And one more thing…

In all the hubbub, I forgot to mention the most important thing. And that is if the anti-+Jonah faction had anything on HB, they would have succeeded in removing him from office. But they had nothing but some nebulous “concerns” about his “health.” I’ve been in the business world long enough to know that when Corporate wants you out, they’ll find a way to get you out. They always have something on you, even if it’s picayune, they’ll find some way to magnify it. If you’re smart, you’ll take the gold watch because otherwise the truth will come out and it’ll get real messy. (Still, I can’t help but wonder, what does he have on them?)


  1. You really hit this nail on the head, George. I remember reading in the SIC report how Kondratick was said to have gained his hold on people in charge by blackmailing them. Not too long ago, I was shocked to see Stokoe respond to someone’s comment, about the attempt by Metropolitan Philip to badger the OCA into removing him from the MC in 2009. Stokoe said that he successfully defended his position by telling them that they should prefer a Stokoe bound by confidentiality agreements, over a Stokoe free to publish whatever he wanted.

    It’s like he’s turned into the very thing he was against.

    • George Michalopulos says

      Helga, this is fantastic! Where did you get a hold of this information? It’s literally the smoking gun which I’ve long suspected.

      Isn’t it ironic, but Stokoe couldn’t help himself. He’s already violated part of the confidintiality agreement in a lot of his posts, esp. the one in which he names names in the SMPAC report.

      • Here you go:

        And in case he decides to rewrite history:

        (Editor’s note: Well, the issue was not really excommunication, for not even +Philip could give a canonical cause for that. His goal was to have me removed from the Metropolitan Council, and +Jonah promised to deliver the threat. He did. As did others from Syosset. My answer to them was “Say, didn’t Mt. Herman triy to remove Gregg Nescott? How’d that working out for you? I also pointed out that Mark Stokoe on the MC bound by the rules of Executive Session was more advantageous for their desire for less transparency, than Mark Stokoe not on the MC, free to publish absolutely anything he could get someone to talk about.” That ended those discussions immediately. So while no •crickets•, I do hear •yawning•.)

        • DnNicholasJ says

          I wonder what ““Say, didn’t Mt. Herman triy to remove Gregg Nescott? How’d that working out for you?” meant, implied, entailed, threatens?

          • Nescott was someone that Met. Herman tried to get dismissed from the MC (and the SIC) for publishing something on OCANews.

      • A small addendum to my previous comment, as I see it has attracted the attention of the commenters at OCATruth: I don’t want to accuse Mark Stokoe of blackmail, but it does appear to me that, in the interest of self-preservation, he has fallen into the same habits that Kondratick was accused of. I don’t know if he did it on purpose, or with some notion of the greater good in mind, but this is what it resembles in my eyes.

        To my knowledge, he has never reported on the issues surrounding the archdeacon from Florida, which, while an awkward issue, still fits under the category of major news in the Orthodox community. He can’t cover everything, but he did know about it, so I think this establishes at least one instance of selective reporting on his part.

        • John Gilluly says

          The thing that I couldn’t fathom is why Fr. Thomas Hopko – Dean Emeritus of St. Vladimir’s seminary – would exhort OCA members to “trust, honor and support” Mr. Stokoe in his devotion to discrediting the Metropolitan. The malicious tone of the OCANews website towards the Metropolitan is obvious. If the synod’s “love and concern for him (the Metropolitan) and earnest desire to see him succeed” is so paramount in their minds, why doesn’t Fr. Hopko get that message? He can’t label someone “gravely troubled” and call that a supportive statement.

          Mr. Stokoe says there’s no campaign or conspiracy against his Beatitude. He is just candidly reporting the facts as he’s been given them. But who gives him some of those facts? Someone within the synod or the organization who tips him off (his ‘sources’).

          The primary intent of Stokoe’s recent articles is a concerted effort to discredit the Metropolitan. To create an atmosphere in which he can be “dumped” or persuaded to quit. That intent seems obvious. Fr. Thomas Hopko’s follow-up Lenten message would lead a reader to the same conclusion, wrapped in a saccharine package of words, ending with a shot at Fr. Fester. This is his Lenten Message of Peace?

          Metropolitan Philip is upset with Mr. Stokoe’s commentaries about his Primacy. He has removed seminarians from St. Vlad’s. His message to the OCA last year was, Stop Mark Stokoe. And now the former Dean of St. Vlad’s is posting on that we should “trust, honor and support Mark Stokoe’s continued efforts”. That doesn’t seem wise to me, and a direct slap at Metropolitan Philip. I don’t see how those comments can help the seminary.

          • I don’t think Metropolitan Philip cares what Mark Stokoe writes when it’s not about him. I wouldn’t confuse Fr. Hopko with a representative of the current administration at SVS, anyway.

            What worries me is that Fr. Hopko threw his personal credibility behind Stokoe, which means a lot of people are going to read OCANews with their critical thinking skills turned off.

            • George Michalopulos says

              Good point, Helga. However I think Hopko’s intervention failed miserably and he will now suffer for it. Already questions are being asked about his wonderful leadership at SVS.

  2. Heracleides says

    Philip deserves more than a slap (a boot might be more appropriate).

    • I would rather have whatever you think we have in the Antiochian Archdiocese under Met Philip than what the OCA has: rebellion and chaos.

      • George Michalopulos says

        Kevin, I’ve had my disagreements with +Philip in the past (for example, what he did to the bishops last year was atrocious), but in the matter of homosexuality in the ranks he is 100% correct. And he was right to take the AOCNA out of the demonic NCC.

  3. Christopher says

    I’ve been in the business world long enough to know that when Corporate wants you out, they’ll find a way to get you out.

    I agree, but it often takes some time while the case is being made and a certain “momentum” is conjured up…

    • George Michalopulos says

      Christopher, they had their momentum. It was all based on nothing except peronality conflicts. No criminality, no canonical errors, not even a traffic ticket. “If you’re going to take Vienna, take Vienna.”