Did Fr. Seraphim Rose Know About Gleb Podmoshensky’s Crimes?

Michael W. Davis | May 2, 2026

[Blog Administrator's note: As is known, Fr. Seraphim Rose was canonized by ROCOR under Metropolitan Agafangel in 2024.]

 

ROCOR must leave no stone unturned as it investigates Fr. Seraphim Rose's cause for canonization. But at this time, there is no reason to suspect that Fr. Seraphim knew about or actively covered up for Gleb "Fr. Herman" Podmoshensky. 

Several readers have approached the UOJ regarding the allegations that Fr. Seraphim Rose was complicit in the sexual abuse committed by Gleb Podmoshensky (formerly known as Fr. Herman).

It is well worth undertaking a dispassionate analysis of the existing evidence. Before we do, however, let me make one thing clear: I am 100% in favor of the Holy Synod of ROCOR[-MP] thoroughly investigating these matters before they decide to canonize Fr. Seraphim.

(See: https://uoj.news/news/86809-exclusive-rocor-weighs-canonization-of-its-first-us-born-saint)

We must spare absolutely no expense while rooting out and exposing sexual predators and those who enable them. If ROCOR’s investigation turns up new and damning evidence, then we must live with the consequences.

Rather, my argument is that, based on the existing evidence, there is no reason to believe that Fr. Seraphim Rose knew about/covered up Gleb Podmoshensky’s crimes. 

The Case Against Fr. Seraphim

For those who don’t know, Gleb Podmoshensky was the best friend of Eugene Rose. Both men were disciples of St. John of San Francisco and ran a bookstore associated with his cathedral. In 1967, they founded the St. Herman of Alaska Monastery in Platina, California. When they were tonsured, Gleb took the name Herman, while Eugene took the name Seraphim. Fr. Herman was chosen to serve as abbot of the monastery.

The two monks’ relationship eventually deteriorated before Fr. Seraphim reposed in 1982, at the age of forty-eight, after a short yet painful illness. Three years later, Fr. Herman was publicly and credibly accused of sexually abusing older boys and young men. He was defrocked by the Holy Synod of ROCOR in 1988 and subsequently led the monastery into schism. 

Podmoshensky stepped down as abbot in 2000. The rest of the community immediately joined the Serbian Patriarchate, thereby re-entering the canonical Church. Podmoshensky died in 2014.

Why do people believe that Fr. Seraphim was culpable in Podmoshensky’s crimes? There are three main arguments.

1. Fr. Seraphim must have seen or heard something.

2. Fr. Seraphim was Podmoshensky’s confessor.

3. Fr. Seraphim cursed Podmoshensky on his deathbed.

We’ll consider those arguments in turn.

1. Fr. Seraphim ‘Must’ Have Known?

Many assume that it was simply impossible for Fr. Seraphim not to be aware of Podmoshensky’s misconduct. However, as my friend Ben Dixon has pointed out, Fr. Seraphim spent most of his day either in the chapel, at his writing desk, or in the print shop. He had very little “down time.” 

What’s more, it would not have been unusual for Fr. Herman, as the monastery’s abbot, to spend time alone with young men (e.g., pilgrims or novices). Fr. Seraphim would not have found this to be suspicious behavior.

As Rdr. Daniel Everis—a longtime friend of the Platina community—later recalled, “Fr. Herman, however, did most of his… sexual liaisons [sic] outside the monastery, when he was on his… missionary journeys.”

(See https://startingontheroyalpath.blogspot.com/1999/02/in-fr-seraphims-defense.html)

So, it’s likely that Fr. Seraphim was nowhere near Podmoshensky when the latter committed most of his offenses.

Some critics note that complaints were made against Podmoshensky to the ROCOR hierarchy in the late 1970s. I do not have access to these records myself. Yet even if this were true, it does not prove that Fr. Seraphim knew anything. After all, it is unlikely that the complaints were made to the monastery itself. Also, if ROCOR’s leaders had suspicions about Podmoshensky and chose not to act, it’s unlikely they secretly informed any of the Platina monks.

2. Did Fr. Herman Make a Good Confession?

The second argument against Fr. Seraphim is that, for almost two decades, he and Podmoshensky heard each other’s confessions. Therefore, Fr. Seraphim must have known that his friend was abusing boys and young men.

Yet why should we assume that Podmoshensky was confessing his crimes to Fr. Seraphim? 

Indeed, this argument would be slightly more plausible if only one or two accusations had been made against Podmoshensky. But the sheer number of victims does not suggest that he “slipped” and then repented. Rather, it suggests that Podmoshensky (like so many others) used his status as a cleric in order to systematically abuse young men and boys.

Again, it’s impossible to know another human being’s heart. But a man who gives himself over so completely to the satisfaction of his own evil desires probably isn’t too worried about making a good confession—especially if doing so would threaten his access to potential victims.

3. ‘I’m Finished With You!’

According to Fr. Seraphim’s friend Fr. Alexey Young, his final words to Podmoshensky were: “I’m finished with you! Damn you!” These he spoke while on his deathbed.

To some, the choice of words—“I’m finished with you!”—suggests that Fr. Seraphim had known about Podmoshensky’s crimes for some time. But is this necessarily the case?

Again, it is universally accepted that Fr. Seraphim and Podmoshensky’s relationship deteriorated dramatically in the late Seventies/early Eighties. Then-Fr. Herman’s behavior became increasingly erratic. He began to espouse heterodox opinions. It was said that Fr. Seraphim could hardly stand his presence.

So, it’s possible that Podmoshensky admitted his abuse to Fr. Seraphim while the latter was on his deathbed. This would explain why there’s a note of long-suffering in Fr. Seraphim’s response. 

Indeed, we have no idea what Podmoshensky said to Fr. Seraphim that day. We can’t be sure that he confessed to him at all. But even if the conversation did take place, and even if the two men were discussing Podmoshensky’s abuse, it does not necessarily suggest that Fr. Seraphim had any prior awareness of said abuse.

What Is to Be Done?

I have heard allusions to a text written by the late Fr. Alexey Young (another friend of Platina) which claims that Fr. Seraphim learned about Podmoshensky’s crimes three months before his death while hearing someone’s confession. I haven’t been able to find this source. 

If this were true, one might ask: Why didn’t Fr. Seraphim tell the police? The answer is that, unfortunately, this would have been impossible. If he had learned about Podmoshensky’s crimes under the Seal of the Confessional, he could not have repeated the information to the police—or anyone else, for that matter.

One might then ask: Why didn’t he at least leave the monastery, or do something else to limit Podmoshensky’s access to potential victims? Yet several sources close to Fr. Seraphim have claimed that he was planning to leave the monastery. 

For instance, Rdr. Daniel writes: “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.”

This is probably the most Fr. Seraphim could have done to stop Podmoshensky without breaking the Seal of the Confessional: leave his own monastery. This would have hinted strongly at a grave disturbance at the monastery—probably leading to its disestablishment—without disclosing any specific crimes.

This would have destroyed Fr. Seraphim’s life’s work. Personally, however, I have no doubt that Fr. Seraphim would have done this, had he been left with no other choice.

Conclusion: Truth Will Out

I have never heard any firsthand witness claim that Fr. Seraphim knew about Podmoshensky’s sins more than three months before his death. 

So, from what I can see, the most likely scenario is that Fr. Seraphim did not know about Podmoshensky’s crimes until he was just days away from death.

The second-most likely scenario is that he found out about Podmoshensky a couple of months before his death and was doing everything he could to prevent further abuse.

In both cases, Fr. Seraphim would have been prevented from disclosing Podmoshensky’s sins by the Seal of the Confessional.

Perhaps something will come out in the course of ROCOR’s investigation. We must also hope and trust that the bishops will leave no stone unturned while seeking the truth about this gruesome affair.

At this point, however, there is no reason to suspect that Fr. Seraphim knew about or actively covered up for Podmoshensky. 

 

Source:

https://uoj.news/man-and-church/87041-did-fr-seraphim-rose-know-about-gleb-podmoshenskys-crimes