The Direction We Are Heading

I am working through some new analyses of the various “characters” at play in the present OCA controversy. This takes time because I want to use public documents and there are in many cases too many for me to go through to find the “gem” that sums it up.

At this point a great deal has changed from when I started this blog not so long ago. For one, Fester has been exposed though the myth around him remains with a few diehards unable to see his membership in the Fabulous Four who have done so much to discredit the OCA. Even Metropolitan Jonah Paffhausen has seen enough to remove Fester from DC.

However, Fester still wields a great deal of personal power over the Diocese of the South. Any priests reading this should feel a bit queasy about having to replace a priest who does not stop communication with his old parishioners particularly to influence them. Until Fester’s status is finally resolved he is still a danger to the OCA. After all he is connected to two men who took the OCA to court, Kondratick and Soriach and never denounced their lawsuits. He may sue as well.

Bishop Matthias Moriak will also now have to figure out what to do with Stokoe’s now public personal life. I would advise Moriak not to worry about Stokoe leading a gay gendarmerie against him. My view of the average OCA member including the Diocese of the Midwest is that they can differentiate between the good that resulted for the OCA from Stokoe & OCAnews and his appropriateness as a member of the Metropolitan Council.

Even Stokoe realizes how difficult it is to be a reporter on the institution he is reporting on.

Stokoe benefitted from protection by Osacky and then inaction by Mollard though the latter had the cloudy issue of locum tenancy on his side. Moriak will now face a series of challenging decisions- will he investigate Stokoe to remove him from the MC as is his duty and if so how long does he envision this process taking? If he refuses to investigate will he set limits on Stokoe in terms of reporting? This poses problems for the impression that Stokoe operates under “freedom of the press” and posts what he wants and when he wants to.

None of us are entirely free and we must choose to whom we are enslaved. As Orthodox Christians we are certainly slaves to God but we also willingly choose to bind ourselves to other people and even ideas that we refuse to abandon without great struggle. We must be cautious of who we bind ourselves to. My concern was that Paffhausen and others were binding themselves to Fester and thusly to whom Fester is bound- Kondratick, Soraich and Fitzgerald.

Paffhausen’s “speech” which is still unclear as to its actual presentation shows a man under torment rather than a leader. This was not a rally-the-troops kind of speech. It was clearly written with Fester’s help if we look at his emails to Soraich. But I think this torment was a hopeful sign that Paffhausen senses what is unclean about what Fester is telling him and that his inconsistencies reveal his own inner struggle. If you are struggling with accepting evil that is good. It is when you swallow it without even a twinge that you have a much greater problem.

In order for Paffhausen to succeed, he cannot take this tone with the bishops. We people in the business world would laugh at a CEO addressing his management team like this. For him to lead he has to inspire. He once inspired the people and I think he has it in him to do it with the bishops but that does not begin with complaining about how unfair life is. It is not enough to say “I am the boss”. Anyone can do that.

What he has to do is get at least a majority of the bishops to believe that what he is doing is right for the OCA. So far the message has been inconsistent especially in external affairs which is his “specialty” as metropolitan. That has to change.

Then we can support him. Right now we are not sure if we are supporting Paffhausen or the schemes of the Fabulous Four.