Guess Who WASN’T Invited to Dinner?

Patriarch Bartholomew Archontonis (1940- ) is visiting New York City as part of his trip to the USA. He met with all the Orthodox First Hierarchs in the USA… except for Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral of the ROCOR. Why?

On Tuesday, 27 October, Patriarch Bartholomew Archontonis of the EP held an audience in New York City for “the Orthodox Primates of the USA” in the words of oca.org. The URL for the entire article is:

http://www.oca.org/news/1979

How wonderful! How grand! How… MISLEADING! There was an “Orthodox Primate” (“First Hierarch” is a more correct translation from the Greek or Russian) missing!

GUESS WHO?

Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral, Archbishop of New York and Eastern America, First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, that’s who. This meeting took place in the seat of his see. Some shall protest, “This was a meeting of the SCOBA hierarchs”. Yes… but, Jarmus did not state that. He stated that Bartholomew met “the Orthodox Primates of the USA”… that is the direct quote from oca.org. Besides that, it took him TWO DAYS to post this. I would have had it up immediately after the meeting… that is what a conscientious and dutiful person does. Jarmus is not only a lazy dogsbody incompetent; he doesn’t know how to use the English language. JP is a fool to engage such a sort as “Director of Communications” (Jarmus, apparently, is literate enough to cash an OCA pay-cheque, though!). In addition, Jarmus did not see to it that the proper people posted photos of the event (digital cameras exist, sir… we can post photos from them on that very day).

However, my task today is not to excoriate Jarmus for his (usual and expected) inept bungling. Do note well that Vladyki Hilarion was not invited to this great love-feast and Dixie-Fry of “the Orthodox Primates of the USA”. He IS the ranking bishop of the MP in the US… yes, the ROCOR is autonomous… but, it IS a part of the Patriarchate of Moscow and all the Russias (Vladyki Hilarion did take part in the last MP Archpastoral Council in Moscow, after all). This was a highly interesting omission on the part of the EP handlers of Patriarch Bartholomew. Bart did not plan this… no superior in any organisation handles such detail… that is handed over to underlings (who often have their own axes to grind and agendas to advance). There was no mention of a separate meeting with Vladyki Hilarion on the official ROCOR website. He was in Atlanta GA on Monday 26 October, but, there is no further news of his whereabouts after that date on the ROCOR site. Could a meeting between Vladyki Hilarion and Bartholomew have occurred? Perhaps… but, there is no posting on any website that confirms such a meeting.

Why was Vladyki Hilarion not at the meeting of “the Orthodox Primates of the USA?” Jarmus’ slip in grammar is probably not completely innocent. There is a possible explanation for this… one that is not very edifying (after all, we are talking of human-beings with real emotions, not soulless automata). More recent arrivals may not remember it, but, there was a bitter and acrimonious conflict between the OCA and the ROCOR from 1965 until (circa) 2000. ADS fomented this… as so many other cancers in the Church were. Trust me, this dispute was deep and it caused grievous wounds to both parties. It was one of the major causes of the decline in membership that both bodies suffered in this period (the other major reason was that gossip ran rampant in many parishes… typically, our parishes are so small (often, fewer than 200 parishioners, all told) that such personal silliness and spitefulness causes greater harm than in larger organisations). Both bodies hid this by not issuing accurate membership figures. We only have two citations from reputable “public figures” on this… Jonathan Ivanoff of the OCA stated officially that membership had declined 6 to 12 percent per annum for at least a decade. Alexander Lebedeff of the ROCOR stated that very few of the students that had gone through his church-school classes were still in the Church, and that New Russians (post-1991 Russian immigrants) made up 80 percent of the membership of the larger urban parishes of the ROCOR. In short, this was one of the most severe self-inflicted wounds in American Orthodoxy.

Obviously, the sentiments of that period are not dead. It is clear that the EP planners were in touch with people such as Lyonyo Kishkovsky of the OCA. LK could have gently reminded them to invite Metropolitan Hilarion as a courtesy… no doubt, what he did was more sinister. He simply did not mention him, and the Greek parties went ahead with planning, not realising that LK was omitting a key figure in American Orthodoxy by his silence. This raises questions about how deep the reconciliation between the OCA and ROCOR truly is and what the MP is going to do to resolve the present disunity in Russian Orthodoxy in the US and Canada. It also raises doubts on SCOBA itself… for the ROCOR is part of the MP, no? The reconciliation did not happen yesterday… it occurred in May 2007, over two years ago.

Of course, there were always personal contacts between Russian Orthodox people… in Washington DC, a priest at the OCA parish and a priest at the ROCOR parish were brothers-in-law. Amongst ethnic Russian people, friendships and family ties proved stronger than the “official” conflict (which was, basically, a private feud between ADS and Grabbe). However, we lost many of our children due to the disedification caused by the antics of the combatants. The most fanatic were  amongst the convert cohort… the worst were SVS in Yonkers and Holy Transfiguration Monastery in Boston. I remember an OCA priest claiming in 1984 that ROCOR was not Orthodox and that no other Local Church admitted them to communion (admittedly, he was one of the MP priests that went to the OCA after Feodosy Lazor became First Hierarch of the OCA in 1977). This priest is still active… and he is an authority-figure, interestingly enough.

I might add that a pall of silence from official quarters covers this haemorrhage. No one is not allowed to speak of it… nor can one speak of its major cause… it has gone down the memory hole. True, some public figures have spoken of it… but, nothing of substance happens as a result. My view is clear… we must have frankness on the actions of public figures in the past… otherwise, we learn no useful lessons and we shall repeat our previous mistakes (and they are usually worse the second or third time around). Mark down well that no one in the higher levels of Orthodoxy in the US wishes to speak of past errors… and, often enough, those of us who bring such up face accusations of disloyalty and slander. I would say that a membership decline has occurred… and that it is mainly due to our own freely-chosen actions. We have to discuss this openly to prevent such happening again. If we do not… trust me, the scandals of the past shall hold no candle to the scandals that we shall be handed in future.

Metropolitan Hilarion was not at the New York meeting with Bartholomew… that’s a fact. He belonged there… that’s a fact (he IS a First Hierarch, after all, of a larger establishment than some of those represented at the fete). The fact that he was not there was a scandal. Jonas Paffhausen was there… and the autocephaly of the OCA is not accepted by the EP. Hilarion Kapral was not there… and the EP considers the ROCOR a canonical church body. THAT’S a contradiction in terms, friends and neighbours. I looked at the official itinerary of Bartholomew and there was nothing about a meeting with Hilarion (are they to meet after the Patriarchal liturgy in New York City on Sunday? There is nothing to show such).

As Alice said… things get curiouser and curiouser. I’ll say this… events in Orthodoxy are never boring or dull… there’s always an odd twist to them, isn’t there?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Saturday 31 October 2009

Albany NY

“Off With Their Heads!”

We’re all familiar with Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There. Right now, I am thinking of the Queen of Hearts. The following quotation makes the Queen look very sane, indeed. This is an illustration of the sort of thing that one puts up with if one’s blog is popular. Actually, it’s a howler and says more about the author than it does about me. In short, I’m LAUGHING… and the thought that some bloke is taking this seriously and thinks that this is hurting me is HILARIOUS. Truly, I have a sense of humour and proportion… which this barmy wanker obviously doesn’t!

Read it for yourself (I didn’t make this up… no, I didn’t… I SWEAR to you on a stack of bibles!):

******

how pathetic
none cares to comment anymore
how pathetic
you have to comment on your own posts
how nice to know all the
little voices of russia
in your head all agree with you

the little voice of russia
maybe millions
but the anger
the hatred
the violence
what Christian people in the ussr?

U-northodox
S-exist
S-chismatic
R-ussia

proud to be you

FULL STOP

******

Spelling, punctuation, and grammar are as in the original sent to me.

This is a sign of something. As Bob Czech said to me many moons ago, “They wouldn’t be hollering if what you said wasn’t true”. Poor dears… you can’t shoot ALL the messengers. Indeed… what are they going to do? Hire a hit-man for a KGB-style mokriye dyela? I think NOT! The obvious boobosity and pomposity of my interlocutor has me wondering if they are married or in a relationship. What sort of person would want such an obvious loser in their life?

Let’s lift a glass and cheer! If this is the best that the opposition can muster… there’s hope for the old planet yet! SMILE… that really riles ‘em (shaking my head and laughing as I pass you your glass). The best revenge you can have on such sorts is having a wonderful day and not thinking further of such rot.

Remember… you tend to grow a THICK skin in the Church. There are malicious, malevolent, and spiteful children about… Do remember the scene in Dickens’ A Christmas Carol at end of the section dealing with the Ghost of Christmas Present. The Ghost opened his robe to show two urchins clinging to him, and Scrooge asked who they were. “This boy is Ignorance, and this girl is Want. They cling to me for protection. Beware them both, but, especially beware this boy”. Yes, indeed… it DOES take all kinds. Why must they all cross MY path, though?

Cheers, and have a wonderful weekend!

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Saturday 31 October 2009

Albany NY

Editor’s Postscript:

Of course, “Off with their heads” is NOT what I think. I’m not so silly and self-centred. Isn’t it a perfect characterisation of my interlocutor’s attitude to the world as revealed in their screed? There is no way to know who this was, as it was anonymous (as all such cowardly and childish missives are), but, it would not surprise me to find that this came from the hands of an angry konvert (yet, I am wise enough to know that such filth does not stick to many (or, indeed, most) converts). I am going to continue to post on “touchy” topics in future. Those whose skins are thin should either stay away, change their behaviour, or grow up. That’s the way of it in the adult world… you don’t shut someone up by throwing a tantrum and stamping your foot. Only toddlers think that (isn’t that a sad commentary on our society, especially the suburban affluent effluent?).

There Oughta be a Law!

Laura Dekker (1995- ), the brave Dutch girl who wants to sail around-the-world single-handedly… bully for her! Fie on the judges, shrinkie-dinkies, and “child protection authorities”… let them go to their master (and it sure ain’t the Good Lord, that’s for sure)… and right smartly, too!

I thought that I had seen it all… Well, live and learn, they say! First, read the news item below…

******

Dutch Court Nixes Teenager’s Round-The-World Sail

A Dutch court ruled Friday that 14-year-old Laura Dekker was still too inexperienced to be allowed to set off on her quest to become the youngest person to sail solo around the world. Judges at Utrecht District Court placed Laura under the guardianship of child protection authorities until next July to ensure that she cannot set off on her dream voyage. The ruling means Laura can continue living with her father, but, her parents must consult child protection authorities about all major decisions in her life. Laura and her parents were not in court Friday, but, family spokesman Mariska Woertman said the teenager was “disappointed that the court does not have faith in her to leave now”. However, Woertman said Laura was confident she can be ready to sail soon after next July and still set the record as the youngest sailor to circumnavigate the globe.

The Utrecht court first blocked her departure in August out of concern for her safety. The decision sparked a worldwide debate on how much authorities and parents should limit children’s freedom to undertake risky adventures. Laura’s parents, both veteran sailors, are separated. Laura’s father supported the attempt, but, her mother said in a newspaper interview in September she thought Laura was too young. Presiding judge M. Oostendorp said Laura’s mother has given her blessing “so long as she has assurances about the safety measures. At the moment, as far as she is concerned, they are insufficient”. Child protection authorities welcomed the decision.

Judges said they were confident that Laura was emotionally ready for the trip, but questioned the safety precautions and her ability to continue her schooling while at sea. They said, however, her sailing skills were not in question. A psychological analysis submitted to the court said Laura’s planned trip would not impair her social or emotional development. “The good news today is that we have established Laura is capable of making this voyage”, said her lawyer, Peter de Lange. Laura told the three-judge panel at a closed hearing Monday that she was equipping her 26-foot (8-metre) yacht Guppy with extra security and communications equipment and learning to use it. “(The plans are still) too unclear, not concrete enough and too uncertain” to guarantee her safety, said Oostendorp.

Laura also told the court that she planned to wait at least until next May, after school ends, to embark on the voyage and will be guided by an experienced sailor in a separate boat. She also promised to take a sailor’s first-aid course and practice sleep management techniques. De Lange criticised the judges for questioning Laura’s single-handed sailing experience… which is limited to trips on Dutch rivers, close to the coast, and a single solo voyage to England and back. “They say she has not got much experience of solo round-the-world sailing. That is a bit weak”, he told reporters. “How do you get experience? By doing it”.

In August, 17-year-old British sailor Mike Perham became the youngest person to sail solo around the world. Earlier this month, 16-year-old Australian Jessica Watson also set off on a single-handed, round-the-world trip. De Lange said Laura can still break the record if she sets off next year. “But, the record is not her primary goal”, he added. “Laura just wants to sail”.

Mike Corder

30 October 2009

Utrecht, the Netherlands

Associated Press

As quoted by Yahoo! News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091030/ap_on_re_eu/eu_netherlands_young_sailor

******

This is utter stuff n’ nonsense. A judge (of all people!) issues an opinion on nautical matters… not maritime law… one expects that… but, issues a ruling on the fitness of an individual to undertake a voyage. This is the sort of rubbish one sees routinely in American suburbia amongst the affluent effluent. Sadly, it means that the Americanist contagion has spread to parts of Western Europe. Legalism, not good-sense, underpins this madness. It leads to such things as the OCA claiming that it has no legal responsibility for the actions of its priests, as these fellows are, in essence, independent contractors and actors. What’s the difference? In the Dutch case, a court prevents a young sailor from departing on a risky journey by using questionable logic… all sorts of supposedly grown-up adults are wasting a good deal of time, effort, energy, and money on this. Let the young girl sail, I say… she knows the risks… it’s her life, after all. The “child protective authorities”, head-shrinkers, and judges should butt out (I believe that this is actually an episode in a dispute between the separated parents)… the court would do better to spend its time pursuing real child abusers and paedophiles (isn’t that the case… the legal system chases ridiculous will o’ the wisps such as this… and real abusers hop away, scot-free, because the court wastes its time and energy on such frivolities).

I bring the story of this court case up for a reason. One of my correspondents wrote, “The OCA should be taken to court for what its hierarchs have done”. I quite agree… but, there is a traffic-jam in the courts… caused by cases such as the one about Laura Dekker. Real child-abuse advocates shall tell you straight-up that it is hard to get the system to punish actual abusers because of the logjam of such frivolous cases. Another reason is that the OCA is no major actor either in American religion or on the American scene in general. For God’s sake, its central budget is less than 5 mill, and most of that is spent on salaries for a small set of dronish apparatchiki on the Island (where the cost-of-living is so above the national average that the cost of maintaining a HQ there is a criminal and egregious drain upon the donations of the faithful (that is, money that should go for charities and missions go into the gaping and ever-voracious maws of Kishkovsky and Garklavs)). In short, it is not worth the government’s while… at least, not yet (after all, the RCs are 20 to 25 percent of the US population… a major proportion by any measure… all Orthodox in total are about 0.3 percent (the OCA in toto is 0.03 percent… if we were disappear, America would not notice it). Even in Orthodoxy, it is a miniscule voice… out of some 986,000 Orthodox in recognised Local Church bodies in the US (per Aleksei Krindatch), only 115,000 are in the OCA (and 27,000 of those are in its virtually independent Romanian branch and 20-30,000 are Alaska natives in the Russian Orthodox Diocese of Alaska, leaving only some 58,000-68,000 under Syosset’s direct rule in the “lower-48”).

Don’t hold your breath waiting for the courts to act (I do think that Kristi Koumentakos is going to get justice against Ray Velencia… but, that is not striking at the root of the contagion). Certainly, I would be pleased to see it happen… but, let’s be frank. We’re just too unimportant as a group… except for a few isolated areas (such as north-eastern and western Pennsylvania, the industrial Midwest, and some cities in the Mid-Atlantic region), we are so small that we are invisible. Remember, the loudest noises issue forth from miniscule sets in Lilliputian mission parishes (something that Fr Alexander Lebedeff noticed in a post on the dissidents who protested against the MP/ROCOR reconciliation… the sociological imperatives in the OCA and ROCOR are almost identical as they are both “Russian Orthodox” bodies).

Is it, “Abandon hope, all ye that enter here?” NO… emphatically not. However, we must resolve this ourselves, not the courts. That is, a solution requires that we act to put it right.

Shall we?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

30 October 2009

Albany NY

An Item from the Old Curiosity Shoppe

Metropolitan Jonas Paffhausen (1959- ) of the OCA in a meeting with a low-level MP functionary in Syosset NY. Note well that one of the people in the picture is Leonid Kishkovsky… When he was in Moscow earlier this year, JP stated that all the major players under Herman were gone (his exact words were that only a house-cleaner and two secretaries were left)… it seems that he lied… draw the proper conclusion.

Here is something that just crossed my path that is far less than it seems. Trust me… it appears of great importance… then, when one looks closer, it fades into nothingness. Let’s look at the news item, first.

******

Primate of the Orthodox Church in America gives audience to president of the International Foundation of the Unity of Orthodox Nations

His Beatitude Jonah, Metropolitan of All America and Canada, received in audience on 26 October 2009, the president of the International Foundation of the Unity of Orthodox Nations, V. Alexeyev, and the representative of the Orthodox Church in America Archimandrite Zacchaeus (Wood).

Mr Alexeyev informed Metropolitan Jonah about his recent visit to St Vladimir’s Seminary in Crestwood NY, to convey to it an official letter from His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, informing the Seminary that it won the Foundation’s Prize in recognition of its efforts for strengthening unity between Orthodox nations in the field of education. They also discussed in detail various projects of the Foundation, the official website of the Russian Orthodox Church Representation in America has reported.

DECR Communications Service

http://www.mospat.ru/en/2009/10/28/news7186/

******

Firstly, do NOT be fooled by the URL. This is NOT from the main official website of the MP… it is the official website of the MP DECR… if you go to the homepage, you do NOT go to the homepage of the main site. This is vitally important.

My first task was to see if this news had appeared on the RIA-Novosti, ITAR-TASS, and Interfax-Religion feeds. It had not. In short, this is not considered important by the main secular news agencies that cover religious news. I only bring this canard of an article up because the OCA fanatics are going to beat the drums about this.

Note well that Hilarion Alfeyev did not put his name to this release… the only body named is a nebulous International Foundation of the Unity of Orthodox Nations… I have never heard of it and I follow the Russian religious press fairly closely. It smells contrived and hurriedly cobbled together… there has been no major press release on any of the relevant Russian news-services about this putative organisation to my knowledge prior to this event (there have been one or two articles mentioning this “award”… that is the only sign of life that this “foundation” has shown).

On a minor note, SVS’s address is given incorrectly… it is in Yonkers NY, but, the OCA invariably says it is in Crestwood… Crestwood is not a city, town, village, hamlet, or census designated area… it is only a neighbourhood of the City of Yonkers with no real or legal existence (the OCA does not like using the real address because it lacks the cachet of the rest of Westchester County… Yonkers is in Westchester, but, it has a grittier and more plebeian image). His buddies in Syosset misled HA…

As for the letter from KMG… the poor fellow signs hundreds of documents daily. He has a busy schedule of personal meetings and audiences (I pity the poor fellow… he must spend two hours a day in minor audiences (that is, those quickie 5-minute affairs) alone). Do note well that His Holiness gave no one in the OCA an audience to receive this letter. Zacchaeus Wood did not even get one of those minor five-minute jobs where one receives a smile and a letter from the hand of KMG, and a PR snapshot with the Patriarch. HA did not give him an audience… he did not even get a meeting with anyone important such as Bishop Mark Golovkov, or Frs Vsevolod Chaplin, Mikhail Dudko, or Nikolai Balashov. All that happened is that a “V Alexeyev” (a complete and utter unknown, let me assure you… he has figured in no other major news items from any major Russian or international agency of my knowledge), a very minor flunky and lackey, has brought a letter from a vague (and previously unknown) “foundation” just when JP needed something to distract people from the Nashotah House débâcle and the controversy swirling about the rumours of an “Anglican Rite” in the OCA (God willing, saner heads shall prevail… but, I shan’t hold my breath… it’s unhealthy, you know).

In short, this is total GIGO. It is not worth the paper it is printed on. Does Syosset truly believe that the faithful are that stupid? Have they truly lost contact with reality?

I fear that we know the answer all too well…

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Friday 30 October 2009

Albany NY

Is There a “Third Way?”

Are there only two positions on ecumenism? Must we choose between “giving away the farm” or “speaking the truth in love”… or, is there a “third way?”

To me, the only really interesting part of all this is that I try personally to make a clear distinction between the kinds of ecumenical activity that seek some sort of forced-fit or dumbing-down of theology, and those that simply promote our knowing one another better and more deeply.  The former is something in which I have no inclination to engage; the latter, it seems to me, is a part of loving one’s neighbour, as Christ exemplified when he broke bread with Romans, tax collectors and other sordid characters… never giving an inch in terms of the significant differences they had between them.

In sum, if you were objecting to LK’s participation in the kind of ecumenical processes that “give away the farm”, then, I’m right with you.  I don’t know him well enough to make the same kind of judgement.

An honest and humble observer…

In this instance, I wish to totally protect my correspondent’s identity… I do not wish any repercussions from the Syosset mafia to fall upon this estimable person. Such is my duty to my friends… it is how I can best express my respect for them, isn’t it? This submission raises such good questions that I had to share it with you (and protect my interlocutor at the same time, no?).

What is “giving away the farm?” A good example is the recent concordat signed between SVS and a heretical Episkie seminary, Nashotah House. The Anglicans compromised on none of their theology or on any practical matter… and received legitimation by their agreement with SVS. Nashotah House did not abjure the 39 Articles nor did they agree to condemn such things as female ordination or Calvinist theology. In short, SVS and an unrepentant Proddie body signed an agreement… with a bunch of Calvinists who have no intention of curbing any of their objectionable Protestant practises. In short, it was a classic illustration of an Orthodox body compromising its basic principles in its concessions to the party outside the Church, and the heterodox party emerged with its assumptions intact and whole, without making any attempt to fit them to the Church’s dogma and tradition. JP’s signature to all of that was an open and brazen slap in the face to the MP… which has broken off “dialogue” with the TEC and has condemned the “branch theory” explicitly (a heresy that the OCA implicitly accepted by its acceptance of a pact with a TEC institution).

“Speaking the truth in love” appears more truthful… at first glance, only. Part of the problem with it is that it unscrupulous sorts use it to continue the fruitless “ecumenical” dialogue. If there is nothing of use in such talks, if it leads to nothing but the pointless issuing of papers on topics that the parties either never disagreed upon or will never agree upon (due to the basic dogma of the groups involved), “speaking the truth with love” is just as bootless as “giving away the farm”. Indeed, it is WORSE… for the Orthodox party thinks that they are “witnessing” to the heterodox. Trust me, the papists, Proddies, Pentecostalists, and the American Cultists (Mormons, JWs, et al) are not listening… they are NOT going to change one whit even if we were talk until we were quite blue in the face. Any discussion on doctrine is sterile as no party is going to give in to the other. Ergo, this is worse than “giving away the farm”… it is far more mischievous and we should stop it immediately.

But… isn’t there anything that we can do with those outside the Visible Church of Christ? Of course, there is! There is a great deal that we can do together once we drive a stake through the heart of the ecumenical monster. People of good will can unite to support common goals in the community. We can work to help unwed mothers… we can help to feed the hungry… we can lobby politicians at all levels of government. That is only a partial list. However… we cannot hold common prayer together or pretend that we are one in Christ… we are not. To love one’s neighbour as a fellow human-being and to love what our Lord Christ taught us are two ENTIRELY different things. The first requires that we treat all of our neighbours with fairness and equity, at the least. The second requires us to understand that some are outside of the Body of Christ… and that this fact makes for a difference.

Yes, I agree that many disagreements and disputes between people arise out of ignorance, and that anything that “lights a candle in the darkness” is very good, indeed. No one is more polite and civil to those outside the Church in personal situations than I am. They are what they are (and they are emphatically NOT Orthodox). I have no right whatsoever to proselytise them (even if they try to proselytise me)… that is the most inherently disrespectful thing that I can think of. I would keep the discussion focused on things of common interest and approval, and would politely (but firmly) steer the conversation away from any doctrinal matters… that never leads to any good, I have found. It is sad that there are neophytes in the Church who think that they should “witness” to others in the same way that they did in their former confessions. If any of you have met such, I apologise to you most sincerely and profoundly, and can assure you that grounded Orthodox do NOT act in such an inconsiderate and impertinent way.

So, is there a “third way?” Yes… happily, there is. In fact, the Church has followed it for many centuries… it is NOT new. Let’s remember what a wise Ecumenical Patriarch once said…

Send us no more letters on doctrine. Send us letters of friendship, only.

Now, THAT’S what I agree with. I believe that I am not alone…

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Friday 30 October 2009

Albany NY

Whose House Is It, After All?

Well, dear readers, you have often heard me say that my enemies are a greater inspiration than my friends… it’s happened again! Firstly, I had a couple of problematic “comments”, so, I e-mailed them (and my replies) to my staritsa in Russia for her opinion. She was to the point. “Remove them and your comments on them. You shouldn’t have been tempted to reply to such. You weren’t wrong, but, you were unwise”. That was the entire message… but, I don’t think that there is any ambiguity in it, is there? Those making the comments were not right… but, I was not wise in replying to them. I think that her message is clear… if someone wants to come to blows… spam them without mercy. Don’t reply… no matter how egregious and insulting it is. So, if you wish to begin a hue and cry, don’t stop here. I’ll spam you and that’s that. But, it does open up a discussion on what obligations an internet poster has to the public.

Firstly, you note that I often put URLs in my work as “footnotes”. That is, you can go and check my sources for yourselves. That is to say, I am not pulling “rabbits out of the hat”, so to speak. Sometimes, the information comes directly to me. I have no obligation to publicise my sources. Indeed, I have the duty to protect my sources, especially in times such as these (a priest-friend said to me, “There is a civil war going on for the soul of Orthodoxy in America. There are tons of information and disinformation out there”… I think that all of us would agree with that assessment). Then, why should you trust me? To start with, one can see that I am responsible in using public sources… ergo, it stands to reason that I would be as careful with private ones. I have had the time to build up a network of contacts (such does take time and effort… and some blind alleys, to boot), so, I do have something of value to offer the public.

Secondly, I do not waste my readership’s time. I have a duty to stick to the point, and come to my conclusion in as swift a way as possible. Otherwise, I waste your God-given time. That would make me a thief… no question on it. Therefore, each post is an essay of about 800 to 1,500 words. You cannot make your point adequately with fewer words than the smallest amount (800 words)… you don’t know what you’re saying if you can’t prove your line of reasoning with the largest amount (1,500 words)… so, there!

Thirdly, I must troll for information in all sources. You note that I use information from oca.org… they don’t realise that there are glaring lacunae obvious to anyone with knowledge of the history of the Church… but, it is useful despite the webmaster’s intent and Syosset’s skullduggery. Mark Stokoe’s site, Orthodox Christians for Accountability, is an interesting gemischlichkeit… on factual reporting, it is usually spot-on, but, its opinion pieces are, to put it mildly, “interesting”. I agree with neither of these sources… yet, you read things that you don’t agree with in order to see the situation in all of its facets. It is much like how we read Pravda in Sov times… you knew it was complete hooey in many respects, but, there was “gold in them thar hills”, so, you picked up your shovel and dug for it!

Fourthly, (this is the section that some are going to moan about) I have no obligation to give anyone a forum, but, I also have no right to egregiously attack any private person, that is the flip-side of that statement. Note well that there are different standards for public and private individuals. The bar is higher for ordinary people. That is proper, for “common folk” do not have the same influence on events as “public figures” do (therefore, they have a greater right to privacy). Most priests are “private individuals”… they don’t have any more power to affect events than you or I do. Some priests are “public figures”… by their offices, influence, and/or known ability they can affect events, often profoundly (examples would be Alexander Lebedeff in the ROCOR and Igor Burdikoff in the OCA… I am not comparing these two; I am simply stating that both are “public figures”).

Fifthly, and lastly, I shall not go behind someone’s back and try to enlist either clergy or laypeople in a personal campaign against any given private person (all understand the clear mean-spirited nastiness and brutish cruelty of such). I shall not post any critical comments slamming any ordinary person on any other website, nor shall I use a pseudonym to attack any common and private person. If I say something, it shall be here, under my name. If I were to do otherwise it would be beyond the pale and outside the limits of polite and acceptable behaviour. That is why the MP recently (and correctly) censured anonymous internet posting.

Whose house is it, after all? It’s mine! Ya’ll come and be welcome! To all people of good will… please, take off your shoes… here’s some slippers… come, come, to the table… eshli, eshli, na zdoroviye! To all those who are not of good will… I got a shotgun and I know how to use it… BLAM! …then, I’ll set the dogs on ye!

It’s all up to you…

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Thursday 29 October 2009

Albany NY

Intolerant Tolerance: Wonderful Words for Appalling Actions

We have a lot of that here in old famous, tolerant Sweden: intolerant tolerance. Vladimir Bukovsky, who went to the Gulag for twelve years and now lives in Britain, says that we in the West have our own Gulag: an intellectual Gulag, which is the beginning of the physical one.

Thomas Hermansson

One of my readers, again, gave me the central thesis of the current submission. Thank you, Thomas… it all comes with ease after a coherent idea for the core of one’s argument is given. I am in your debt, sir.

One of the particular features of the intolerant élite is that nothing they say has any resemblance to frankness, honesty, and real toleration… indeed, their addiction to what Orwell called Newspeak deforms their every statement. Christianity has not been immune to the ravages of this intellectual malady… it even ravages those portions of the Church that heterodox and secularist trends have infiltrated.

Here are some extracts from an article in Touchstone, Reorganizing Religion, by David Mills. I will post the URL at the end for those who wish to read the entire piece.

These people will at least as often reject a perfectly sane orthodox man because he is orthodox, though this is never the reason they give. They take his settled belief in the Creed as “rigidity”, or “legalism”, or intellectual immaturity, perhaps, hiding deep insecurity, if not something worse. If he shows any passion in his care for truth, he will be judged to be “angry”, or to have “authority issues”, or to be “unable to work with others”…

If he tries to defend himself against any of these charges, no matter how gently he speaks, he will be accused of “defensiveness” and an inability to listen to others, and, probably, also of the ever-useful “issues with authority”. (I have heard, with some bemusement, men and women who proudly rejected most Christian doctrines, including the ones the authorities of their churches insisted they hold, cluck with annoyance at someone who had “issues with authority” because he disagreed with some diocesan resolution which had no actual authority whatever)…

These commissions will define “gifts for ordination” as the skills and personality needed to maintain the system more or less as it is. In other words, they judge people’s vocation by whether they will be good parish pastors who will maintain the parishes, which in practice often means inoffensive therapeutic types with a suitably elastic theology and a commitment to “be a part of the diocesan team”, which means, among other things, being happy to transfer a good part of the parish’s wealth to the diocese. Jesus would not have made it through the usual ordination process, nor would any of the apostles save Judas. I am not joking, though this may be unfair to Judas…

The problems with such a system will only be seen in times of crisis, and, then, only by certain critical outsiders. When radical change is needed, the bureaucracy will be almost completely blind to it, and unless radically threatened (by a loss of funding, usually) will not easily be brought to see it. To change will mean to give up what they are doing, which very few of those in the center can easily accept…

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=17-07-039-f

The above is a correct rendering of how things work in the OCA, especially at SVS. SVS is thoroughly infested with a heterodox ethos… the recent signing of a covenant by SVS with an Anglican institution points this up clearly… which one was which? What does such lead to, speaking frankly? It leads to people such as Timothy Blumentritt being put in positions of authority because of their “certification” as “therapists” (the high priests and gurus of secularism… SVS approves and employs such to show its subservience to the zeitgeist (in this, is it any different from Nashotah House, then?)). This, in turn, induces seminarians to trust such people. Finally, this leads to situations such as the affair surrounding Eric Iliff… let’s not forget that it involved a homosexual assault by a SVS faculty member that led to Eric’s eventual suicide (I find that Mr Iliff committed suicide only after he initiated a civil action against SVS highly problematic… I am not alone in thinking such). SVS has NEVER offered an adequate and real repentance for this situation… which was of its making.

In addition, note how this system circles the wagons around even the most egregious violators of pastoral norms. The Syosset apparat defends Raymond Velencia tooth-and-nail … they are even willing to drive the OCA into bankruptcy to afford his legal fees. Why? He is nothing but a dishonest and nasty-minded priest… if he were to go, well, it would not be a loss or menace to the Church at large. Indeed, it would have cost the OCA MUCH less money to have convened an ecclesiastical court, kicked the rascal out, apologised to Kristi Koumentakos, and compensated her for her actual damages. Why wasn’t such a reasonable course followed? To change will mean to give up what they are doing, which very few of those in the center can easily accept… I think that this wraps it up well. They refuse to change… why? If they were to do so, it would mean they would have to abandon the project begun by ADS. They would have to return to the ethos of the days of Leonty Turkevich and Cyprian Borisevich… and that they REFUSE to contemplate. It would mean that not only their idol, but, they, themselves, were WRONG (and wrong not only for a short time, but, wrong since the late ‘70s at least). I would argue that the Schmemannshchyna proper ran from the death of Metropolitan Leonty Turkevich in 1965 until the death of ADS in ’83… the Hopko and Meyendorff years were not as completely nasty… JM was an actual scholar (thereby watering down the evil sowed by ADS) and TH was incompetent not evil (although it is true that the fumbling and bumbling of the inept does lead, too often, to an evil result… as we saw in the Iliff affair).

This is, indeed, an “intellectual GULag”, and no one can point it up. If one does not parrot the secularist/heterodox party-line of SVS or Syosset, one is not allowed to become a priest or work for the Church. This has led to the current impasse. The mantra is, “Everything has changed”… then, why is Kishkovsky still in power, as he has been for the last 30-odd years? Reflect well on the fact that many of the senior apparatchiki in the OCA started their rise in office in Soviet days… a friend of mine made the following comment:

As a rule, the Soviets only made people on whom they had kompromat into bishops (such was the case with Bloom… otherwise, they would have deposed him decades before). I am sure that this was the foundation of the OCA.

This is the dirty and unspeakable secret… that the Sovs vetted almost all the upper level of the OCA (not only many of the bishops, but, many archpriests such as Kishkovsky and Burdikoff, as well) and these fellows were found acceptable to the Council on Religious Affairs (the Russians booted out such people, but, they lived on in the diaspora). Oh, yes… they parrot all the shibboleths about “peace”, “love”, and “politeness”. They are so “nice”… however… reflect on the fact that these “nice people” tried to steal the parish property in Mayfield PA from the good folks of Russian Hill (only the wording of the original property-deed, which contained specific clauses and precise definitions to prevent the papist bishop from seizing the church, saved their bacon). Reflect on something else… they spare no cost on lawyers or out-of-court settlements. I would say that they are trying to cover appalling actions with sugary and wonderful words.

Which do you believe? Do you believe what your eyes show you? After all, it  only reflects what actually happened! Or, do you believe the honeyed words of JP and Co? Everything has changed… he says so (he DOES wear a white hat, doesn’t he?)!

I know what I believe… what about you?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Thursday 29 October 2009

Albany NY

You Have the Right to Remain Silent…

One such fellow sent us a 7-page letter to the editor and demanded that we print it in full and embark upon a wide-ranging debate in the pages of our paper about why we were wrong. Needless to say, we didn’t do so. But, I have always wondered if there isn’t some tendency toward totalitarian thought among people like that. Probably, a nice guy otherwise, but, something about our resisting his “authority” rankled him.

Andrew Sabak

We have all met those who bloviate continually on “free speech”… how good it is… how much they are in favour of such… blah, blah, blah. There is one constant that I note in such sorts… you can say anything that you please… as long as it agrees with what they think is the truth. “You have a right to your opinion”… usually prefaces a rant demanding that one not only retract one’s statement, but, also remove it from public view and a demand to keep your mouth shut in future. A variation on this is, “I hate to criticise others, but…” This is nothing but weasel-words and mealy-mouthed hypocrisy. Such sorts do not “hate to criticise others”, but, since the therapeutese regnant amongst the overeducated states that “criticism” is a bad thing, they, of course, do not wish to do so… but, they MUST… because the object of their wrath is being so “nasty” to “nice” people.

One of my interlocutors recently started a post by saying, “I hate to criticise others”… I would say to that person, “Grow up! You wish to criticise me and you hate what I am saying against your idol. Be honest… be frank. Don’t be a phony and don’t be afraid of admitting unpleasant truths. You’ll feel better and be a better person to the others around you. In short, be less tight-arsed and overly-earnest… Disagree openly and without dissimulation… you will find that your opponents are often respectable folks (you might like them better than some of your allies… I have certainly found that true in life, dear) that will respect you for that. You’ll probably smile more and everyone will like you better”.

However, I think that Mr Sabak hits the nail precisely on the head with “I have always wondered if there isn’t some tendency toward totalitarian thought among people like that”. As for me, if you wish to disagree with me, well, I say that you should get to work and do your best! I don’t mind objective argument… note well that I do not bring up anything personal in my argumentation… anyone who replies in like kind is welcome. I would warn my readers that anyone who tries to destroy a thesis by ad hominem citations is beyond the pale and we must reject them out of hand as  uncivil and loutish people. Besides… ask yourself… why are they getting personal, especially when the original poster was not (note well that I do my best to protect the identities not only of my friends, but, of my foes also)?

Are there specific instances of “totalitarian thought among people like that?” Yes… I remember that after the death of Vladyki Cyprian in 1980, there was an incident at St Tikhon’s… a seminarian used “thee” to address God, and a modernist shoved him off the kliros… you see, the modernists insist that we use “you” instead of the more-traditional “thee”, and this seminarian’s action was just “infuriating”. No reason was given… those involved issued no apologies. This is how the Reonovationists imposed their liturgical innovations… in a nasty, cruel, and high-handed fashion. These are the people who the konvertsy praise and associate with… it makes me wonder how “traditional” they are… my Anglican friends assure me that many of those who convert to Orthodoxy are malcontents who tried their totalitarian shtick in their former confession, and failed. What’s that old saying…? Never buy a pig in a poke… It does seem to apply here.

Do be careful when listening to the totalitarians… they never tell the story in all of its fullness… then, they get upset if you add the missing detail… for instance, there was a fulsome (and disgusting) little blurb on oca.org pouring praise on Lyonyo Kishkovsky. You can see it at: http://www.oca.org/news/1974 (Here is a typical sentence from this tedious piece of fluff: He is especially recognised throughout the Orthodox world for his outstanding work in the field of inter-Church relations and ecumenical witness… doesn’t that make you wish to hurl?) It states that he has been rector of the OCA parish in Sea Cliff for 35 years… omitting the fact that there was a nasty court fight over the parish property and that most of the parishioners decamped for a new ROCOR parish founded after they lost their legal fight (Lyonyo was known for his personal nastiness in this case). It also omits to mention that Kishkovsky was head of the OCA DECR under Feodosy, Herman, and now JP… you see, JP claims that no major figure is left at Syosset from the former administration. THAT is a manifest lie and I shall say so openly. Totalitarian people not only lie by commission, they lie by omission as well… indeed, they may lie by omission more than they do by telling actual fibs. This is, perhaps, the most dangerous thing to watch for when you listen to totalitarians… do not attend to what they say openly as much as you should listen for what is left out.

You have the right to remain silent… to pay for the expenses of your betters… and to bow your head before their education and wisdom. After all, they only have your best interests in mind. The Church will be in danger if we tell you the story full and unexpurgated. Trust us… for everything has changed.

HAS IT?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Wednesday 28 October 2009

Albany NY

Editor’s Postscript:

I would like to thank Andrew Sabak for giving me the inspiration for this post. It all flowed easily once he gave me the central thesis of the argument. This is one of the more pleasant aspects of this work. I get to become acquainted with some very dear folk who spur me on to things that I couldn’t have thought of on my own. Vielen Dank! Ochen spasibo!

Vox Pop

I have no obligation to give my opponents a forum… if you wish to express yourself, start your own site… no one is stopping you… certainly, not me! I was looking for an appropriate image to portray my angry interlocutors… isn’t this so à propos?

As it stands, there are those who believe that I am under obligation to offer a forum to those who disagree with me. I do not. If you wish to state your point of view on this subject, I suggest that you do as I do… develop your contacts, read extensively in the Russian press, keep up an active correspondence, go to Church when you can, and write daily. Practise DOES make perfect. Then, you must persevere… I had a spot of illness that necessitated a hiatus… but, I am back… with a new emphasis in my work (there is also a pressing situation that calls us all to arms… this is one of those times where slackers need not apply). Hmm… I say that one of the reasons that these sorts do not start their own sites is that they do not wish to do the hard work necessary to keep them up and build up a readership. However… they have a good deal to say about those of us who are labouring in the cyber-vineyard.

Let’s reiterate the good advice that I was given recently:

• If they attack you, do not respond.
• If someone asks for personal information, do not give it.
• Do not respond to idiocy on other websites.
• If attacks continue, note who makes them and what group they belong to.

This is why I spam most combative comments. One commenter, however, needed a firm reproof… one that they took badly (and tried to “move the goalposts”, to boot). There is no custom or canon in the Church mandating weekly attendance at liturgy. There are all sorts of just and legitimate reasons for one’s absence from liturgy. In any case, being officious and prying Nosey Parkers isn’t good, we shouldn’t meddle in the private domestic affairs of our fellow Christians. That is found, all too often, in Proddie converts, who carry over into Orthodoxy bad habits from their old confessions (and, I must add, these habits are not the best Protestant practise… most Protestants ARE better than that). One is, “X and Y display lax behaviour… that shall lead to their damnation… however, my zealous behaviour shall save me”. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

We should ask ourselves, “What is to be done?” As for me, I am glad when I see someone who has not been in liturgy for some time. It’s great! It means that someone is coming to worship Almighty God. To hear these nappy-clad konvertsy bloviate, you’d think that wasn’t a good thing. I don’t keep a scorecard… God knows that Nicky and I miss often enough due to his work. Another related complaint of the chronically Proddie is, “Those ethnic Orthodox are always late”. Sometimes, people live far away… amongst other things. God made the liturgy for us… we were not made for the liturgy (sound familiar, konvertsy? It’s what our Lord meant, dears). What are you going to do… bar the doors after the beginning of liturgy? God save us from such nonsense! I come to the liturgy for one reason only… because Almighty God is there.

I do NOT go to hear chanting… I do NOT go because of some guru priest… I do NOT go to look down upon my fellow Christians… I do NOT go for instruction (don’t these children understand that a church is a place of prayer? It is NOT a lecture hall like a Proddie establishment). I go to church because God is there… full stop! There is NO other reason for going. What does it matter to you how many times or at what time I show up? THAT tells me that you are not attending to prayer and giving a proper attention and reverence to God… remember, one of Satan’s most basic tactics is to lead someone to services so that they feel self-righteous and condemn their fellow Christians! The prelest inherent in most konvertsy complaints is manifest and glaring… that they are spiritual neophytes of the rankest sort is obvious to all. No doubt, I shall be called “nasty”, “mean-spirited”, and “cruel” for speaking up so… go ahead, say it! I am NOT alone. As a priest-friend of mine wrote to me, “Sock it to them!” I shall, batiushka, I shall. I know that you must remain silent about these mewling adolescent vipers because of your office… I know my duty and I shall NOT shirk it.

In any case, the konvertsy are not long for the Church. The reasons are interesting, but, they are, truly, a matter for another post… I shall not distort the topic by truncating it. There ARE enough good words to say on that, alone. They are not of us… they never were, for many never converted in their heart-of-hearts… they remained insolent and steadfast Proddies in their innermost being. Are most converts like that? It’s hard to say due to a lack of solid evidence (although the anecdotal evidence is damning), but, I do know of many who are not so… people like Pat Reardon and John Whiteford should know that I am not speaking of them. It shall be a repeat of the Brookline, Basil Osborne, and Agafangel Pashkovsky schisms… they shall go off and form their “pure” church… and squabble and split and split yet again. Sad… isn’t it? But… you can’t talk to such sorts… they prefer to worship a “god” of their own creation and not the Creator of all Heaven and Earth. I say let them go… I fear that they shall have no “peace” or find no “answers”.

As for me… “Give me that old-time religion… it was good enough for the Butovo Martyrs… it’s good enough for me”.

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Wednesday 28 October 2009

Albany NY

Editor’s Postscript:

Many sincere and unfeigned thanks to my opponents… your words got my brain in gear… and transmuted your ignorance and bile into pure gold. My friends inspire me, but, my enemies do so to a greater degree! Reflect on THAT…

Oh… I’m STILL smilin’… your words had NO effect save to stimulate my thought… I have a THICK skin… you tend to develop that in the Church…

Hier Stehe Ich… Ich Kann Nicht Anders… Gott Helfe Mir!

There is a division in my “mail”… it’s rather even, in fact. Half you of you believe that I belong in a home for the feeble-minded, and the only reason that I am not there now is negligence on the part of my doctor. The other half believe that I am not afraid to post on touchy issues, being willing to face whatever comes my way in consequence. Well… I’m neither a demon nor an angel… I’m a rather ordinary human-being… with one striking characteristic. I’ve never been to abide pure and unadulterated bullshit. There is no other way of describing it, I am afraid. If the guilty party is a clergyman, clerical status does not exempt him from the results flowing from his action.

To kick this off properly, let me tell you what this website is and what it is not. It IS a secular blog maintained by an Orthodox laywoman that often discusses religious themes. It is NOT a church site (it is certainly not an official church site, nor do I imply such) nor is it a “religious” site. The emphasis is journalistic, not hagiographic. DON’T lecture me on how to address this or that clergyman… I follow academic and journalistic norms… not those found in certain Church circles (to write the name of a bishop in all caps with a cross in front is a pretentious affectation, not simple respect)… clerics get the respect that they earn (those who have done so… receive it in full… those who haven’t… don’t get any… it is quite that simple)!

Normally, I shy away from theology or the canons… I am not trained in such. My academic training was in history, and my interest in the Church is in its life and history as an institution and its interaction with the secular world in the past and in the present. Just as Christ has two natures, one divine and one human, mystically united (don’t ask me for the details… I’m no theologian… go to the guys at the MDA for that one), the Church has two natures as well (it IS the Body of Christ, after all). I focus on the human side of the Church… you may dislike that. Fine! Read someone else who is closer to your taste.

In Russia and Greece (and the other Orthodox countries, as well), there is great interest on the part of secular journalists in the Church. Some are believers (as I am), some are not. Human nature being what it is (and if you wish to see classical illustrations of what sinful-ginful humanity is capable of, I would tell you to watch the Church… we have our fair share of skullduggery and high-jinks!), there is always something INTERESTING going on in some corner. Let’s see… Archbishop Nikon in Yekaterinburg had his hand in the till and the MP Holy Synod gave him the boot… Bishop Diomid Dzhuban of Anadyr rebelled against the Archpastoral Council of the MP and got the chop… The ROCOR Holy Synod caught Gleb Podmoshensky in naughty doings and deposed him (JP’s connection with GP was after the latter’s deposition)… Philaret Denisenko was laundering C-notes and he got the heave-ho (he then founded the “Kiev Patriarchate”, an uncanonical and false organisation)… Bobby K was kiting plastic up the yin-yang… Feodosy Lazor had sticky fingers (in more ways than one, I am afraid)… Eric Tosi claims that four years’ worth of financial records “simply do not exist”… and that’s just us Russkies (and this list is neither exhaustive nor complete)! My Greek friends tell me that it’s just as colourful a scene amongst them.

In short, the human side of the Church is not perfect… it never was… it never shall be. Oh, yes… EVERYBODY talks about it… so, don’t try to shut me up… I’m not hostile to the Church… I’m only hostile to phonies and bullshitters. Dishonest clerics do NOT negate the holiness of the Church… but, they DO make us all look like liars and cheats… that is why we must expose them and chase them out! Conversely, the heroes deserve praise and exaltation! There ARE two sides to the coin.

Basically, there is a set of people who get upset if someone doesn’t take every official Church statement as Gospel truth… in reply, I have a name for you… Vitaly Ustinov. In his earlier days, he was a vigorous and able bishop… unfortunately, he became First Hierarch of the ROCOR in 1986 when he was 75-years-old, obviously, many viewed him as a place-holder… God laughed! He served until his “resignation” in 2001 at the age of 91, and, then, led a schismatic body until his death at the age of 96 in 2006. I refer specifically to the most egregious thing done in any of the “Russian” churches… the ROCOR established parishes and dioceses on the canonical territory of the MP after the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991… they did this on the direct orders of Vitaly Ustinov (and many loudly supported it, including a faction at Jordanville, I am afraid).

True, there were courageous clerics such as Archbishop Antony Bartoshevich of Geneva and Western Europe that openly and boldly condemned this vile and despicable action at the time (they were loudly condemned by the Vitalyist faction). They deserve glory and honour to their memories. There are fewer greater blots upon the history of our Church… it is sad to relate, but, the ROCOR plunged a knife directly into the backs of our Russian confrères in the Faith just when they needed our aid and succour… just when they needed our aid and comfort in fighting against Papist and Protestant proselytism. The fanatics chased people out of the Church for opposing this, including clergy. The party-liners all shouted in unison, “The communists are still in power” (just like a Stalinist Party Congress, and that from so-called and self-proclaimed “anti-communists”… I see no difference between the two sorts… what do you think?)… I would say that those who said that then are those who condemn those who question problematic official statements.

Interesting, no? Indeed, some of those who persecuted those who advocated reconciliation in the early ’90s later flip-flopped… I would say that not all of these “conversions” were sincere, some of them did so to keep personal prerogatives and positions only, and that Vladyki Hilarion should keep his eyes and ears open in consequence. Not everyone is your friend, Vladyki… in your place, very few tell you the truth… you have my sympathy and support.

In short, if you wish to read cheer-leading… don’t stop here! If you wish me not to transgress the PC code of American suburbia and, above all, be “nice”… don’t say that I didn’t warn ya! This site deals with the real doings of the human side of the Church… if JP claimed that he had gotten rid of the lot of the higher-ups at Syosset… and Lyonyo Kishkovsky was at his side, still the head of the OCA DECR (as he had been under Feodosy and Herman)… I shall notice it! I shall call it what it is… a bald-faced lie… and follow the trail to see if it leads somewhere (in this case, sadly, it did… to GP in Platina CA and RSK in Venice FL).

Yes, the title came from Martin Luther… yet, it is a good “mission-statement” for this site:

With God’s Help, I’ll take my stand… I can’t do otherwise (and stay honest to myself and my Lord).

To my friends:

Thank you for standing with me and by me. You make me realise that I am not alone. I appreciate THAT.

To my enemies:

Reflect on this… you more often inspire me than anything else. Thank you (I mean that without sarcasm or irony… you don’t know how much you unintentionally shine a spotlight on certain things!). You have forgotten the Law of Unintended Consequence. CHECKMATE.

Remember… the Lord loves a HAPPY warrior… are you such? Or, are you unsmiling, overly-earnest, tight-arsed, anal-retentive, passive/aggressive, and/or self-righteous? Reflect on that…

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Wednesday 28 October 2009

Albany NY