray for the success of the faithful at St Mark’s.

  4. disqus_tExhThGOox says:

    So HOCNA says accept our heretical statements or we will take away your churches. Let them. They cannot take away the True Faith. Let them have material things.

    • HOCNA adds hypocrytical to the heretical. 20 years ago, during the legal crises with ROCOR’s attempts to claim Holy Resurrection Church in Worcestor, Metropolitan Ephraim stated that they didn’t want to raid churches that left them. “If they wish to leave, let them”, basically was the line. Now, not once but twice (in Toronto, and now in Boston) HOCNA makes a legal claim against a departed parish. Fortunately in Toronto, the vagaries of Canadian law made it entirely possible for the parishes there to slip out of HOCNA, and while sabre rattle as HOCNA did, they were unable to really gain much.

      The irony is that I visited St. Mark’s two years after the former Seattle Cathedral engaged in a Boston enabled revolt against Metropolitan Moses. When I received my initial tour of the Boston Cathedral, the hieromonk who escorted me said that St. Mark’s was owned by the diocese because “they didn’t want the people to revolt and take the parish with them. I believe my remark was “that’s ironic”.

      • Stan Ihoria says:

        John, does anything surprise you from HOCNA. They say one thing to do the other, that should be the expected norm for them. They cannot be trusted at all. Boston enabled, is putting mildly! People want to talk about ‘personal sin” are either in complete denial or completely in the dark. When they learn how the Seattle revolt and every other faith decision was made to protect Panteleimone and his tragic secrets, they will understand that they have been lied to for years!

        • Yes, everything seems to have the effect of further and further isolating themselves from any constructive and accountable relationship with a larger canonical body (I could point to the endless stream of sneaky revisionism, of which areas under my pervue, mainly the liturgical chants seemed to dominate),

          I get tired of hearing the same old “personal sin” canard. They say rape is not about personal physical pleasure, but about power, and this was definitely about the control and manipulation of an entire Church body. In the words of the Sith Lord -“Power. Unlimited power”.

          • Steeley says:

            Sith Lord? It appears John lives in fantasy land or maybe is on fantasy island? Please do tell us about the “endless stream of sneaky revisionism” , etc. Thanks in advance.

      • Steeley says:

        would you allow others, whom previously worked in your vineyard to remain, especially when they no longer follow the rules/faith of said vineyard? Ofcourse not, you would also seek to have removed said ungrateful folks to be returned to the owner…The deed shows whom is the rightful owner, for the group who left the HOCNA to seek legal action to obtain what is not legally theirs is against the very faith in Christ and His Church…The HOCNA’s mantra was always, “you want to leave, then leave with what is rightfully yours”…

        • Ambrose says:

          So Steeley, the church that the priests and parishioners of St Mark’s supported financially since the beginning is not rightfully theirs? I’m confused. It was through their donations and membership fees that paid the mortgage and monthly bills. What then makes it rightfully HOCNA’s? Because Metropolitan Ephraim says so?!? If you ask the St. Mark’s parishioners who have been supporting the church, it was through their labours that the church exists. The mistake for them was that they trusted in the leaders of their synod as beng Orthodox! Remember, when St. Mark’s voted to move to the GOC, only three people voted to stay with HOCNA.

    • Steeley says:

      what heretical statements? The statement they made against the Name-worshipping heresy was from no other that St. Tikhon of Moscow! So now you say St. Tikhon is a heretic. Have you also removed his icon from your church (if you even had one to begin with)? Its a fact, that those who left recently left for personal reasons. When they found out Fr. Panteleimon was guilty, they no longer had the spirit of Christ within them guiding them, instead the world entered their heart and became unforgiving, ungrateful servants. May our Saviour have mercy on the clergy for leading the sheep into a schismatic body.

      • They *no longer had the spirit of Christ within them guiding them…”??? Gee, that sounds like such a Christian, loving statement about anyone who leaves a group that has been covering up something VERY unChrist like for over 20 years.

        *WE* are the ones without Christ’s spirit in us, guiding up?? May I ask, have you ever felt victimized, used, lied to to your face, mistreated, and then vilanized once the truth of your victimization came forward? Let me tell you, I am one who recently has, from HOCNA!

        I had been a loyal, loving member of HOMB for over 15 years, ever since my convertion in ’96. A few years later, I heard of the, then *alleged* charges, against Panteliemon. It troubled me deeply. So much so that I was questioning whether to stay with HOCNA or not over the *alleged* charges. But after speaking with Fr. Issac (whom I have always loved as my *Spiritual Grandfather*), Met Ephraim, and Fr Sergious (who recently joined the departing monks), I was told that, then Fr., Panteliemon was not a man that probably did such things, and if he even had, it was his personal sin, and not a sin that changed the faith of The Church.
        Since then, I had spoken to Fr. Issac at least twice about the matter, both times he swore that he did not know Panteliemon to be a man that could do such things…that he was almost a saint…that modern day saints all had had good things to say about him…etc, and to rest assured, as far as *he knew,* Panteliemon was innocent and that those saying he was guilty were nuts.
        Now, just months after my last time asking him about the matter, Fr. Issac comes forward and admits to everyone in HOCNA that he and Panteliemon (at least!) have been covering it up for over 20 years, and that Panteliemon was INDEED guilty of the charges! And they continue to try and suger coat the matter, and have not taken any serious steps to try and offer consolation to the actual victims…whom they have been bad mouthing for over 20 years.
        To top that, on the Name Worshiping issue, St Tikhon stated that the finding of the council would stand till the Sobor that was planned..which never happened thanks to the Godless/forsaken communist revolution. HOCNA is saying that the *matter is still rather unresolved*…which is not what St Tikhon said. St Tikhon and subsequent councils/synods/etc, have said that the findings of the Russian council was adequate, unless a future council finds otherwise.
        With all that in mind, and St. James’ statement of “Let your YES be YES, and your NO be NO…”…I ask you, is it the Spirit of Christ which leads and guides a synod ran by those who have shown no shame till recently in covering up such a terrible matter for over 20 years?? And who refuse a council’s findings which every other body has accepted as adequate for Orthodox use and teaching?
        Forgive me if I seem hostile, but you have shared that with us in your remark, Steeley, and unfortunately I did not fight it off, but felt that it was needful to show you how you were *out of order* with the spirit of your remarks.
        This is not an easy time for any of us…those who stayed, or those who have left! Last I spoke with them, both my Spiritual Father and my Father Confessor are remaining with HOCNA in support of Met Ephraim, and those remaining in their churches. It breaks my heart. Both to know that those I trusted most in The Faith have lied so grievously to my face, and that my beloved fathers in Faith are currently remaining with that synod.
        Think much more deeply before you make quips, Steeley.

        • Ambrose says:

          James, may God be with you! I too struggle daily with the lies that were told to me and the overall deception by my spiritual father and his fellow leaders. Complete trust has been lost and it is very sad when I pause and think about it. I feel like your comment mirrors my own experiences and conversations over the past 25 years or so.

      • GOC Raleigh says:

        As I understand it, the HOCNA Synod lifted the depositions against the GOC in 2010, but has now revoked their previous revocation…

        Makes me wonder if that means our people all went to Hades when they died, got translated to Paradise in 2010, and then a few weeks ago got the sad news that they would have to go back to Hades, because they were re-declared schismatics?

        I am fully aware that HOCNA clergy would probably not take such an extreme and somewhat absurd line of reasoning, but it is a legitimate point to make; lifting a deposition is an act of charity; how do you then reinstate it after lifting it? That would make the revocation of the lifting an uncharitable act…

        • Jason says:

          But remember, the HOCNA Synod knew that your people would hear the “true HOCNA gospel” in Hades either way, so this wasn’t a concern for them 😉

      • Boston says:

        St. Tikhon of Moscow most certainly was not a heretic. In fact, he supported the decisions of the Russian Synod regarding name-worshipping.

        Below, I have an excerpt from the much-cited letter of St. Tikhon. It is clear that he is requiring the name-worshipping/glorifying monastics who are uneducated to testify to “their exact following of the Orthodox Church, and of their obedience to the God-established hierarchy” (i.e. of the Most Holy Synod) and to repudiate four specific errant beliefs that they held.

        He then explicitly states that “while manifesting its condescension, the Synod did not alter its previous judgment (i.e. the synodal decisions that HOCNA has now called heretical) regarding the very error contained in the writings of Anthony Bulatovich and his followers.” He could not be more clear about where he stands. But you don’t have to take my word for it, I have provided the excerpt below.

        **From the Nativity Greeting of Patriarch Tikhon to the Diocesan Hierarchs**

        …During these lofty days, when the Church celebrates the Nativity of the God-man, Who brought upon earth the peace and goodwill of our Heavenly Father, I deem it proper to remind you, in brief, concerning the Athonite name-glorifiers and to offer you some guidance on how to treat these monastics. From their case it can be seen that in its Resolution 3479, of April 22-25, 1914, the Holy Synod condescended to the spiritual mood and the disposition of mind of those Athonite monks who were not well versed in theology as expressed in books, nor very knowledgeable concerning formal proceedings, [and it, the Synod of 1914] allowed the previously required signed repudiation by the name-worshippers of their false teaching to be replaced with a written testimony [i.e., from witness] (by a sworn promise), while kissing the Holy Cross and the Gospel, of their Orthodox Faith, their exact following of the Orthodox Church, and of their obedience to the God-established hierarchy, believing according to the teaching of the Holy Church, adding nothing and subtracting nothing on their own, in particular as pertains to the veneration of the Name of God, not to believe that His Name is God’s essence, not to separate it [the Name] from God, or consider it another deity, and not to deify letters, sounds and random/accidental thoughts about God, and such who believe in this manner and who manifest their submission to the ecclesiastical authorities, the Holy Synod [of 1914] decided to receive into the Church, while those of priestly rank it permitted to perform services. However, while manifesting its condescension, the Synod did not alter its previous judgment regarding the very error contained in the writings of Anthony Bulatovich and his followers, which it decided to refer to the consideration of the Holy Pan-Russian Local Council, from which depends the resolution of this case in its essence…

      • Ambrose says:

        Are you sure this isn’t Metropolitan Ephraim? No seriously Steeley, have you actually spoken to any of the monks who left? You love casting judgement on them based on why you believe they left. You actually sound like Metropolitan Ephraim. You quote him verbatim. This is what happens when you don’t have a thought of your own.

        “The world entered their heart and became unforgiving, ungrateful servants.”

        Do you actually believe what you write? It’s your synod that has become worldly. They stopped serving God a long time ago, and serve only men. Well one man in this case. The HOCNA synod made a choice to leave ROCOR days before Fr. Panteleimon was going to have to stand up for his sins. This means that your leadership put your salvation at risk and mine, by fleeing their correct synod at the time in order to prevent Fr. Panteleimon from standing trial for his sins. This is devious and very unorthodox. Fr. Isaac and Metropolitan Ephraim admitted to the coverup and allowed dozens of monks to be sodomized. When these monks approached them for help and guidance, they turned their backs on them. When they inevitably left the monastery/synod they were slandered and discredited. I was told that they were delusional, and had no credibility as witnesses because they left the church and fell into heresy. Can you blame them? They wanted to become monastics to be saved and to follow a chaste existence. Yet, while these harsh words were coming out of your leaders’ mouths, they knew in their hearts that these men that they were slandering, were victims of rape. How can they give and receive communion on a weekly basis knowing this? For what purpose did they resort to these slanders? To protect the name of their cult leader/pseudo Saviour. Yet, you trust in them. You receive the Holy mysteries from their polluted hands. If HOCNA was actually accountable to another synod, Fr. Isaac would be defrocked and Metropolitan Ephraim would be deposed. These men lost their credibility when they admitted to allowing us to go into schism in 1986, essentially cutting ourselves off from our Saviour and His church to protect a man, a very sinful man. But I forgot, it is the monks who left who are worldly, unforgiving and ungrateful.

        • GOC Raleigh says:

          I hosted His Grace Bishop Demetrius for a few days recently, and got to know the hierodeacon who accompanied him. I also met a monk in New York when I recently visited who had been one of those who left in September.

          I’ve known Bishop Demetrius for five years, and I can tell you that he really tried everything he could to stay in HOCNA. This is based off my conversations with him over the years, and also observing his behaviors and actions. He tried everything he could to have union of all of HOCNA with the GOC, and then he after Met. Moses and Toronto left, he tried to encourage the remnant part of HOCNA to continue forward toward union with the GOC, despite the pain that the defections caused internally.

          He resisted calls to personally depart repeatedly. Some of the people on the GOC side gave him a hard time for this, saying the time to leave was last year and that he should not have stayed in HOCNA. So when he made his move now, it was obvious to me that he had exhausted all possibilities within HOCNA. The isolated, small nature of the HOCNA Synod made dealing with canonical matters extremely difficult.

          I’m a well-known GOC apologist (to be clear, I believe everything I write, and this is not political for me in any way), so I am sure I won’t convince anyone who already thinks that Bishop Demetrius is an opportunist or a malicious person, but I want to simply share that from my experience with him, he has tread the course patiently and tried to do the right thing at each step of the way. His departure was certainly not sudden, and I formed a very positive impression of the monks I met as well.

          Bishop Demetrius visited our parish in North Carolina and was well received by the people. It is nice to be able to have this cooperation and interaction. When I first started attending St. Markella’s in 2004, I could see the Church universal present in the all-Greek, Queens neighborhood parish with its satellite parish operations in large Northern cities, but I knew that it would be hard to reach out to the average American convert. Thanks be to God, we trudged along, and He blessed us to grow. Now, with the accession of these former HOCNA parishes and clergy, it will really help our missionary aims, and I am sure their association with us will help them as they no longer have to try and explain the HTM situation to any new person who knows how to use Google…

          I am sure we will have our problems going forward as well, but it just feels nice to be able to pray together with fellow Orthodox clergy and laity, and I hope this trend towards greater integration continues.

          • Anonymous says:

            Pavlos is an ecumenist and traitor! If you defend him in anyway, you will be committing a sin against God and the Orthodox Church.

    • Anna Khan says:

      The property of St. MArks in Roslindale belongs to the archdiocese, which let the clergy stay there for many years without paying rent. If i stayed at your house without paying rent can i sue you and take your house?

  5. Anna Khan says:

    What people dont know is that Fr. Chris from St. MArks in Roslindale said in a meeting that if the Metroplolitan did not let them stay at St. Marks then they woyld find another place. He didnt mention anything about suing or the fact that he is also suing for St. Annas that is next door. It all comes down to money and power and not about any so called heresy

    • Ambrose says:

      Anna, you are so misinformed its sad. What more needs to happen for your very simple eyes to wake up. Just because your hierarchy (who as a collective completely lack ANY credibility at this point) tells you something, it doesn’t actually mean it’s factual. Fr. Christos and his parishioners, (the strong majority anyway) who have supported the church completely, want to stay in their house. If they have to leave, then they will do so “and start over” BECAUSE they don’t want to be in heresy. If it were just about property, they would have stayed put. When the rest of the Orthodox world not named HOCNA or Gregory Lourie says something is a heresy, it pretty much makes it one! God enlighten you!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *