Chris, if you are unaware about the leftist/secularist bias that plagues several of the elite reaches of our denominations, then you are being naive. No, there are no minutes of the meeting of the secularist comintern that any of us can point to, but that’s never been the case, has it? Those of us conservative/traditionalists who have been in the trenches know that the Left does not operated by a conspiracy theory a la the Illuminati or the Elders of Zion. It’s just like-minded people of a certain disposition who know and promote each other and their worldview’s over and above that of the majority. It’s no different than a modern Gnosticism.

Andrew, if it is right to question our bishops (and I agree), then why isn’t anybody questioning the other bishops about their actions or perceived actions in this regard?

Sure Geo, we do agree on a vast majority of issues, especially on the clear teachings and moral precepts of the Orthodox Christian Moral Tradition and conservative values in general. That’s not at issue here.

We’re all waiting for +Jonah to address the situation specifically and offer his version of the facts, more MC members to weigh in, some detailed explanations from the Synod, and additional information to be revealed. Hopefully a clearer picture of what happened and why will emerge. Then we can all see just how much “spin” Stokoe really did put in his reporting.

I’m very surprised that +Jonah himself has not issued a detailed statement presenting his own analysis of what happened and why he made (or failed to make) certain decisions. His silence (outside the short video released) coupled with the relentless attacks on OCAnews by his supporters, especially by former Kondratick friend, confidant, and Secretary, Fr. Fester, and the mostly anonymous commentary on http://www.ocatruth.com furthers the mystery and raises many red flags, not just for me, but for many other Orthodox veterans of the previous OCA scandals. Something’s definitely on the up and up. Can’t quite figure out what’s really going on, but I hope the full truth will come out in time and the light of Christ will indeed shine through the lies and show the Church who the real shepherds and faithful vinedressers really are.

Nick, the difference is that Herman, Nikolai, etc. were clearly corrupt men. There was no “conspiracy” to get rid of them, just collective outrage. A conspiracy is when two or more act in concert to pursue nefarious end. The fact that there was never outrage among the laity against +Jonah and on the other hand a concerted action by a few people who didn’t like his values shows the disconnect.

The bad faith was evident by the story itself and the now-leaked e-mails. And the fact that the anti-+Jonah bishops have “caved” (according to Stokoe himself) and Bishop +Benjamin’s recent call for civility all point to a conspiracy that failed.

Chris, Nick, you guys both know that we see eye-to-eye on 99% of things. But Stokoe has gone from objective journalist/muckracker to propagandist. His mala fides jumped out to me immediately from the first reading of his editorial thereby nullifying its objectivity. Fr Hans said it best: “why the ferocity against +Jonah?” It reminded me of the execration heaped upon conservatives on MSNBC.

And now that it’s been proven that he was actively working to spring a trap, that’s all the proof I need that the intent of the story is anything but neutral.

Also, did you see that he’s now going after the HS for caving into +Jonah?

George:

Let’s go back a couple of years, George: ” Now that we know (or strongly suspect) that this HS meeting was nothing more than a lynching party, +Herman (or +Nikolai) is completely free to ignore whatever remedy they sought for him”. Is this the George that I know that would have said that a couple of years ago?

What was the bad faith? Conspiring to get rid of him? You so seem to imply. A conspiracy is people acting in concert to accomplish a particular task. George, are you saying that we all, who wanted to get rid of Herman, were guilty of a conspiracy and therefore ipso facto acting in “bad faith” so that Herman would be justified in being restored?

Do you really think that Chambesy fell apart because of what was happening here? You imply in another post on another thread that Hilarion pulled the plug on Chambesy because of what was happening here. Come on George. That is ridiculous. The OCA is the equivalent of a pimple on Cindy Crawford’s ear (or wherever else) compared to the games that the Old Worlders are playing between themselves. Do you really think that the sun, moon, stars and everything else revolves around the OCA?

Chris raises a valid point. We know who Stokoe is and he does let people express their views, both pro and contra. ocatruth.com doesn’t let me kinow who it/he/she is and doesn’t let me agree or disagree. For all I know, it could be Varvara in another disguise fomenting more problems. Or maybe it’s Bobby, to use a Varvara phrase.

Geo,

What “cabal”? I keep asking for proof and explanation of who those “Jacobians” are and what they have done and said that supported a secularist/progressive/pro-gay/pro-feminist agenda, etc. and all I keep getting back is personal opinions and wild speculations.

The only “picking” that I am aware of by Stokoe on the Manhattan Declaration (a declaration which I have also signed and strongly support) was with this comment: “the unilateral signing of the Manhattan declaration.” http://www.ocanews.org/news/JonahLeaveofAbsence2.25.11.html I have actually posted a comment on OCAnews regarding the need for clarification on this. I would like to see why it was made and what was meant by it.

How does one make the leap from that to Dn Brian’s claims of “seeing a good man destroyed and the OCA taken over by pro-gay, pro-feminist, will-of-the-people Jacobins.” without offering documentation and objective evidence is beyond me.

Speaking of “managed news” have you looked at the http://www.ocatruth.com lately? Is does not inspire any confidence or sense of balance or objectivity.

Dn Brian, Something just struck me as incredibly ironic. You accuse Mark Stokoe of:

He edits or omits comments he doesn’t like, saying “Please, no invective,” but his own comments are full of invective — frequently snide, snarky, insulting, and sometimes I think dishonest about his reasons for not letting others have their say. That is not the spirit of truth.

But then, you promote an alternative venue like http://www.ocatruth.com that allows for zero ability by anyone to comment, critique, or participate in any kind of discussions on any of the stories and editorials posted there. Come again?

Dn Brian,

Now, you’re playing games or playing dumb, not sure which. The evidence I was asking for was in regards to the following serious claims you have made in these discussions:

And it’s coming from someone who is our natural enemy — a modernist, leftist, pro-gay, pro-feminist Jacobin revolutionary whose evil is easily seen in his own spiteful, mocking editorial comments.

…

But none of these reasons is justifies deposing the Metropolitan, or remaining silent while the Jacobins depose him, or assisting in deposing him by joining the Jacobin chorus in complaining about him. None are even valid reasons for publicly complaining about a hierarch.

…

For some people, it seems autocephaly means doing as we please regardless of the rest of the Church — and becoming Orthodox Episcopalians. The irony is that, by going after HB’s head, they are only making autocephaly harder to maintain. Our Jacobins may be unwittingly inviting intervention from abroad, just as the French Jacobins did.

…

I myself am more concerned about seeing a good man destroyed and the OCA taken over by pro-gay, pro-feminist, will-of-the-people Jacobins. That’s who took over the Episcopal Church. That’s what I mean by Orthodox Episcopalians.

…

If we care about autocephaly, and if we care about keeping the OCA out of Jacobin control, then we need to vocally support +Jonah now and not let our words be used to pin that other scandal on him.

Chris, you’re a good guy, but way off base here. The biases of Stokoe and his cabal are clearly secularist/progressive/etc. I’m surprised you can’t see it. (Why did Stokoe pick on the Manhattan Declaration? what was wrong with it?) As I will point out very shortly, Stokoe made at least three misstatements of fact. And now that we know that he was part of the cabal, and “managed” the news, I’m sorry Chris, but that’s Leninism. It makes everything that came before suspect.

Chris, I’ve already given you proof that Stokoe is a liar, and you have ignored it. What good would other proofs do?

It depends on how we define ideology. I mentioned my reservations about the word. I tend to use it to mean worldview, vision, or perspective. Some people use it to mean a system of thought, but etymologically all it really means is a collection of ideas.

Often people err in their understanding of Orthodox teaching and praxis because their collection of ideas is flawed. It’s not just that they are mistaken about what the Church teaches; it’s that they reject the Church’s teaching because they believe something else, having collected and embraced other ideas.

Andrew, I agree with you that bringing back Kondratick was a mistake. However it’s a stretch to suggest that +Jonah is “obsessive” about getting on the ExComm of the EA. I’ve had two meetings with HB within the last four months and never once did he mention anything about the EA. If I had to guess, I strongly suspect that he’s come to the realization that most of have about the EA, that’s it’s turning out to be what you said it was “one and it’s done.” Again, that’s my take on HB’s perception on it. I could be wrong, but the fact that he’s said nothing about it publicly for a good long while, or to people I know, disprove the idea of his “obsession” with it. In fact, now that the Russians have pulled the plug on the latest thing in Chambesy(which was probably their intention for at least the last six months or so [which even Stokoe alerted us to this back in December]) leads me to believe that +Jonah stopped thinking seriously about it around the same time.

You posted:

Deacon Brian, I would suggest that if some are challenging Met. Jonah because of his traditional stance on abortion, gay marriage, etc. then their understanding of Orthodox teaching and praxis is defective.

Agreed.

I would really appreciate it if Dn Brian could back up these claims with specific information, non-anonymous corroboration, and solid proof. His allegations are very serious and some elaboration and documentation is needed to inform the Church and the rest of us who have never seen or heard of this before. As the former Washington Bureau Chief of Investor’s Business Daily and a fellow conservative, Dn Brian should be able to objectively and professionally offer some evidence to help us understand what he seems to know about this information and who exactly is opposing +Jonah for his support of the Christian Moral Tradition and teachings.

If indeed things are as precarious and dangerous as Dn Brian claims, why has he kept silent on this until now and did not alert the faithful, support +Jonah, and defend the Church?

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” – Martin Luther King Jr.