John, it appears that we now know that there was a carefully planned conspiracy to get rid of HB, HB found out about it, confiscated the e-mails, knows where the bodies are buried (out West at least) and more heads are going to roll. In other words, as Mark Twain said, the rumors of his demise were greatly exaggerated.

George, I read your comments and I think they are germane. It’s almost as if Stokoe has a hidden video-camera following t he metropolitan around from city to city – even room to room – except the ‘Lens’ is not Sony, it’s subjective Stokoe. So who’s recording all the blow-by-blow stats that go into Stokoe’s creep caster? A back-stabbing staff member par excellence, someone who raises the term “creep” to new heights, and someone who has a lot to lose if Metropolitan Jonah sticks around.

So you fill in the blanks.

Stokoe should get his conscience clear on this one as he goes in for the kill. Who’s killing whom? Even the most jaded journalist should know when he’s being played by darker forces far smarter than himself. But that’s evil and maybe he’s too enlightened to consider that. They always make sure you wake up after the fact, or after you’ve been tempted to go over the edge of the brink.

Thus far, Stokoe and crew have proven clever at ripping people to shreds and have the long teeth to prove it (Go get em tiger?). But can they build anyone up? I don’t think so.

If you’ve been around long enough, you learn that what you see at first is usually what you get. Stokoe could give Shakespeare’s Iago (King Lear) a run for his money.

Michael, John, that’s the big disconnect for me as well. I’ve known +Jonah for about 2 years now. The man is the soul of humility as well as being a regular guy that you can joike around with. I know I have my faults, but being in the profession I’m in in which my life is at risk, I’ve developed a very acute sense of sizing up people within a few minutes. Yes, I become biased, and hard-nosed, and it’s hard for me to shake a first iimpression, which is quite possibly to the detriment of my salvation. Having said that, I know people who know +Jonah and known people who know people who know him as well. His record as abbott in Manton was impeccable. As Metropolitan he’s become a veritable rock star of Orthodoxy. Sure, he’s made missteps but nobody I know has said that he was driven to fits of dischord, rage, or criminality. It’s just not in him. Even if you read Stokoe’s account, he’s very careful to label his bill of particulars against +Jonah with weasel-words about “attitude” and “process” and “ineptness” and his monastic prejudices, with a good bit of Russophobia thrown in for good measure. These are important distinctions. They paint a broad picture but not necessarily an accurate one.

If I may, if the Holy Synod had something of a serious nature on +Jonah, they should have asked him to resign right then and there and if he refused, they should have resigned out of principle. They didn’t. This means that anger and bitterness may certainly have brought some of them to this point, but that’s not enough in and of itself to remove a bishop, let alone a primate. The fact that Stokoe’s latest report indicates that +Jonah is fighting back and that the Holy Synod seems to have caved in to him (doubtful in my view) indicates to me that the original report was mostly agenda-driven and that the facts that were known were slanted in such a way as to paint HB in as bad a light as possible.

Regardless, the Holy Synod is going to have to come to the point where they either ask Stokoe to recant or repudiate his report in a signed statement to that effect. If they don’t then OCAnews will continue to be viewed as their spokesman and they will be tarred by association. especially if his reportage gets any more hysterical.

As for me, I will stand by my own analysis: assuming that he did not make any of this up, we have to ask why he did not have the courage to source his notes. Hence my hunch that he’s carrying water for one or more bishops. If a bishop, clergyman or bureaucrat came to me and asked me to write something of this nature, I’d tell him: “do it yourself and sign your name to it. I’m not your lackey.”

I’m glad to hear from someone who knows +Jonah. I know folks who know him: my brother, a fellow parishoner and friend who is a God son of +Jonah. They speak highly of +Jonah.

Yes, Deacon Brian, that’s it exactly, the man I’ve known for 10 years. Out here on the West Coast it’s been pretty much everyone’s experience too. Once you get to know Bishop Jonah you grow to love him. He started his small monastery with 4 and now they don’t have room for 40. I think he traveled 30,000 miles a year in his car visiting churches, giving relief to priests and parishes, and being a father-confessor for hundreds. Young people especially are drawn to him.

At the end of the day that should mean something, yes? A person’s true character shining through.

The interesting thing is this – if what I say is true and what you say is true – because this is the man we know – and this is, has been, and continues to be – our consistent, ongoing experience of his character – an outlook acquired by personal interaction, not by hearsay – not something theoretical, not presumed, not supposed – -then what does this say about the incredibly detailed and litigious description of his actions by the reporter and his detractors?

You can’t have it both ways. It’s either him or them, and it sounds to me like their descriptions of +Jonah are descriptions of themselves and the axe they wish to grind – couched in a carefully wrought slight-of-hand in which the victim is cast as the victimizer. I’ve never known +Jonah to be a mixed bag. What you see is what you get.

The other thing about writing propaganda is that those who do it are really good at it. Propaganda is one thing. Journalism is another. Propaganda is to journalism what Fox News is to the Christian Science Monitor. Playing to emotions ‘sells’. A good propagandist can get an audience worked up over almost anything because they mix emotions with words, subjective content with images, and disguise personal opinions as facts.

If one was to re-read Mr. Stokoe’s article with the intent of answering: “What is he trying to tell me?” The answer is clear. “Metropolitan Jonah is a bungling idiot who doesn’t know what he’s doing, defies authority, and is set to ruin the church. He should be stopped. ”

That’s not the guy I know. But maybe Mark does. There’s a mirror in his office where he can look him right in the eye.

Dean, forgive all the replies but I’m able to post freely now. I was just wondering, does the Holy Synod now realize that they are front and center on all things? Not that that’s a bad thing, in fact it’s a good thing, but from now on they’re going to have to handle the problems that come forward. +Jonah can just sit back and say “I’m just one bishop, what do you want from me?” I’m all in favor of this but I’m curious if they understand the full implications of their actions. This is not exactly what I would call “collateral damage” but it is an example of “unintended consequences.” They’re now leaders, they better start acting like it.

Let me give you an example of collateral damage that is entirely possible: the Syosset Set thinks that they are very popular among Orthodox in America. That’s a stretch, but what if the money dries up? The irony here is that the far-sighted vision of +Jonah for the future of Orthodoxy in America may come to fruition after all. Including the selling of Syosset to pay the bills. But that’s negative and I don’t want to dwell on the negative. Let’s concentrate on the positive aspects of +Jonah’s vision:

1. a monastery in Washington. What’s wrong with that?
2. the Archbishop of Washington living in Washington. What’s wrong with that?
3. closer relations with the ROC. What’s wrong with that?
4. engaging the culture. What’s wrong with that?
5. more dioceses. What’s wrong with that?

Certainly there are others.

Since I’m on a roll, I’ll compare what happened to +Jonah with the ouster of +Iakovos. I think that all reasonable people can agree that that was a disaster of the first magnitude. It was in 1996. It’s now 2011. We’ve lost 15 years –that’s half a generation. The only reason this latest escapade isn’t nearly as cataclysmic is because cooler heads prevailed and he’s still Archbishop of Washington. (Plus the fact that this was done by an American church to an American bishop instead of by Turkish citizens to an American bishop is somewhat of a sop I suppose.) Unfortunately, like the ouster of +Iakovos and the shenanigans done by +Philip two years ago, this cannot have a beneficial effect on the Church. Still, as Joseph told his brothers: “what you intended for evil, the Lord has used for good.”

Dean, you do realize that the word dolmathes is Turkish, don’t you? Now that our Greek-American bishops are taking Turkish citizenship your irony is squared. 🙂

Nick, I think that broadly you are right. But I’ve got the experience of actually speaking with HB about autocephaly on more than one occasion. To me and the others who were present, he was emphatic that autocephaly was not on the table. Admittedly, does “reimagining autocephaly” have room for a kenotic emptying of the OCA into a “greater autocephaly”? Yes. It can also be negative, I agree. Regardless, we had no reason to suspect otherwise. As to whether he was saying these things to “negotiate” a seat on the ExComm of the EA, I have no way of knowing and until you brought it up, could’ve cared less. We all know that the EA is going nowhere fast. We also know that the Phanar played it too clever by half in creating the EA assembly in the first place. First, in their belief that they could pull it off without the OCA in it, and second, without thinking that +Demetrios would undermine them (God bless him for that).

If anything, what this all tells me is that these Byzantine games are deleterious to our salvation (bishops included) and they should be left aside. Instead, we should just preach the Gospel. The rest will take care of itself.

Nick, thank you for bringing this up. As for my “zeal for the OCA,” your bringing this up allows me to clarify one important thing. I am not “zealous” for the OCA (justifiably so). What I am zealous for is good and proper order in the Church. The Holy Spirit saw fit to send Russian monks to evangezlize this land, then create an archdiocese. He further saw fit to have the Mother Church of this land grant its Daugher autocephaly. As an American, I would never consider going to Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria, or wherever and set about to establish an English speaking jurisdiction.

Let us not forget that this latest kerfuffle is because of jurisdictional chaos. Look around at these comments: +Jonah was “too harsh” in proclaiming American independence or he was “too soft” in “reminagining autocephaly.” Which is it? (Rhetorical question.) The fact that he did both was because he had a dozen audiences listening. The Archbishop of Athens doesn’t have this problem, nor any other other patriarchs. They got only one jurisdiction within their lands.

How is it that I forgot my Serbian brothers!? Of course Nik!

George: I think that his comments were not “musings”. He was serious and prepared to give away the house. It is interesting that Bishop Melchizedek accompanied him. I think he was sent by the Synod as their eyes and ears as to what HB was trying to do in Moscow. Obviously he has a level of support in the Synod in that they made him the temporary Chancellor.

However, the fact that he spoke in this fashion showed that he was not a triumphalist and open to unity.

No, it shows a lack of maturity and understanding of the Byzantine nature of this whole Chambesy thing. He acted non-triumphalist and open to unity when he gave his “kenosis” speech. That was wonderful. But when he took it to the next step, of actually contemplating giving up autocephaly for a seat on the Executive Committee he showed a level of panic (and I might add ego to the equation) that was incomprehsible to me.

George, think about it without pre-conceived blinders. Think about the ramifications. You and I both agree that this Episcopal Assembly is going no where. Why go to Moscow NOW to negotiate away autocephaly? If the EA fails, and we are now for the forseeable future once again a dependency of Moscow, that would be a disaster. History would judge his actions in that regard as a serious blunder from the OCA perspective.

I think the press release on this last Chambesy meeting issued by Moscow is telling. They could not agree on autocephaly or the diptychs. Moscow brought this process back to square one. One interesting thing is that Met. Amphilochios of Serbia, when he addressed the Chambesy gathering at the beginning on February 22 said, or implied, that all of the other things that have presumably been settled regarding the agenda (apart from autocephaly and the diptychs) are open to further dialouge. He also suggested that the “pre-conditions” to even calling the Council are still up in the air and are not settled.

If Jonah would sit still and let Moscow, Serbia and others play Byzantine politics with the EP, to which they are better adapted, things would be better. That would be wise and mature. Jonah’s only agenda, I thought, is to have an autocephalous American Church. That I grant and that is all you and I desire. But he is playing with Byzantine heavy wieghts and he is out of his league. We have to trust Moscow, Serbia and some others in this game. None of the Slavic jurisdictions will give up their dependencies to an autonomous or semi-autonomous or non-autonomous American Orthodox Church under the EP. If Jonah does not understand that, then he is out of his league. If he does understand that, then ego has come into play. I make no comment on which.

Reflect. I am getting tired of hearing about the Old World Partriachates as if they were of one mind and are acting as one monolithic block. They are not. This last Chambesy gathering confirms that. They are divided. They are not of one mind. Some are pushing for a Council and some are stalling. “Premudrost” or in English “Wisdom” is what we need here while they are in the midst of their Byzantine intrigue. Panic and Ego are not what we need. HB needs time to reflect.

Though all rights Met. Jonah should be on the executive committee (and I’m rather disappointed that no OCA chairs a committee), to back off in any way from autocephaly to secure a seat on the EC makes absolutely no sense.

The OCA is listed on the EA as a canonical jurisdiction, but without any reference to its “Mother Church.” One can be a little pregnant only so long.

Not to mention that the Smyrna colony was populated by uniates-there is only one recorded Orhtodox man (married to a uniate) in the whole colony. The priest who served it was a Spanish Latin rite priest who restored the Vatican’s organization in Florida. Extinct and forgotten, until it seems the GOARCH had to find something to counter St. Herman and his mission.

And it was preceded by the family of Philip Ludwell III, who converted in 1734 in London and was given special permission by the Holy Synod of Russia to bring the Eucharist back with him to Virginia. Btw, his grandfather was the governor of the Carolinas, his mother is buried in the church of Jamestown, and he was the one who gave George Washingtion his commission in the army.