At first my title was “There’s Less Here Than Meets the Eye,” but that fact is so glaringly obvious that I was afraid that people would yawn and skip over the post altogether. But the Good Ship Lollipop lobbed another salvo at HB +Jonah and like all previous cannonades it fell short.
Who is Stokoe writing for anymore? Sure, Stokoe will always have some true believers hanging onto his every word, but ever since challengers arose and forced Stokoe into the arena of real ideas and debate, many who privately expressed discomfort with his one-sided, agenda driven “reporting” have come forward. Sunlight is the best disinfectant as they say, and there’s nothing like more sunlight for the Uber-Meister-of-Accountability-and-Transparency-and-Publisher-of-Stolen-Emails.
The truth is that Stokoe’s “reporting” is chaotic. We’ve known for some time that there are events that he won’t report and others that he reports out of context. We know for certain that he will report every event that advances his personal animus of +Jonah even if he has to stretch the facts. His latest missive (+Jonah – In His Own Words) is a case in point.
What dastardly act did the Villain of Syosset commit this time? What new scandal would our Brave Scribe uncover? “My Goodness!” I thought as I read the piece. “Digging through the stolen emails Brave Scribe discovered — a speech! Brave Scribe sure got him now!”
Then, as I read the speech, I thought that +Jonah sounded pretty good! Finally, a leader with some kahunas! Finally, no more limp-wristed equivocation! Finally, someone who isn’t afraid to take the lavender Stokovites head-on!
I can see why Stokoe didn’t like it and why he provided his own line by line commentary to dispel its authoritative tone. It’s either that or the Stokovites can’t function without Stokoe telling them how to think. Good thing we have Brave Scribe telling us what the words really mean! There’s some real reporting!
The truth is that Stokoe lost any claim to being honest reporter long ago. Maybe he realizes he’s been reduced to the role of antagonist and that’s why he doubles-down on prevarication more and more. Maybe that’s why he can’t see that stealing emails is wrong.
For example, in his earlier cannonade Disinformation Goes International (where Stokoe collaborated with Bp. Mark Maymon to steal Fr. Fester’s emails), we were led to believe Stokoe printed an entire e-mail exchange between a Dallas parishioner and Fr. Joe Fester verbatim. This is flat out false. Overlooking the troubling fact that Stokoe even published the private correspondence of a parishioner, I have proof that in his zeal to discredit Fr. Fester, Stokoe tampered with the record.
You can judge for yourself. First is a screen shot of Stokoe’s reporting of the email exchange followed by a screen shot of the exchange itself. Then I provide some analysis.
SCREEN SHOTS
Now read the original e-mail exchange:
Notice that in the original e-mail exchange Fr Fester asked two questions:
• how do you get them to look at the video that he is NOT removed. (Feb. 27, 2011, at 8:34 PM)
and
ANALYSIS
Note that Stokoe completely omits the second response, publishes a different response (and colors it with his typical purple prose: “He receives the chilling reply…”), and then OMITS Fester’s reasonable reply:
The correspondent who sent me the screen shot of the original e-mail exchange between him and Fr. Fester is a Russian national. He speaks good but heavily accented English. Still, there is a little bit of a language problem. The media personality the correspondent refers to is a Russian ultra-nationalist on the margins of Russian politics but his ideas are often advanced in less confrontational ways by other spokesmen. Roughly speaking you could say the spokesman functions like a Russian Pat Buchanan.
Regardless, Fester in no way asserts that this individual should be used:
Note Fr. Fester’s “chilling” reply:
CONCLUSION
Clearly, Mark Stokoe is not an honest reporter of facts. Why did Stokoe do this? The only reasonable answer is that he wanted to color his reader’s perceptions of Fr. Fester. Where else has Stokoe tampered with the facts?
Actually, George, the HB +Jonah is the good ship. Stokoe is captain of the Titanic: powered by hubris, way too many innocent souls on board, and the captain thinks his ship is unsinkable.
I am not surprised in the least by Stokoe editing out context to create a false impression. Yet I am sure his supporters will flock here to defend this and say it is innocent and meaningless, and what we should really be dealing with a priest engaging in conspiracies.
I once saw a writer ellipses out the word “NOT” from a sentence he was quoting and cite the edited version to prove his point. Stokoe’s tactics strike me as very much the same. Good investigation, George. Thanks for spreading a little sunshine. Like you said, it’s good when things come out of the closet.
Good detective work, George. Keep it up. And, yes, your last question is a propos: “Where has Mr. Stokoe tampered with the facts?”
Still, I am forced to add: “And yet, he and his comrades still sit on the Metropolitan Council with narry sign that anything is to be done to rectify the injustice, conflict of interest and impropriety.
This is the greatest scandal of all, of which the Church should and will ashamed and for which it will, by Divine design, inevitably pay a high toll. Judgment and exile are always the price of unrepented sin. Our God is a consuming Fire and how that Fire is felt depends upon the disposition of the one–invidivual or corporate–on whom It is brought to bear.
For what its worth–lest anyone should think the trouble stirred up in the past two years by OCA News is not damaging to the Church–I am informed that applications and enrollment is very low this year at SVS. I do not know this to be the case, but should we be surprised? Who would want to enlist in this kind of ragtag outfit run by a silent Synod (Greater and Lesser) and Metropolitan Council that (allegedly) can’t bring itself to wish the Metropolitan it is supposed to work with well? Beware: Mene mene tekhel uphartzin. The moving finger writes and having writ moves on, nor all your piety and wit, nor all your tears, can e’re wipe out a word of it. Pray that it is not too late.
Tiresias
And yet, he and his comrades still sit on the Metropolitan Council with narry sign that anything is to be done to rectify the injustice, conflict of interest and impropriety.
Can we have a “class action” spiritual court?
“Good detective work, George. ”
Yes, an excellent piece of investigative journalism
Please. “Good detective work,” “An excellent piece of investigative journalism”? The content on this blog gets sillier and less substantive every day. To be very, very charitable.
George, why do you position an e-mail that was posted at 9:33 p.m. immediately after one posted at 10:30 p.m., and do so in such as way as to give your readers the completely false impression that this hour-earlier e-mail is in reply to the later one? Do you hope to make Fr. Fester appear reasonable and decent thereby? If so, your transparently lame propaganda ploy fails spectacularly in its mission.
What was Fester actually replying to at 9:33 p.m.? We can’t determine that from the data found in these screen shots, but whatever it was, it obviously cannot have been that 10:30 p.m. e-mail from XXXXXX. The one that MS characterized as “chilling” — a characterization you elect to butcher, too:
What Stokoe actually said was chilling was not Fester’s reply, as you falsely assert, but XXXXXX’s description of the media personality (the ultra-nationalist “Russian Buchanan”) and his evident willingness to lie — perhaps for the team. I take it that the chill in question is a decent reaction to the larger context discernable here, and its implications. Namely, that wherein our smooth operator — the good Father Fester — evidently has few scruples about discussing making use of this dubious Russian character to advance, one presumes, the goals of the Kingdom of God in Amurika. I mean, what else could the good Father possibly have been up to? In any case, there is nothing “purple” about Mark Stokoe’s prose here. It is understated, all things considered.
(Machiavelli and Jesus Christ are not compatible strategists, incidentally, nor are the goals they aimed to accomplish particularly comparable. I mention this, although I fear that these distinctions may perhaps be lost on much of your readership.)
Finally:
Your assertion, bolded above, plainly begs the question. There is no evidence whatsoever that Fester is asserting that this individual should not be used. The impression you wish to give here is mere wishful thinking on your part and unsupported in any way by the evidence provided. (And twisted, as we have seen.) So, not such a nice try, George. But do keep it up, eh? This is all very entertaining.
If I were teaching a class on the real world effects of 1) reading comprehension issues, 2) fallacious reasoning, 3) the dynamics and psychology of mob mentality and mimetic contagion, 4) crude and dishonest propaganda, 5) indifference and even open hostility to facts and evidence, and 6) typical sectarian/political delusions, this list might provide my students with a superb clinical experience.
Are you people even for real? I begin to seriously doubt it. You do not commend your church.
Mike,
While what you pointed out is true, it hardly changes the meaning of the emails in any drastic ways. If anything it makes the conversation clearer although perhaps George should have noted they were flipped in his article.
“Are you people even for real? I begin to seriously doubt it. You do not commend your church”
“Fascinating. Maybe it’s a Southern thing? I really want to understand. Help me to do so.
Are you educated people?”
This seems hardly worth responding to. Rudeness, which borders on bigotry, does not merit an intelligent response.
I dunno Mike. Both screen shots were sent to me by the outraged correspondent. (And let’s not forget that he was violated, I guess that means something to you, doesn’t it? Shouldn’t it?)
Anyway, where was I? I did not doctor anything sent to me by the aggrieved party. I wasn’t trying to make him look good, bad, or indifferent, just mainly to show that Stokoe’s reporting is fare from honest. It’s rather like Mapes’s attempted takedown of Bush in the run-up to the 2004 election. I believe that Dan Rather’s explanation was that the doctored Texas Air National Guard files were “fake but accurate.”
Let’s just deal with the the facts as presented. Did Stokoe doctor Fester’s e-mails or not? He did –and not to make him look good.
When all is said and done, Our Glorious Scribe is a pretty despicable character.
OK, point taken. Please forgive me for assuming that this particular aspect had been rigged (so much else was). I gotta admit it had not occurred to me that “your correspondent,” who I had to assume was Fr. Fester, would stoop to that. (I do assume you’re talking about Fr. Fester here? If so then I strongly suggest you ask him about it.)
I looked for the source here, Stokoe’s post on ocanews.org, and couldn’t find it. It’s standard practice to provide a link in cases like this. Please do so, so I can check Stokoe’s text for myself in its full context.
Anyway, George, what about the other problems I noted, the ones you can’t blame on Fester?
Don’t think Fester has a strong Russian accent or a passport to justify one.
If that course you mentioned doesn’t pan out, I find that simply reading more carefully dramatically improves my comprehension 🙂
It slipped my mind. So I stand corrected on a completely peripheral issue. One irrelevant to any of the grave distortions I noted. I do confess a tendency to over-ascribe agency to Fr. Fester, beyond his due. Perhaps. I’m far from alone.
Nevertheless, I confess something else: it crossed my mind to wonder if anyone, by any chance, has ever heard Fr. Fester imitate a Russian accent. . .
Is it easier, Mike, to believe that Father Fester faked a Russian accent than to believe someone in a cathedral where about one-third of the parishioners come from the former Soviet Union had this happen to them? Honestly?
I personally know the man in question here, the one who sent George the screen grabs of his correspondence with Father Fester. Everybody at SSOC does. I hope he reveals his identity, but if he does, you will probably assume it’s Father Fester acting like a sock puppet.
To be clear: I want to see the whole thing in the context in which Stokoe embedded it — with what was written there, fore and aft. I’m afraid I simply don’t trust you, George.
Was this asked with a straight face? After all your spin and worse that I just exposed? Do you have a link to this on Stokoe’s site? So I can check it in context for myself? I shouldn’t have to ask, incidentally; it’s just elementary integrity to link to excerpted webpages. FYI.
Open your eyes! You are full of outraged talk and yet readers here have to guide you every step of the way to show you where the answers to your questions lie. I don’t think you have been able to answer even one of your questions on your own.
The link you want is in this paragraph. You’ll have to find it and click it yourself though. Not doing that for you.
Mike, you reach any farther, and you will fall right over. You could use a bit of help in the reading comprehension department, and especially prior to the rock throwing in which you engage.
And of course, because
that would make him a Russian national.
Your Stokoe shilling is really beyond the pale.
Whereas OCANews would be the clinical study of fair and balanced reporting?
I find it sad that my prediction of the response was so spot on. If the chain of e-mails has been misrepresented by George or his correspondent, then I am sure that Mark Stokoe can bring it to light – he has the forwards after all to work from.
And you have no problem with that deceitfulness, do you?
I read this to Jacob and he says to tell you, “You’re a good example of the class you say you’d like to teach.”
George, why do you position an e-mail that was posted at 9:33 p.m. immediately after one posted at 10:30 p.m.
Probably because he didn’t notice it. Oops. I have no doubt George will answer your question. Oops! He did answer your question.
What Stokoe actually said was chilling was not Fester’s reply, as you falsely assert, but XXXXXX’s description of the media personality (the ultra-nationalist “Russian Buchanan”) and his evident willingness to lie — perhaps for the team.
False. (Well, true. What Stokoe actually said was chilling…) What Stokoe actually did was edit a stolen conversation between two people to make things appear the way he wanted them to appear, and that’s manipulation. I’m an editor despite the fact that I can’t comprehend the English language, have only a third grade education, and no sense of reality. I don’t edit to change the sense of what the writer has written or I get fired. Stokoe’s use of the word “chilling” is carefully placed to appear to be about the “Russian Buchanan” but in the end, it’s Fester he wants us to get the chills about. That, my friend, is Machiavellian and not Christ-like. “No problem if it is for the cause,” spins Stokoe. I’m getting dizzy.
I mean, what else could the good Father possibly have been up to?
Answer: To get the word out to the Russians through the Russian media that “Jonah is not removed.” Duh.
(Machiavelli and Jesus Christ are not compatible strategists, incidentally, nor are the goals they aimed to accomplish particularly comparable. I mention this, although I fear that these distinctions may perhaps be lost on much of your readership.)
That’s just unnecessary. Your character is showing.
Your last point apparated over to Mark Stokoe’s computer. It’s got no substance.
Who’s Jacob?
George’s “answer” only digs the ditch deeper. Some of y’all are marchin’ right into it, not unlike lemmings.
False. Not.
Met. Jonah *is* removed. The fat lady just ain’t sung yet. The main reason? We Yankees don’t much cotton to budding autocrats or to old-world Imperial “Orthodoxy,” caesaropapism, unaccountable clericalists or Nicolaitians in divine drag. Not to mention anti-Constitutional Dominionists. We prefer Holy Orthodoxy to the pseudo varieties, if y’all don’t mind.
Re: your duh … I hate to disturb your complacent naievete, but what Fester is up to is clear enough to me and to many others. If ROCOR wants him, well … bon apetit, MP.
Thank you.
Your last remark sports a predicate branching off from a verb unknown to me, editress. Perhaps you could revise it into clearer English, limiting yourself to words found in the OED?
Maybe George can ask Deep Throat and you can get your answer from a primary source for once.
You are right that the fat lady is warming up, and the OCA is screwed. Not sure why you would be so giddy about your church’s self-destruction though. It’s sad.
Re: ‘Deep Throat’ and honest answers, I think I won’t hold my breath.
My church is Holy Orthodoxy. If James Paffhausen should choose to participate in the edification of Christ’s One, Holy, catholic and Apostolic Church, that would make me very joyful. But whether he would do so or not, that Church isn’t subject to destruction — self- or any other kind. You’re sorta presumptuous, on many levels.
I think it’s likely that there will be an autocephalous OCA that’s not a paranoid laughingstock, some day. I sincerely hope so.
Maybe. I won’t hold my breath for an honest answer, though.
I think it’s likely that there will be an autocephalous OCA that’s not a laughingstock and a great, big stumbling block, some day. I certainly hope so. It would be reason for joy to see James Paffhausen choose to participate in the edification of Christ’s One, Holy, catholic and Apostolic Church in America. But whether he does or not, the Holy Orthodox Church isn’t subject to destruction, self- or any other kind. The “orthodox” imperial cult/simulacram can fall, fall even further than it is fallen, fallen already, as far as I’m concerned. I’m not “giddy” about that, but not unhappy, either. I prefer things in black and white. That way there’s just no excuse at all for making the wrong choice.
This particular church, the one in America, has its work cut out for it, agreed. There does sometimes seem to be less to work with in this sorry culture than is needed. But one thing’s clear enough: intellectually and morally corrupt imperialists, idolatrous Mammon-cultists, solid-science-deniers and other worshippers of ignorance, wannabe autocrats and clericalists, dog-collared bootlickers of rich, vicious thugs, as well as assorted paranoids, hypocrites and other miscreants, pseudos and unrepentant sinners et al. are unlikely to be of much use whatsoever in that blessed effort. IMHO.
Gee whiz Mike, mommy taught me not to call names in first grade.
Seriously Mike, forget to take your meds?
You had me until this….
Gee, Mike, I guess you wouldn’t eat with the sinners or tax collectors either, huh?
Oh, I totally prefer them to most of y’all, please believe me. Rather fond of unpretentious sinners, actually. The repentant ones anyway. Right-wing hypocrites, not so much.
Who you calling right-wing, and what do you mean by that?
By right-wing, do you mean people who do not condone homogenital sex or procreation by individuals who are not married?
What is your goal in participating on this blog, if you don’t mind sharing?
Mike,
You don’t need to be so angry. I’m a very nice person in real life. I’m not complacent, nor am I naive.
“Jacob” is a pseudonym for the intelligent fellow sitting here in my living room, and he sometimes comments. I’m “Rachel,”also a pseudonym. “Jane” is my real middle name.
Why does George’s answer only did the ditch deeper?
Stokoe edited the conversation before he posted it on his web site. So that’s true. What are you saying is false?
Your third paragraph with all the flowery language? I’m interested. Again, what are you saying? I don’t understand. But that’s not surprising. I’m not educated. It’s true, I have an education, but you have more information than I do apparently, so educate me.
What is Fester up to?
“Apparate” is used in the Harry Potter books (see definition below). Your last paragraph had no substance because it was mean-spirited.
Etymology 1
From Latin apparātus
[edit] Noun
apparate (plural apparates)
(obsolete) apparatus
[edit] Etymology 2
From Latin apparēre (to appear) in late Latin, as of a servant who appears on being summoned. A back-formation from apparition.
[edit] Verb
apparate (third-person singular simple present apparates, present participle apparating, simple past and past participle apparated)
(neologism) To appear (magically); to teleport to or from a place. [quotations ▼]
Jane Rachel, I’m interested in how you are able to put a diacritical sign over the “a.” I’ve tried to do put an umlaut over the “u” in uber. Could you help me?
I cut and pasted that definition of “apparate,” but I know there’s a way to do it. I can’t remember how. I’ll bet Lola J. Lee Beno can help you.
Hold down the “alt” key while typing 129 on the number pad on your keyboard.
über
Are you sure “uber” (or is it “über”?) requires an umlaut though?
In 17
Mike says:
May 25, 2011 at 4:46 am
Is that supposed to impress, or to intimidate?
It was meant to insult all the while lecturing us on “Holy Orthodoxy..”
In 17
Mike says:
Perhaps it would be well if you would describe for us what your (“Yankee”?) vision of Holy Orthodoxy is.
Sounds like “Orthodox Congregationalism” to me.
Ya know, this is the second post where I’ve read about “dominionists” . Despite having lived in the bible belt for most of the past decade I don’t think I’ve ever met a single one. NOT ONE!!!!! (shouting intended). That’s just one of the slurs you throw at those you don’t like.
Evidently Yankees are about manufacturing bigotry and paranoia, at least from the evidence you are presenting about what Yankees are like. Fortunately, I don’t ascribe the motives of one to all, though you seem to expand the nonexistent threat of a small fringe group (who, incidentally, would use that Yankee virtue of democracy to achieve their goals if they had a hope of achieving them) to, well, the rest of us I guess. Mike, you have become nothing more than a troll. I respond only to tell you that with this you have lost all credibility and show yourself to be a fringe whack-job. My words are carefully chosen and, yes, I know they will offend. However, that is the course you have chosen. If you want your credibility back, I think you have some apologizing to do.
I’m a North Country Minnesota-born girl with Yankee and Southern roots and a sister in Atlanta, Georgia, and I am with you, Mr. Harrington. I can assure you, we up in the northern states are not all about manufacturing bigotry and paranoia. As for Mike, I can’t figure out what he’s up to exactly, but Crito’s essay recently posted over on ocatruth blows his posturing to smithereens.
“Dominionist” has become a code word for “right-wingers who have deeply held Christian beliefs but who I don’t want to be associated with because then my liberal friends will not like me anymore.”
You’re right, they’re an ephemera. It’s like Bill Maher and Rosie O’Donnell who go on about how terrible “Christianists” are but who don’t say “boo!” about Muslim terrorists.
Ditto that George, I’m surprised us “dumb hillbillies” were able to keep up – but do try and be more “holy” in your “Orthodoxy” – you dumb hillbilly you.
The only intelligence he exhibited was of the dishonest kind..move along..
I’ll grant you a point that you did not make:
(1) It is a mistake to get distracted by irrelevant issues or issues of only tertiary importance. Stolen emails and the DOS are distractions, and they are being dealt with via appropriate channels (for the most part it would seem).
I’ll also grant you a point that you did make:
(2) Most people here have no experience standing up for themselves or their church in public. They aren’t used to facing down this kind of attack. Their legs are a little wobbly. No doubt they will fall down a few times as they gain strength. But give them a enough time and they’ll be walking, running, and then on to training wheels!
Mike,
I get email threads like this all the time, as I deal with people in different time zones on a regular basis. If the “10:30pm” email was sent from Central Time, then Fr. Fester could easily respond 3 minutes later at “9:33pm” Eastern Time. Most email clients don’t include the time zone in their “friendly” timestamp. And since we have confirmation above from Seraphimista that this person is a parishoner of the Cathedral in Dallas, that settles it for me.
Dear Mike,
I am the owner of published e-mails. I remember my e-mail exchange with Fr. Fester very well and was amazed to find this conversation published on OCAN without my permission.
“…..George, why do you position an e-mail that was posted at 9:33 p.m. immediately after one posted at 10:30 p.m.,…..”
Thank you for drawing my attention to that discrepancy. I believe this happens because I normally use two computers –Mac desktop and old little Windows laptop at work. Time on one of them could be not properly set – it newer bothered me before.
I understand, that it might be difficult to follow this email chain without correct date. What would honest journalist do? He would contact me (or Fr. Fester!) for clarification and permission for the publication. But not M. Stokoe. He chooses to publish stolen emails, distorting them to achieve his goal.
As a party in that email exchange I am ready to testify that Fr. Fester NEVER asked me to use anybody (especially F.) to distort the truth. Does this answer your question?
Now, let me ask you this: how in the world my private emails got to M Stokoe???
Bishop Mark Maymon said to us in St. Seraphim that he found the conspiracy against himself, and that is why he sent Fr. Fester’s emails to HOLY SYNOD!!!.
There is nothing in this email chain about Bp. Mark – not a word! Why would he send that text to Synod? How can he prove the very existence of the “conspiracy” if nobody talks about him?
Why did he send it to Stokoe? Why Stokoe choose to publish them?
I have only one answer – Stokoe use everything he can find to blacken Fr. Fester and HB. That is his real goal – not the “truth, transparency and accountability”.
And finally, I am not going to reveal my identity here in the Internet for you – it is pointless.
I am ready to testify and provide all required documents when there will be a formal court hearing.
Thanks for your response, The Russian. No reason for you to identify yourself. I’m glad to hear your testimony that Fr. Fester never asked you to use anybody (esp. F.) to distort the truth. That was the weightiest question I had after reading your screen shot, so I appreciate your response.
As to the issue of your private e-mail dialogues with Fester getting published, pertinent legalities aside, I don’t approve of the tactic. But then I recall that Mark Stokoe wasn’t the first to deploy it. And I’m sorta old-school on tactics when it comes to intelligence gathering about what’s really going on behind the scenes: I believe the One who promised that there’s nothing hidden that won’t be revealed. God only knows how much abominable filth is destined to come out about this country, with respect to the churches, the military, the corporations, the banksters, the judiciary and government. It’ll all come out, though, even if only on Judgment Day. My sense is that it ain’t gonna be pretty. That much, I know almost for sure.
The snippets of e-mails we’ve seen are clearly edited, truncated, taken out of their context and used to distort and special plead — by everyone involved, on all sides. None of which affects much the larger truth here: a consensus has developed against Met. Jonah — among the MC and the Holy Synod, at SVS and evidently among many on his own staff. Too many people feel they cannot work with him. Ergo: too much white hat, not enough cattle. Period. So this looks like history to me at this point.
He isn’t up to the job, evidently. But who could be, at this stage of the development of the OCA, and in this retarded culture? I wholeheartedly agree with Fr. Hopko that the OCA isn’t mature and integrated enough to be ready for a Metropolitan. To me it’s that simple. Just about everything I’ve seen and heard adds up to a pile of testimony to that cold, hard fact. Moreover, I’m deeply skeptical about the office anyway. Anywhere. I’m especially suspicious of anyone who would want it. I seriously wonder if that is not a cardinal disqualification.
In the early Church, those bishops who turned out to be the best ones generally seemed to have fled, literally or figuratively, whenever threatened with the office. That seems right to me. The contrast with today may explain a great deal of what’s wrong with the churches.
Rule #1. Stokoe spins. Don’t use his site as a baseline.
Where? What other emails were stolen? Are you thinking of the Stokoe conspiracy? They weren’t stolen. They were leaked to Bp. Tikhon. Big difference.
Where? Who? The only manipulated emails so far are on Stokoe’s site. Are you thinking of the Stokoe conspiracy emails? Those weren’t manipulated. Those were reprinted in full.
Where did you get the information? Sources? Not even Stokoe dares make this broad of a claim (he sure would like to though).
Sounds to me you read too much Stokoe.
Rule #1. Stokoe spins. Don’t use his site as a baseline.
The only thing I care to comment on is this:
The e-mail excerpts in the screen shot in this article are truncated, edited and clearly not the entire text of their exchange.
Rule #1. Stokoe spins. Don’t use his site as a baseline.
The excerpts aren’t truncated at all.
The first screenshot comes from Stokoe’s site. The second screenshot shows the original email. Compare the second to the first and you discover that Stokoe manipulated the text of the original email and passed it off as genuine.
Showing more text either above or below the section that Stokoe misquoted (the first screenshot) adds nothing. It’s irrelevant. It can’t change the fact that he lied about the contents of the original email.
Second, you have the testimony of the Russian author who confirms the screenshot of the original email is accurate.
Your point Mike, is pointless.
Rule #1. Stokoe spins. Don’t use his site as a baseline.
I see now that what came before and after Stokoe’s excerpts is not relevant to this. But I wanted to check it out for myself. The link enabling me to do it was either added after I asked, or I somehow managed to miss it the first time.
“The Russian” didn’t say that his screenshot comprised the whole e-mail exchange. It looks to me like excerpts of e-mails cut and pasted and then screenshot. He hasn’t said otherwise. In any case, I’m not convinced that Stokoe has materially distorted the essential sense of anything here, in spite of George’s eagerness to spin it that way. I don’t know enough to make that judgment, but neither do you. I can, however, see quite clearly how George has done his own spinning and distortion of what may have been a spin job by Stokoe. I’m only sure about George’s, since I caught him red-handed in the act, and demonstrated it.
My point isn’t pointless: it is impossible to accurately judge the full meaning of excerpted, truncated, incomplete and out-of-context e-mails. The context includes other related communications, as well. The only meaningful disagreement is about whether this behind the scenes stuff is any of my, or your, business, and, in this particular case, whether these e-mails were “stolen.” I tend to think generally these things are my business, unless it concerns confession and private spiritual advice, which of course is nobody else’s business. Whether those in question here were “stolen” is currently an open question. I am less exercised about that than some of you, and my tendency is to think they were not, based on what I know at this point.
Church affairs and church politics and behind-the-scenes maneuvering and sordid controversies and schemings and plots and grossly unbrotherly and uncanonical behavior affect me directly and indirectly and definitely affect my capacity to give informed consent to membership and stewardship of a church. Therefore I think such communications among top church officials are my business. I know for a fact that in Greece the Greeks certainly feel that way about the GOA there. I doubt a whole lot gets swept under the rug there, although I suppose I may be mistaken.
Mike, you don’t accept first hand testimony, a primary source?
Um, what’s your specific question? Do I believer TR that Fr. Fester didn’t want to use this F. character after hearing TR’s description of him and his schtick? I suppose that is possible, even likely, and that Stokoe has twisted this one badly. I don’t see much substance in many of the other alleged distortions the clique here and at OCAT accuse him of, though.
So I am willing to concede that in this case Stokoe appears to have gone way over the line. The way he spun the tonsure of the dying nun sounds like another hugely uncharitable impropriety on his part, although I don’t know all the details on that one. Net, though, he’s done a lot of laudable and needed muckraking, IMHO. So I am definitely not on the bandwagon with those who would condemn and “depose” him.
Dear Mike,
I am glad to be able to answer your question. But you still have not answered mine.
You chose to accuse Met. Jonah instead.
I understand that this is the only question that is important to you, but it is irrelevant to our discussion here.
Listen, it is this simple: I have asked why Bp Mark Maymon stole and M. Stokoe published MY PRIVATE EMAILS?
It is all about “pertinent legalities”.
The One, Whom you quote so often, said ” “YOU SHALL NOT STEAL!” Why it is so difficult to understand?
I did not “deploy any tactic…” I did not “distort or truncate any emails (I do edit them to protect my privacy) I don’t care what do you think about the future of OCA, or the office of Metropolitan. I simply want an answer on my questions:
Why did Bp. Mark Maymon send my emails to Stokoe? Why did Stokoe publish them?
The only reasonable answer I see here is this – they want Met. + Jonah gone. They are ready to use any illegal means to achieve their goal.
This is immoral. You cannot build The Happy Future by immoral means – The Future will be distorted. They tried this in Russia almost 100 years ago – and you know how it ends.
That is what ” … wrong with the churches….”, NOT the office of Metropolitan.
Why are you asking me about what Bishop Mark chose to do? What do his actions have to do with me? Your reasoning escapes me. Ask him.
You’ve admitted to editing the screenshot e-mails “to protect your privacy.” As I figgered. It is of course absolutely your right to do that. And I understand how you would feel violated in this matter, to some extent. I do sympathize. But the cat’s now out of the bag. You will have to take your beef up with Bishop Mark. Perhaps there’s a lesson in this for you about playing with the big boys. It is and always has been at least somewhat perilous to do so. C’est la vie.
I get the impression that you are pressing charges against the bishop, or consenting with those who are doing that? Is that true? I have no doubt that your clear sense of righteous indignation has been stoked and fed by certain elements. I can easily imagine the pressure you’re under, and the influences . . . This whole unfortunate imbroglio does raise interesting forensic and philosophical questions about the nature of theft. I’m one of those who is not at all convinced that what happened here falls justly under the category of theft, as such, at least as this crime is understood by adults. We shall see how that shakes out though, I guess. You clearly desired, for whatever reason, to be a “playa,” and so you are. Congrats for getting your wish.
I haven’t accused Jonah of a single thing, unless you refer to having expressed my opinion that he seems somewhat unsuited to his job — an opinion based on the evident fact that a significant number of those with whom he must work closely seem to oppose him and think he’s in over his head. Again, it’s just my reading of the situation. The situation itself is hardly my fault. So how exactly I am guilty of “accusing” Jonah escapes me. And please recall: I also opined that I don’t think the OCA is mature enough for a Metropolitan, and that I agree with Fr. Tom that the OCA should go into a sort of moratorium, Met-wise. Y’all want a culture warrior, I do grasp this. What I don’t get is why you can’t see how grossly inappropriate that would be in a bishop in this country at this time in this infant church. At least the sort of warrior that would be popular around here. One more bit of data that to me means: so not ready. I humbly suggest that you focus on getting your own sorry house in order, first. Friendly advice, for what it’s worth.
I would go further, not that anyone here seems particularly interested in my opinion. Generally speaking, my impression of the OCA and the AOCA is that an insufficient number of their laity, clergy and hierarchy are mature enough, spiritually and intellectually, or adequately formed in the Faith to be really ready for autocephaly. This place sure hasn’t changed my mind about that one bit. Nevertheless, I do make an effort in my own mind to avoid attaching undue weight to the ravings and delusions rampant hereabouts. I try to perceive the big picture. I’m just sayin’.
With respect to your closing shot, I meant that, IMHO, a large part of the problem with the churches may well be that “the system” favors the elevation of the guys who sorta lust for episcopacy. It wasn’t always like that. This state of affairs may not necessarily be a good way to procure the best men for the jobs. You have every right to disagree. In this country, we’re very opinionated. Perhaps you’ve noticed. Good luck to you, and may God bless you with all good things in Christ.
Mike,
You are obfuscating and you know it.
Why do you think Bishop Mark stole the emails?
Why do you think Stokoe published the stolen emails?
Whether you consider it theft to take someone else’s stuff or not, what do you think these acts say about the character of Bishop Mark and Stokoe?
Have a little creativity and honor the man’s simple request. Just answer the questions honestly. You are very capable.
No, I’m not, and no, I don’t. You’re entitled to your opinion, though.
None of my business. (And assuming what isn’t demonstrated on your part.)
No strong opinion, insufficient data.
No opinion, insufficient data. They may have had a damn good reason for all I know. “Someone else’s stuff” somewhat begs the question, as noted.
I did answer honestly. You’re very nosy and presumptuous, and you can sometimes seem just a little bit unhinged, too. Work on that?
Mike,
1. We all read your input and hear what you are saying.
2. You can not possibly call “um” unhinged-have you gone back and read your own e-mails?
3. I don’t know how many people here are actually right-wingers, but I assure you not all are, if that makes you feel better. I believe most here want to follow their faith as presented in the Gospels, the Fathers and the Tradition and if some things line up with right-winger understanding of the Gospels, well maybe they have that part right.
4. You are not the enemy here. We all want the truth of the matter. remember what you write is there for EVERYONE to see. It’s easy to say things, it’s hard to take it back. Forgiveness is hard, the OCA is small. We all may meet face to face someday and we will probably like one another until we put it all together and remember what that guy/gal said . . . .
Pray tell me who these “big boys” are and why emailing a priest friend – father confessor is something the OCA parishioners constitutes “playing with them”.
This is the sort of condescending talk that shows where the real “clique” is.
Chancellor of the OCA, Dean of St. Nicholas Cathedral (Washington, DC) = big boy. Desiring to be intermediary between said big boy and media operatives reaching millions in the Russian republic = wannabe bigtime playa in international church politics. Getting burned in the process: not a surprise to me.
Holy Synod = bigger boys.
I take it you must know that Fr. Fester has been caught red-handed trying to pass off his revisionism about what happened in Santa Fe:
Self-explanatory and requiring no comment from me.
Perhaps because the emails proved that the parish council was plotting with Metropolitan Jonah against their lawful bishop (Nikon)? Got it right so what do I win?
Now there is a plot against Nikon?! 🙂
For the record, James, Nikon was not bishop of the DOS until after the emails were stolen. So what you are claiming is not even possible. You are allowing Mark Stokoe to abuse your mind. For the record, who was bishop of the DOS when the emails were stolen?
Um, you might as well go and get yourself chrismated. “Taste and see that the Lord is good.” There’s nothing else like it on earth. It’s so good, and heaven is waiting…
Well, um, lets look at the record. Jonah was put on a leave of at least sixty days and Nikon was made locum tenens from the day in Santa Fe. Now since Jonah never actually went on leave, he never could reclaim being locum tenens as the sixty days never expired.
I know its hard to understand for the pro Jonah forces, but facts are facts. Perhaps thats why none of you seem willing to put your real names to anything..
Besides the attack on Nikon is well documented (go to OCATruth and search “Nikon”- should prove quite enlightening)
James, brother, I’m saddened. Not by your providing an alternate voice coming from the cathedral. We need that, but you are making tremendous allegations against a group of devoted brothers and sisters who are simply taking their positions as leaders of the parish seriously and are addressing the serious errors in judgment and behavior of bishop Mark. To slander them here is inappropriate. If you have solid facts and evidence to prove your allegation, that should be directed to the appropriate authorities: Fr. Justin and bishop Nikon. You can send the evidence to Fr. Justin, who can deliver it personally to his Grace, bishop Nikon when he sees him this weekend. If you have none, then, it would be wise to refrain from making allegations that only serve to foster distrust and antipathy.
by your prayers
Theophan, If my comments have at times proven somewhat flippant I apologize but I have had to hear an awful lot about this as you can imagine and perhaps I assume too much that some facts are in order.
The Cathedral is, as you are aware, suffering from two problems- the ones related with Metropolitan Jonah and Fr. Fester trying to build a base of popular outrage at the Cathedral to overturn the decision of the Holy Synod in Santa Fe. I make that statement solely on my reading of the public record which no one has denied (that OCATruth was coordinated by Fester with the knowledge of Jonah) That there is credible evidence of clerical interference by Jonah through Fester I would also argue was established to the satisfaction of the Holy Synod (or at least Fester’s role. I think what I have seen shows Jonah complicity but others may disagree).
I have no sympathy to the complaints about the emails. I have seen nothing to indicate any illegal or unethical behavior on behalf of Bishop Mark rather I see the gang of OCATruth shedding crocadile tears. They certainly din’t have a problem publishing Archbishop Dmitri’s letter to Archdeacon Burke (nor have they ever cared to explain how they got it).
The other issue is the Fr. John matter. I have generally avoided in depth commentary on that one as I have never heard a credible account of what exactly happened. There is a lot to that I would say was probably mishandled at best by Bishop Mark. However, sorting through the rumors is too daunting of a task when the principals insist on silence.
As for the parish council attacking inappriopately, I would say their turning to Fr. Joe and Jonah was problematic. I would also say that it seems to be in the grip of a herd mentality and has come to conclusions I find somewhat bizarre. That said, I don’t think that the individual members have engaged in anything unethical, just judgments which I would take issue with.
Believe it or not, I actually took the time just now to do what you requested. I went to OCATruth.com, I did a search for Nikon, and I read the first ten articles that came up. Nothing about any plots there, none at all really, but certainly none involving any conspiracy by the parties you name in the time frame you identify. You might need to go to the effort to actually communicate what is on your mind about this matter, or we can just let it go if you prefer.
The two negative (or potentially negative) things reported about Nikon on OCATruth.com were as follows:
(1) He was named by Stokoe as one of 4 bishops on the Holy Synod who want Jonah ousted, along with Benjamin, Tikhon, and Melchizadek. But this is Stokoe’s opinion, Stokoe’s words. Stokoe lives in Ohio, not in the DOS. Also Stokoe made this claim well before the Santa Fe meeting, so Nikon was not bishop of the DOS then. So even if Stokoe was plotting to harm Nikon with this claim, his location and the timing don’t fit your allegation.
(2) There is mention of a report that Jonah sent a letter to Nikon requesting him to prevent “gay Miami Archdeacon Gregory Burke” from serving at the altar while he continues to live with a man who is assumed to be his sexual partner (obviously we aren’t privy to all the relevant inside information here). The letter would have been sent because Nikon was bishop of the DOS at the time and Miami is in the DOS. If Jonah did send such a letter, which makes a lot of sense, then he would have done it as both a professional courtesy to his temporary replacement in the DOS and for the good order and health of the church. Apparently Nikon is letting the gay archdeacon return to serving at the altar and has made no public statement about the matter. This is a puzzling matter to be sure. It probably does qualify as a black mark against the church and to some extent Nikon’s reputation until it is address, but unless you have secret insider information, there is no evidence of a plot against Nikon. Maybe a plot against Burke??? Although you’d need more information than what is provided to really classify it as a plot against Burke. In any event, this was an issue in the DOS and it is fair game for folks in the DOS to be concerned about it, wouldn’t you say?
So again, no plots against Nikon that I can find anywhere. When you suggested a plot between Jonah and people in the DOS, I just assumed you were talking about people in the DOS telling Jonah (their bishop) about their dissatisfaction with Bishop Mark (their temporary administrator). Clearly this is not what you were talking about, but I’m still at a loss to know what events you are referring to or what your point is for that matter.
I’ll be honest with you, I do not read stolen emails. It is rude, wrong, and creepy. Distributing them is also illegal. So maybe you have dug deep into some emails that I have no interest in and really do have some secret information that I’m unaware of. I’d rather not get involved in an unethical discussion, but if there is a way to have an ethical discussion about these matter, I’m game. But next time can you do a little bit of the leg work for me and put a little more effort into clearly communicating what is on your mind.
For what it is worth, I have tried to be kind to you, and I apologize if others here have been unkind in their responses to some of what you have posted. Since I don’t know you personally, it is hard to know exactly what your objectives are. But if your objective is an honest conversation, I’m certainly open to that, and I think many on here are from what I can tell.
James,
Do you get all your exercise jumping to conclusions? And untrue ones at that…..
James S: I’m on the parish council and will attest to the fact that we as a group did not coordinate anything with either Fr Joseph or with Metropolitan Jonah on any of this. Some members of the parish council apparently discussed their concerns with Fr Joseph. I was not one of them. At any rate, I’m not sure there was anything wrong with some broaching the subject with him because he was our parish priest and, to some of us, our father confessor. After all, those types of relationships are not always left at the doorstep when a priest leaves.
Mark Stokoe has characterized all of Bishop Mark’s problems as being a result of not affiliating himself with the “right Team.” That is categorically untrue!
Okay, so if there was no conspiracy perhaps you can explain why the entire Synod (including the great hero Jonah) chose to charge Fr. Fester with clerical interference. Since its your emails, you should have no reluctance to discuss it.
James,
By all accounts, things are being dealt with. Bishop Nikon came, not just to Dallas but to various places around the South to form a more comprehensive picture. My and your perspective will be limited because we are not privy to all the details. I’m sure we would all have to move, even slightly, from our stances if we new every single shred of evidence. But we don’t. So, I really question the value of making inflammatory allegations based on our scanty knowledge of the entire situation.
Nevertheless, I implore you, if you want to insist on duking it out with “those who ruined it for you” here, than be prepared to provide facts, dates, times, and places. The more appropriate channel, however, would be the one I outlined above.
If you disagree with Metropolitan Jonah, you must at least agree with him that the culture in our church is such that everyone is everyone is afraid of being exposed. There are so many allegations being laid at the feet of so many people. Many people claim to have the “smoking” gun and when the time is right, will produce said gun, which will ruin whichever party with whom they disagree. To what purpose? Paralysis. Individually and corporately. Have all these allegations helped us stick to our rule of prayer? Have they goaded us on to reach out to our fellow parishioners, much less those in need? I’m afraid not. If anything, we are headed in the opposite direction. It is very likely that our prayers have lessened. Our hospitality and charity has also diminished. In short, our love has grown cold. If this has happened, it is our own fault, and nobody else’s.
Theophan, thank you. Yours is the voice of reason and perspective here.
James, you said:
Perhaps because the emails proved that the parish council was plotting with Metropolitan Jonah against their lawful bishop (Nikon)? Got it right so what do I win?
I’m not even sure where to start. You’re wrong, brother. Please come talk to me Sunday.
Hey James, just a quick note. Fr Fester did no “coordinating” of anything on the OCATruth.
The site was created on our own by me personally and despite what the Stokoe says it was without Fr Joe’s blessing (he actually never responded to my e-mail where I asked him as a spiritual father if I should or shouldn’t get involved by creating the website. Mark Stokoe posted my e-mail anyways implying that Fr. Joe did give his blessing. Truth is he didn’t ever respond to my private e-mail asking for spiritual/practical guidance, I just did it anyways). Fr. Joe was not a part of OCATruth, he never had access to the site, never had any power over what did or didn’t go in. We didn’t want any clergy involved. We did talk to Fr. Joe about it, but he was doing no coordinating of anything involving OCATruth.
Also, I’m still not sure I can agree that sending dozens of private e-mails to Mark Stokoe is the “ethical” thing to do. I can fathom that perhaps sending a couple of those e-mails to the Synod to alert them to a perceived “plot” or something like that is something somebody would possibly think was a justifiable action to take. But seriously? Sending dozens of e-mails to Mark Stokoe? A layman? a website guy who is known to his inflammatory blogging practices? Thats crazy talk.
Last note: No plot against +Nikon hidden in our website, sorry.
I deny it. As Elijah has explained, Fr. Fester was never part of OCAT. What Stokoe did was paste his corrospondance with people who were upset and confused, and make it look as if he was putting people up to things. At least in the cases I am aware of, this was not the case.
Moreover I have (and so does Stokoe I assume) an email Fr. Fester sent me during Clean Week urging me to cease my involvement with OCAT.
I actually went to Bp. Mark in confidence regarding my involvement with the website, because I was concerned about my spiritual well-being. I told him at that time he was always welcome to tell me when I was off-base or if he started having concern for my spiritual health. If anyone had an open door to advise me one way or the other, it was him.
James we need to talk, I think you and I have the same thoughts.
Thank you, Fr.
Father Reardon, do you endorse this kind of deceitfulness?
Maybe he would not agree with you that it is deceitful.
I think we all need to stop feeding the troll, here.
Fascinating. Maybe it’s a Southern thing? I really want to understand. Help me to do so.
Are you educated people?
From what I’ve observed, if you have a real question, people here will respond intelligently.
George is hit or miss. But I hear he has a day job.
Why Mike, I’ll have you know that I have a sixth-grade edeekashun. Book larnin’ twern’t wasted on me, no Sir!
I find your question rather insulting. I, for one, who has graduated from college, and learned on the job the nitty gritty of coding the front and back ends of websites, assisted by her talent of mining for information, don’t have to answer your question.
27
Mike says:
May 25, 2011 at 2:31 am
Some have even been to college and gotten PhD degrees! How insulting can a person be! Southerners are as well educated (and often better educated) as yankees. Goodness knows, they are better educated in manners. If I’d ever asked someone that question growing up, I would have gotten a spanking for being so rude. I got as good or better an education in the Southern states I lived in as I did in the non-Southern states I lived in (my father was in the military).
It’s unfortunate that Mike, with all his obvious education doesn’t appreciate the simple concept that though he may have something to offer, something worth pondering even something worth getting behind, his anger and hatefilled speach is much louder than his message.
Mike,
Are you serious? How many degrees do I need for you to consider me educated?
And just for your own education, since you think you are talking to uneducated Texans– I’m from California but since it’s southern California you can call me a southerner if you like.
You know, Mike:
You are the most hostile person on this thread, and it really says a lot about you.
Mike, honey, you have major anger issues. I don’t understand why people here are allowing you to frame the argument regarding who’s edjumecated and who isn’t. I couldn’t care less your opinion of frog spit, let alone whether I meet with your approval. Get some counseling. We aren’t going away.
Thanks, George!!!
I feel like sending this to a priest I once knew, but he is still so unwilling… one of these days the crow will be tasted and maybe then there can be some repentance. First, it’s time to call Mark Stokoe to accountability. He needs to be stopped. Grrrr….
George, is there more to come?
…. I have to go. It’s time to put the eggplants we just bought into the ground.
As someone who is gone so liberal that compared to me, Obama seems like a Bircher and Unitarians seem like murderously dogmatic religious fanatics, I find Stokoe to be a loathsome creature who just needs to shut up. He’s not helping the OCA at all, and is causing you guys some major structural problems.
His main problem? He’s deliberately divisive, brings out the worst in friend and foe, inspires skullduggery and his ham-handed machinations will cause parishioners to peel off in large numbers (not to mention that some of those who would leave would be his own allies).
And a word to the wise (and some not so wise, like Maymon) – just because Stokoe is the enemy of your enemy, that does not make him your friend.
Well, if you really want to appear to be a respectable journalist why don’t you publish the whole emails without editing or commentary? Do it like a footnote- see the originals. But of course that won’t let you slant the story your way (Stokoe does the same but why not try and be better?)
And how can anyone stick with Jonah after he stabbed Fester in the back?
Newsflash: he didn’t.
James, how can you say that? Although I wish things had turned out differently (if only Fester had wiped his pass word) he broke Canons, for everyone to see. What is +MJ supposed to do? Not to mention that had +MJ not done that it would be destruction to the end “they” hate him so much. Maybe that was the only way to protect him . . . .
Well now, the real character of the Metropolitan is on display. What Father Fester did was wrong but let’s be honest- he did it at the behest of the Metropolitan. Jonah knew all about the website and the illicit contacts with the parish in Dallas. If he didn’t encourage it (which is dubious) he actively turned a blind eye.
Rather than do the honorable thing and take responsiblity for his actions, Jonah preferred to sell Father Fester for a white hat. Can we at least be honest about it? Jonah should of manned up and offered his resignation to protect Father Fester. Instead, he signs the charges against him.
And let’s be honest about something else: Bishop Mark displayed far more character than anyone associated with Jonah. When Fester tried to get him to change his story, Mark stuck to the truth no matter how much Jonah and Fester threatened him.
James, I read the situation differently. The Synod and MC have been so annoyed with HB for acting “unilaterally” and “without consultation” that they requested him “to deal with” Fr. Fester. As I read the minutes of the meeting, it was clear to me that they wanted him removed. In the spirit of obedience (no sarcasm intended – I feel I have to explain), HB complied with this request. It was no gesture, not an easy decision, I see it as a generous attempt at reconciliation. Now to Fr. Joseph – I do not expect this was an easy conversation between them, but knowing Fr Joseph, I’d think it was him who said “I will leave”. The two man accepted the determination of the HS realizing there would be more damage to the church if they had chosen to “man up”, if I may borrow your expression.
I agree with EAP and not with James Sode. Regardless of how the Fester emails were obtained, Fester became a liability to Jonah. I think Jonah did the right thing. I also think that Fester realized he had become a problem and the decision therefore became mutual.
This event tells me that a reconciliation process may not only be possible but may be occuring.
By the way, and this is for my good friend George. If you go to Byzantine Texas, there is a picture of the Episcopal Assembly. It looks like only half attended (I count 34), if the picture is descriptive of the attendance. I know that the Serbian bishops, possibly sans one, are still in Belgrade for their Assembly.
Looks like the Episcopal Assembly is a slow boat to who knows where.
Well that’s right- when the going its rough throw someone overboard and go to some party in your white hat.
Do you have someone in your parish who you can talk to about your frustrations right now? It sounds like it would be good if you could connect with someone in person and have a heartfelt conversation about everything you’ve experienced.
If there are folks from your parish or diocese here, maybe you really could get together for coffee. Seems like it would be really valuable and the conversation could be mutually edifying.
James, howdo you “know” that +Jonah was aware or even sanctioned Fr Joe’s actions? As for the “white hat” +Jonah already wears it. And as for Bp Mark, wow, you are really off base. I’d think you’d be singing a different story if you and your wife were corresponding with Fr Joe. Oh yeah, then it’d be “bring in the lawyers! I’ve been violated.!”
Well, George, remember the part in Dreher’s email about HB knowing about the site?
Let’s just assume George says “yes” and then you go on to explain …
Or if you prefer, we can assume George says “no,” so you recap and then go on to explain …
You should try and sell this to Stokoe. He might bite.
And more jumping, more exercise! Working up a sweat, I see…..
James, I’m embarrassed for you.
So embarassed that you can’t use your full name.
‘Theft’ and ‘Stealing’ are written of here often as fact. Even though the long promised criminal charges and arrests by the FBI and actual law enforcement agencies continue not to happen.
How many more weeks of no charges and no arrests need to happen before allegations of ‘theft’ and ‘stealing’ cross the line to libel?
You can have theft and stealing that is never prosecuted. Doesn’t make the accusation libelous.
Of course, as I pointed out the last time you posted this, any criminal investigation would involve forensic analysis and likely subpoenas to at least two internet companies. I would also anticipate the prosecutor would see an indictment before any arrest was made. I’d expect 6-9 months minimum for action.
This isn’t two kids stabbed dead in the street; there wouldn’t be a task force investigating it.
Nice try Harry. You don’t know what is or is not happening on the legal front, and you are not going to know. You can bait all you want, but not even a nibble will your line be given. Move on.
“Steal” means taking another person’s property without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. The word “or” in there means stealing happened, whether it turns out the people who stole, stole legally or not. The emails were stolen from more than one person and distributed publicly and then manipulated, with the intention to hurt. That’s wrong.
Such a ‘cut and dried’ case, so obvious to you all, it gives you no pause at all the authorities haven’t acted.
Dude, they are one step away from releasing 33,000 convicted criminals into the streets in CA (a state that on its own has the 6th largest economy in the world). Times are tough everywhere, and law enforcement has to prioritize. That’s right, already convicted criminals. Don’t be surprised if no one cares about an Orthodox priest being harmed by a gay rights activist and his pals.
Unfortunately, this is not television, Harry.
It would give me pause if they had. Considering the forensic work needed to support charges and an indictment, it would give me great pause if this was such a law enforcement priority that already so much has been done.
When you write like this, Harry, your sickly cynical words expose you as an uncharitable person. Stick to the Orthodox Forum and Stokoe’s site. They both suit your sock puppet prose much better than here.
You know, Harry, I’ve been praying that no legal charges are brought up (even though I believe there is a case here). There have been enough of it in OCA. I pray that this matter is dealt with internally, within the church. Does it shock anyone?
EAP, I’m not sure that it can be dealt with internally. The Scriptural injunctions against suing your brother in secular courts only work if there is internal discipline within the Church. This means non-arbitrary courts, a Holy Synod that doesn’t leak like a sieve, and bishops who aren’t in thrall to Jokoe (for whatever reason).
Let me ask everybody this question, especially the lawers out there: would you want your case heard by the HS of the OCA as presently constituted? Even without Bp Mark it’s clear that Stokoe controls a faction of it.
Harry,
The most shocking thing about this is that your morals appear to be so relative, that unless you see an indictment, you believe no wrong has been done. Are you even Orthodox, BTW? Christian?
From a morals stand point, this one is easy. If the emails downloaded, or were accessible, a simple phone call to Fr. Fester saying “Hey, change your password! We’re getting all your personal emails as spam over here.”
No, instead they were monitored, read, for a two months or more. (Not to mention all the history.) It is unclear how many were sent to Stokoe. We have a Synod who has tacitly approved this by doing nothing.
And you are worried about indictments.
I’ll pray for you.
I notice ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is something all the anonymites here enjoy daily, but do not offer in return.
Bp. Mark has admitted his actions relative to the email to those who have asked him. Is this debated?
Jesse, the police must then know about what you assert is so obviously so. Yet what is it they know that you do not, or what is it they don’t agree with you about? Must be something since they do not act as if anything illegal has transpired. The two or three people posting here under various names are sure certain of guilt, that’s plain. Tried and convicted, calling what happened ‘theft’ and ‘stealing’– before an arrest or charges much less a trial. After so many weeks.
Yet, in the past circumstance, years and years in Syosset– Mr. Kondratick and Fr Fester– innocent as lambs. All that donated money withdrawn as cash and gone. Month in, Month out. Shazaam.
So, add to that low-brow name calling (‘Jokoe’) and anonymous posturing. And, what the Russians would call ‘Roman Catholic Tendencies’ — these are Met. Jonah’s friends?
Harry,
You make an assumption that because something is against the law, that the police will immediately jump all over it to proscecute. You obviously know nothing about how the legal system works. Or you disingenuously ignore what you have been told repeatedly to excuse a morally reprehensible act.
Limited resources limit what a DA can do. Moreover, violent crimes will get higher priority. Crimes involving many people will get higher priority. Not that I would wish it on you, but anyone who has had their house or car broken into can tell you that often all the police will do is take a report. Even when it is quite clear who perpetrated the crime, the wheels of the law grind slow but exceeding fine, and that’s on a good day.
Not many good days of late…
There is plenty of documentation that Bp Mark took those emails and sent them to Stokoe and others. You have no standing to see that documentation. Your being nosy does not constitute standing.
Not that it would matter, as you seem to be a johnny-one-note, continually repeating your meme, “If there are no arrests, then nothing wrong was done.”
A number of posters have given you the arguments:
1) Police priorities
2)Investigations take time
3) Setting aside the legal aspects, there is a moral issue here
4) There may be church reasons not to pursue this in secular courts
Do you extend your argument, answering these positions?
No, you argue like a third grader. I can hear the sing-song now…
Oh, and BTW? I don’t know what happened in Syossett. But there was an investigation, over a long period of time, but no indictment. Given the dollar amount, there would have been one if a case could have been made. But, I see that you prefer to keep that Stokoe meme alive as well. Gee, so you argue for innocent in the case where a confession is made, but call for guilty when it suits your smear.
Not interested in facts, I see.
Now I have to pray more for you.
Plainly if there are no charges ‘trey the anon’ is assured there is theft and stealing, and if there are, the same.
Pretty soon one of these anonymites is actually going to write something libelous and George will be left holding the bag.
Also, as you write you don’t know what happened in Syosset, note Met. Jonah’s extremely negative remarks as to the predecessors choices.
Maybe that’s why these like the Vatican style setup — they believe in the Nuremberg Defense “I was just following orders, don’t blame me, I wasn’t wrong, I didn’t do wrong to do as I thought I was told, not me, no way, I’m clean as I was supporting my boss (and myself, good parties!).” — Not in the Orthodox playbook and certainly not in the Orthodox clergy playbook.
Are you suggesting Fester forwarded the emails to Stokoe and Stokoe knows it was Fester but refuses to reveal his source? Now that would be a juicy twist.
Seriously, is that what you are suggesting, Harry?
p.s. Help me out here, cuz I’m gonna have to convert to Catholicism just so I can be around people who don’t talk about the Vatican and the pope all the time!
On a serious note, can you give me some genuine insight into your obsession with the Vatican? I’m guessing there is a real story or maybe several that it would be helpful to hear.
That’s crossed my mind, too. He is asking for it.
Why don’t you take him to court and convict him guys, instead of throwing around unsubstantiated accusations.
Harry as always speaks with authority:
Mike adds:
Permit me, gentlemen. I see this suggestion all the time on internet forums. It is often made in an appeal to get a website owner to temper posters to his blog comments or forums. Hey, watch it or you are gonna get sued.
George can rest easy. Federal law assured a web site owner that they do not bear liability if a third party comes and posts libelous material on their website. George won’t be left holding the bag at all. Anyone that chases George will be left sorely disappointed and probably dealing with a sanctions motion for frivolous pleadings.
What a relief for George! He can aid and abet and foster an environment in which people can and will write/say the damnedest things, and with utter legal impunity! Just like Fox News and the RNC and George W. Bush! How much fun is that? How “Christian.”
A recent example of George writing the damnedest thing:
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Yes Mike, this was such a pernicious plan of Republicans that it had a Democratic co-sponsor and passed unanimously. Look, do you want to talk legality or ethics? You and Harry made posts suggesting to George he was going to end up on the bad end of a lawsuit as a result of what people post here. It was a nonsense statement intended to scare or intimidate. All I did was point out you were wrong. You ought to just say that you didn’t know that instead of changing your argument.
“This” = what? Ya lost me.
Ethics, mostly.
Sorry, Mr. Thought Policeman. Wasn’t arguin’ with ya, Sir. Honest! Just said it crossed my mind. Musta been one of them demons you wuz on about, though. So could ya please let me off with just a warning, Officer?
Mike, Harry, you do know what the defense against a libelous or slanderous charge is don’t you? If it’s the truth.
Harry,
Are you hypothesizing that Fester himself forwarded his emails to Stokoe?
You bring up a good point — that Kondratick was never convicted even after all the SIC evidence was turned over to the DA. So what does your own reasoning (applied in your defense of the Marks) take that to mean relative to his guilt and/ or innocence?
It looks from my chair as though MS is going to keep all eyes focused, on every creative assault
he can devise until the AAC. At that time he is expecting a clean sweep. Change the Statutes change the Met. They are 3/4 of the way there already.
The only way that won’t happen is if the DOS and anyone else who is willing, finds every MC member, council member, with a brain remaining and some courage to stand up at that time. Some phone calls perhaps? You can use a Russian accent.
You can expect zero from the DOW as they have already proved they are “boot lickers” Yankee or otherwise.
The error in this statement, which is common among the supporters of Jonah, is to assume that because most of Jonah’s support comes from the Diocese of the South, the DOS supports Jonah. That is simply false (they have less than a hundred and fifty names on their petition for crying out loud). Its hardly a majority in the South. They probably don’t even have a majority at St. Seraphim’s either- most of us would appreciate it if they would quite whining and let us get back to a quite spiritual life.
That could also mean that the majority of the DoW don’t support Benjamin as well. Personally, if there were a secret nation-wide ballot, +Jonah would win hands-down.
I don’t know of BB running a web site asking people to sign a petition of support. Jonah on the other hand did and didn’t seem to get much now did he? A little under 150 names about thirty of which are associated with a single parish. Not much of anything from his own cathedral. Very strange for a man with such hands down support as you claim.
Huh? James you need to explain what you are talking about when you post on here. Clearly you are part of some list-serv or have some other kind of access to secret information that the world at large does not have. At the very least you could point us to the source of your secret information. But better yet, why not just explain what you are talking about so that regular people can understand you.
what go to OCATruth and count the names of supporters. I doubt if you get to 150, certianly not to 200
I just want to point out James that at his Cathedral, St. Nicholas, many have signed, many-believe it or not, are not following this and many more will not sign anything because they come from former Soviet controlled countries and have told me personally they won’t sign anything.
James,
It is a limited audience that signs in support of a hierarchs on a controversial site (that was) run by anonymites. I just got off the phone with a well-known priest who is reluctant to sign because it would seem to endorse his flock embedding themselves in this controversy. I support his decision there.
What is of note re: the signatures is that they are largely from those who know +Jonah well — well enough to know he’s not the “Man in the White Hat” simulacrum Stokoe tries to pass off.
I think you mean quiet spiritual life. (So what are you doing here then?)
James, you like to throw out broad based statements with not substantiation. It’s called trolling.
Do you know the people at St. Seraphim? Do you go there? If not, then what/who are your sources?
Of course I know the people at St Seraphim. Father Fester was the one who recieved me into the church. I feel bad to see him used by someone like Jonah. Come on down to the hall and have a cup of coffee with me and you might learn a lot of what has really been going on.
Yes a quite and spiritual life is what the vast majority of the congregation seeks. I’m here because, since I can’t enjoy the quite and peaceful spiritual life I used to, I might as well make fun of the people who ruined it for me.
James, who is threatening you in your parish?
You making some very nebulous accusations. I can’t even piece them together into a coherent story. How are people here ruining your quiet spiritual life in your parish?
Admittedly I’m skeptical, but you have an open forum to express your grievances.
It also doesn’t make sense why you would want to make fun of people, can you explain that?
@ James
James we should talk, I think you and I have a lot in common. I attend the Cathedral, we should talk..
So James, were you at the parish meeting with Bishop Nikon and did you and the majority of parishioners you speak of convey this to him? Because from what I am hearing, quite the opposite is true.
What that the meeting was dominated by a few parishoners who yelled and screamed? No, thats true. Of course, it didn’t seem to impress Bishop Nikon all that much- he’s seen these fights many a times. The loud mouths yell and scream and the core of the parish just attends to the service and goes home.
Hint- we have eighty people take communion on an average Sunday- do you think that twenty five people is a majority of that?
James,
St Seraphim’s use to have at least 125 communicants each Sunday. Attendance is down. Giving is off by 60%. You are free to have your perceptions about reality, but the fact is that things have not gotten any better since Bishop Mark arrived. Only one person spoke up in favor of Bishop Mark at the special meeting. Just one. And that one person now knows the whole story and feels really dumb for being taken in by the Mark’s sad story of people out to get him. He did it to himself. He stole emails. He lied to parishioners and he showed a deep disrespect for Fr Anderson who has been there for 15 years. Finally, if he is such a great guy, why did even Fr Moretti bail on him when he realized that he had sucked him into his web of theft and deceit? The best thing for St Seraphim’s is to turn this guy out and turn the page. Get a real bishop who can lead the Cathedral and Diocese into the future.
Signing your real name would increase the credence of what you say. Just remember what Father John said- “I’m not innocent here” and no, more than one person spoke in favor of Mark (and several also spoke to the effect that they didn’t give a damn)
About fifty percent of the whining was about the emails (hint: all the Bishops read them so I doubt if they thought 1) they were stolen or 2) they were “sealed by the confessional”- remember that defense?
Then there was the silly nonsense about the rubics that we used on pascha- unlikely to entice a broad swath of support from the Diocese on that one. Though a rough guess would be it took up a quarter of the meeting it was just childish.
Then of course there was a very very telling thing about the meeting- it was after all about the Bishop. Why were there so few parishioners from our sister churches like St Sava’s and St Barbara’s? The few that were there were almost exclusively ex parishioners of the Cathedral.
Remember, Bishops are about the Diocese not the Parish and one wonders what the rest of the Diocese thinks (which of course is why Bishop Nikon traveled extensively throughout the diocese)
Don’t be surprised if the tour produces a much different result than the one your hoping for. Indeed, given what was put out from St. Seraphim about Christ the Saviour, I would assume that the Miami Cathedral is likely to hold the exact opposite view.
To say that things haven’t gotten better since Mark’s arrival may be true but the question remains as to the reason. Metropolitan Jonah and Father Fester certainly can shoulder a lot of the blame
Fortunately, we are not the Presbyterian Church where the Congregation runs rampant but a hierarchal one were calm reason and dispassionate debate are more likely to prevail. The facts will come out and it doesn’t matter who has the loudest voice or the fattest wallet
You are insinuating that Jonah sabotaged his own administrator on purpose? Why would he do that? That makes no sense. Jonah could have removed him at will, no sabotage necessary.
Can you work up a coherent story and report back with what you have?
On a personal level, I’m sorry your life is so dismal, but I’m having a hard time understanding why. Is it that you love Bishop Mark and don’t want him to go? If so, can you explain why? Is it that you love the 25-50 parishioners who have left since Bishop Mark came and you miss them?
You are taking an awful lot of time to communicate on here, so why not put a little effort into telling your story in a way that others can understand. Thanks.
Well, as long as Jonah was the locum tenens of the Diocese he could have removed Bishop Mark. He didn’t and its quite obvious that Jonah and Fester were assuming that Mark would support them in Santa Fe. When they found out that the man had a backbone and would stand up for what he thought was right, it was too late: Jonah was on leave and Nikon was the locum tenens.
As for his petty little effort at a power play at the end of April, it was of course, too pathetic to really have a chance of success. By that time, even Jonah realized that his fate would be decided by the Synod.
Did Jonah and Fester deliberately destroy the Cathedral? No, what they did was desperately try to rile up the masses in a pathetic effort to rally public support behind Jonah, when that failed they turned the mob against Bishop Mark because he was the only one they thought they could get at (a rather silly effort to intimidate the rest of the Synod). It too failed.
As for my feelings toward Bishop Mark- I have no ill will towards him at all and find that many of the remarks posted here are rather disgusting attempts to slander a basically good man. He tries as best he can to lead a flock in very difficult times. Is he perfect? Of course not. Is he the best man for the South? Don’t know that one yet. The decision is in the Diocesean Assembly’s hand. I pray only that they accept guidance from the Holy Spirit.
I will live with whatever decision they make. I will not, however, resort to wild rantings cowardly posted on the internet without my name attatched to them nor wave a pocket full of cash (as if the Church that fought the Iconclasts is reduced to a petty whore). As for the families that have left, I hope they realize the errors of their way and return to the Church That Jonah would risk their eternal damnation for the sake of his white hat is truly insane.
Thank you, James, for explaining your position. But it left me wondering why you’re denying +Jonah and Fr Joseph the charity you extend to Bp Mark? Why you cannot say this about +Jonah:
In all this time, not one word have I wrote; until now!
James, I’m happy to use my “FULL” name! The only saving grace here is that as blogs go, people are welcome to say whatever “THEY” believe to be the truth. Then there “IS” the truth.
From where in God’s name have you gotten your information? You seem to know so much about all of this that surely you’re more knowledgeable about this entire situation than absolutely everyone else who has been directly involved from the very beginning. I mean it’s almost as if you have been spoon fed exactly what to say.
What Mary said is fact, what Jesse said is fact, no one here that has had anything to say about the situation at SSOC has said anything that wasn’t true. Yet you seem to be so factually filled that all beside you are wrong.
You say that the only thing you want to do is come to church to enjoy the “quiet and peaceful spiritual life.” Unfortunately, sometimes there are things that must take place that simply cannot happen “peacefully” all the time. This is one of those times.
As a member of SSOC Parish Council I’ve never seen you attend a single council meeting. All of which are open to all “full” members of the parish. How is it you know so much about us, what’s happened, what’s been said, etc. and yet you never attend a single meeting?
You said “I’m here because, since I can’t enjoy the quite and peaceful spiritual life I used to, I might as well make fun of the people who ruined it for me.” Brother you need not look beyond the end of your nose for someone to blame for the problem you have cast upon yourself. James, Christ isn’t involved in your life by the things and the people going on around and in your life. Christ is involved in your life because you allow him in to be a part of your life.
You come here to “make fun” of others and yet you’re upset because you “can’t enjoy the quite and peaceful spiritual life”; dear God brother, look at what you just said! You’re here to MAKE FUN of your brother and you wonder why you have what you have? James you are receiving exactly for what you have asked.
If you want a “quiet and peaceful spiritual life” then STOP running down your brothers and sisters. Stop making yourself right and everyone else wrong. Stop casting blame. You can’t control what others do or say, so why are you trying so hard show how upset you are over the situation? Leave this blog and all the others that you’ve obviously been reading. Stop listening to self serving people.
James, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.” Stop reacting to all the words that are NOT God. That my brother you can control. You can’t control me and what I might say, but you can control what words you read; more importantly, what words you react to. Be Godly in your actions and stop “MAKING FUN” of your brother and my friend, “the quiet and spiritual life” you so seek will return.
The Lord Bless You!
Sdn Joseph
Isn’t it time to tell the Church what is really going on here in the Cathedral?
We seem to exhaust all other options.
Sbdn. Oleksandr.
Subdeacons Joseph and Oleksandr, did Bishop Nikon give you any idea what he would be doing with your concerns? Did he say there would be a Synod meeting where he would be bringing them up or something?
Another option might be to call a parish council meeting and have them write a letter to Metropolitan Jonah on the parish’s behalf. Metropolitan Jonah *should* be able to move Bishop Mark on his own initiative, but in the present climate he may be unable to exercise that prerogative.
Thanking the professor, “Crito” whose essay has just been posted at http://www.ocatruth.com/?p=979#more-979 . What a wonderful, eloquent essay. Thanks, Professor, because, like the Apostle Peter says in Acts 12:11, “ now I know for certain. ”
Crito’s essay needs to be sent out to every priest and posted on every Orthodox blog and forum. Priests especially need to read this, believe it, and then talk to their parishioners, publish it in the newsletters and bulletins, and discuss the truth about our Metropolitan Jonah and the “Big Lie” amongst the clergy and with Parish Councils all over the OCA.
(I’m reminded of that scene in Star Wars where Carrie Fisher’s Princess Leah in a hologram in R2D2 begs Peter Guinness’ Obi-Wan to help her and save her people: “Help me Obi-Wan-Kenobi! You’re our only hope!”)
Lord, save Your people and bless Your inheritance!
Crito’s essay needs to be sent out to every priest and posted on every Orthodox blog and forum. Priests especially need to read this, believe it, and then talk to their parishioners, publish it in the newsletters and bulletins, and discuss the truth…
Good luck. When last heard from on the controversy, our priest was explicitly avoiding the topic and the websites discussing it. I asked Father for guidance and his response was a hem and a haw and a “God bless” and that was it.
I know. What do we need to do, bonk them on the head with a nerf ball?
I am sickened by passivity and denial in the face of an all-out attack on morality and Orthodox governance being passed off as “piety.” Phooey! Save me from false piety! If such an attitude were Orthodox, then we’d have no Sunday of Orthodoxy, nor even Orthodoxy itself. This isn’t just politics, folks. It’s REAL.
You said it! There is among many Orthodox a perverse piety that believes one should be willing to put up with everything without complaining, because that’s holy. If someone wants to endure persecution and malicious treatment themselves as an exercise in piety, it is not my place to judge them. Our Lord Himself chose that path in His Passion.
But I consider it cowardly when people (e.g., pastors) who have responsibility for souls and institutions adopt this “keep your head down and your mouth shut” attitude in the face of serious injustice. I don’t think it’s humility at all; I think it’s a lack of courage, and a craving to avoid conflict at any cost.
The intended result is that clergy will shut up and do nothing. The rules are now very simple, if you are on Mrs. Stokoe-Brown’s side of reality, you will be safe. If you are not, you are fair game and all means will be used against you.
First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)
If there was credible information available in opposition, a serious reporter would be able to marshal it into a website that would change the whole situation. Instead, we have anonymous folk posting about what ‘Jokoe’ is doing— you want priests to support that??? There is no way clergy with sentiments favoring your point of view could come out in favor of this kind of thing! Think about it!
Great to meet you…really great publishing. Relieved I stumbled onto it with Google, to bad that it was on-page 6 of search results. It appears like your using WordPress on your online site, you ought to get this plugin for WordPress at http://www.myseopressor.com it’s greatly helped me with my internet site rankings in Google Search. I’d hate to see your useful article content not be encountered by others. Have a great time with your site.