I also say “well said”, Fr. Basil.

The first couple sentences from I Constantinople Canon 6 that you include in this post are clear and instructive.

I also have been greatly saddened and disheartened by the attacks against bishops on the Holy Synod, priests and leading laity.

OCATRUTH.COM never had any credibility in my sight. It is a dark and divisive site, the less read, the better.

I pray for our Holy Synod and Metropolitan Council. May the Holy Spirit guide us!

Is there tons of REAL dirt in the Catholic scandal? Of course. Tons and tons and then some.

But, not content with retailing the real dirt over and over again, obsessively ad infinitum, Rod must manufacture new dirt; misrepresent what’s there; impute the worst motives to those less apoplectic with outrage than he; and impugn the good faith of those countless Catholics sincerely trying to implement reforms. Case in point: Rod’s recent gross misrepresentation, in WaPo, of the RC Philly situation. (Bill Donohue of the Catholic League has effectively countered Rod’s cheap shots: http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=2102 As Donohue observes, just as it is critical not to understate the Catholic sex-abuse problem, so it is equally critical not to overstate it — especially when due process and “innocent until proven guilty” are involved. But when has that ever stopped Rod Dreher?)

Given all this, I am not in the least bit surprised that Rod is using the same tactics now vs. the Holy Synod that he once used (and still uses) vs. the Catholic Church. It is of a piece. Same old Rod.

The one thing that does surprise me (but shouldn’t) is the astonishing hypocrisy he shows here. Crusader Rod supposedly led the charge to force those Evil RC Bishops to reveal their coverups and lack of transparency. Now he is apparently sitting on the SMPAC Report while insisting that the OCA does not have a sex-abuse problem like the Catholics’ problem, blah-blah-blah. (At one point, he even suggests that the OCA sex-abuse cases have not [ever?] involved children. I nearly choked on my cappuccino when I read that. Has he never read Pokrov.org?)

Today’s Catholic Church is transparent and zero-tolerant to a fault. (Yes, we’ve been forced into it; yes, it was an excruciatingly painful process, still ongoing; nonetheless, we are indeed implementing our zero-tolerance policy, and I can give you examples from my own diocese to document this in spades.) Yet Rod *continues* to attack the RCC relentlessly…while defending Met. Jonah and suppressing SMPAC. The irony is staggering.

Rod just needs to shut up already. About the RCC, which he left five years ago, for crying out loud. And about the OCA Holy Synod, too.

Allow me to respond to a couple of things, though I get the sense that I have already been tried and convicted in your eyes.

You say that I posted with the intent to deceive. The reason for this is that I was anonymous. That is non sequator — however much you abhor anonymity. It is curious your outrage doesn’t extend to other, more viscious and slanderous commentators such as “The Whale”.

You call me a liar, which I ask you to demonstrate. Then you ask me if my site is “A Gossip Site” or a “Truth” site. If that wasn’t a false dilemma I would then be able to ask you to show where I lied and then categorize your own site. But it is a false dilemma, and this is a site you to reason and opine according the facts as you know them — nothing wrong with that.

Trust me Father, we never declared open season on bishops or priest, though we did ask for some suspicions to be addressed. If this led to slurs, I’m sorry, but I am not aware of slurs I have utterred.

I hope you realize that I take that seriously. That’s one of the reasons we didn’t enable comments and why we felt an alternative to OCANews was needed. I would urge you to let your criticism cut both ways — how can you justify Stokoe’s unrestrained barrage against clergy and the anonymous piling on that he initiates?

The fact that the site was run anonymously is immaterial to the argument. It is both ad hominem and a red herring. If it is still anonymity that has your goat, and you disagree with a decision you find distateful, than that is another issue.

Distasteful though you may find my decision, it was hardly nefarious. Keep in mind, our goals are ultimately the same — even extending the eventual end of OCATruth.

Lies are significantly determined by the intent to deceive. By posting under a mix of identities – all belonging to you – at OCATruth.com, Monomakhos.com, and perhaps other places of which I’m unaware, the following impressions were given: a) that Jesse Cone had no affiliation with OCA Truth, b) that OCA Truth had more supporters than perhaps it did in reality, c) that “reasonable” graduate students like Jesse Cone, unaffiliated with OCA Truth, support the work of those anonymous guys responsible for it. Beyond that, I stand by the points I made until someone can demonstrate that they are wrong. OCA Truth did say those things, but without proof apart from “our sources.” Pray tell, who might those be? Was your site to be a Truth site or a Gossip site?

As for leadership, a common definition is that “leadership is influence.” OCA Truth absolutely tried to influence what was going on. (So did OCAnews. For that matter, so does this blog, at least in this matter, and mostly by discussing what has happened.) Why else “tell your friends,” and “tell your neighbors”? Why attempt to shape the Washington Post profile of His Beatitude?

Concerning Fr. Fester’s role, I can’t say whether he authored site-specific content or not. He does appear to have provided a steady stream of information, variously confidential or specious. As but one example, where else does one obtain a document, the one from Abp Dmitri threatening indefinite suspension against Gregory Burke mentioned at http://www.ocatruth.com/?p=344 , that sure looks like it came from a personnel file? You guys weren’t breaking into chancery offices, were you?

Worst of all, your “effort” and “prayer” led to repeated slurs against real individuals – my own bishop (+Melchisedek), the rector at my parish (Archpriest John Reeves), my diocesan lay representative to the Metropolitan Council (Gregg Nescott), Faith Skordinski, Archpriest Alexander Garklavs, and others – who have served honorably and faithfully. Several of those have labored under the most difficult circumstances as they sought to unwind the corruption (is that a “liberal” or a “conservative” issue, by the way?) from the previous Metropolitanates. Do you know any of the people you were trashing?

I’ll close with this: “Against an elder [πρεσβυτέρου; presbyter, a priest or bishop in NT context] receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.” 1 Timothy 5:19 Why would St. Paul say such a thing?

First of all, I apologize if you felt I was taunting. I asked you that question seriously and exasperatedly. If those of us who are worried about an uncanonical ousting of Met. Jonah are wrong, please give us legitimate reassurances.

As for the lies… I’m sorry but I don’t see what you mean. I never lied about not having or seeing or hearing the SMPAC report. Yes I decided to post elsewhere under my own name. That’s also not a lie. I never lied to anyone about my involvement in the blog, going so far as even to inform the acting rector of my parish in an act of good faith and pastoral confidence.

When you say you determined two of the OCATruth writers before the emails where released, I am assume you are speaking about Rod and Fr. Joseph. Fr. Joseph was never part of the blog. If you argue he was by extension I would argue that at least half of the Holy Synod is then part of Mark Stokoe’s blog. Not a vital point, but just a small correction.

I think it is a bit of stretch to look at OCATruth as an example of leadership. It’s a blog voicing a different opinion that OCANews. It was never meant to be permanent, and it was never meant to be your one-stop-shop for auditing the OCA or to spreading dirt on bishops/clergy. If it was, it would look very different.

Perhaps you are trying to say that we didn’t take responsibility for the impact of our words seriously, or maturely enough. Perhaps, but it wasn’t for lack of effort or prayer. As I’m sure you know, it is difficult to gauge the impact of what one does online, but please know it is something I do take seriously.

I have said on a number of occasions that it is depressing beyond words to encounter greater morality and human decency from Monday to Friday at my S&P 500 company than seemingly exists at certain parts of the OCA. Gerhard Weinberg notes that military competence was inversely related to one’s rank in the Italian Army in WWII. Perhaps something similar is at work here?