Sure Fooled Me

Back in September 2008, Fr. Igor Chitikov, of the parish in St. Petersburg, Florida, suddenly made a move from RocorMP to ROCA.  We in ROCA all accepted him in good faith, that his conscience would not allow him to betray the Church by joining the MP.  We were grateful that he was in a legal position to protect his parish property from being taken by the MP in a law suit.  All he wanted from our Vl. Agafangel was to be able to keep his parish property as it was.  Vl. Agafangel, of course, agreed, and even ordained a deacon for his parish.

Two months later Bp. Gabriel {RocorMP] apparently wrote Fr. Igor a letter asking him to reconsider his decision. Fr. Igor responded publicly and distributed his response for publication on the internet. It is posted on the ROCOR Refugees blog.
 http://rocorrefugees.blogspot.com/2008/11/fr-igor-chitikov-responds-to-bp-gabriel.html

The letter was good. I wrote this about it to a friend:

This is superb! I'm glad to see that Fr. Igor has it together better. (Certainly thanks to Vladyka Metropolitan Agafangel's prayers.)

I sure was fooled.

It turns out that Fr. Igor only moved to ROCA temporarily in order to gain "bargaining power" with Bp. Gabriel over his property which the MP does not want to let him keep in his name.  As soon as he extracted a promise from Bp. Gabriel that the property ownership remains as is, then Fr. Igor went back to the RocorMP.  So, what does that tell us about this letter Fr. Igor wrote to Bp. Gabriel?

And I was fooled despite the warning bells.  One of the warning bells was that Fr. Igor, too soon after joining ROCA, had questioned Vl. Agafangel in a very critical way.  Vl. Agafangel published Fr. Igor's "concerns" very generously proposing to address them at upcoming Sobor.
http://rocorrefugees.blogspot.com/2008/09/vth-all-diaspora-council.html

  But the rest of us were somewhat scandalized by Fr. Igor's attitude which was not consistent with an attitude of a true "newby."  This is why in my premature praise of Fr. Igor's letter, I said that Fr. Igor has it together "better."  Better than before, when he needed an attitude adjustment.  I ignored those warning bells.  I hope I'm learning not to ignore such inconsistencies anymore.  Too much strange behavior is dismissed as innocent.

Now, take a look at another little "speech" by another suspicious character, who supposedly does not support the MP, but animatedly supports a super-correct group [RTOC] whose hierarchy pits itself against ROCA.  In this speech a "Fr. D." tries to justify Fr. Sergei [Klestov], who had participated in an attempt to create a division in ROCA during it's tender beginning.  Here is the speech, which is in the form of a comment on Daily Courier, January 21, 2010.

(Anonymous) wrote:
Jan. 21st, 2010 03:00 pm (UTC)
Re: as an observer

... There is a saying that by the fruits of one's labors will one be known for what one is. Both Bishop Mitrophan Znosko and Rev. Sergei never did leave ROCOR, did they? Without of going into the current state of the ROCOR church and the many splinter groups that have occurred since the massive betrayal led ignominiously by the late Met. Laurus, to say that Father Sergei is for a union with the ecumenical and twice anathemized Moscow Patriarchate is like saying that Bishop Gabriel (Chemodakov) or Met. Hilarion (Kapral) are currently against the union with the MP. And as an addition, how many Father Alexander Lebedev of Los Angeles's can we recall (O. Pyotr Perekryostoff, Father. Viktor Potapov, O. Valery Lukianoff ... the list is endless) who in the 1990's wrote a scathing book about why one should never join the heretical organization that calls itself the Russian Church - The MP! And yet, they all led the charge along with Met. Laurus to embrace all the lies that ROCOR had called the MP out on since its inception!

The question any sane person would be asking themselves is why all this seeming flip-flopping occurred with these priests and bishops. In some cases, the flip-flopping is the right word, as Father George Larin said that his reasons for switching his position and becoming pro-MP was because his Metropolitan decided that way! However, there were some priests, like Father Sergei, who upon seeing that the canonization of the New Martyrs of Russia by the MP was a ploy and seeing how the MP never had any plans to leave the World Council of Churches (WCC), changed his position accordingly. I would hope that since this is still a free country, one might call or email or even travel and talk with these priests and bishops and have them tell them why their positions have changed. But, one could simply go by what some lady worker at the Synod has to say about Father Sergei's alleged agitating of the masses for the union with the MP or by Daily Courier's unsubstantiated slanderous accusation about the child corruption which if the Daily courier wishes to expound on, he knows that there is nothing in that accusation but hate for Father Sergei. The same way that there is hate by Ms. Shatilova for Bishop Mitrophan, as everyone knows the hatred that Bishop Gregory Grabbe had for Bishop Mitrophan.

There is really not much else to say except for the fact that by coming out with slanderous blogs such as these, the blogger Daily Courier opens up his face and shows himself for what he is. An agent of the FSB and the MP, working to undermine the characters of the likes of Bishop Mitrophan and his spiritual son, Father Sergei, who labored and will labor in God's field so that God's Truth can continue to grow in the hearts of all men !

For those who have ears, may you hear!
Fr. D.



To see this speech in context with additional ROCOR refugees' discussion about it, http://ofmiceandmoles.blogspot.com/2010/01/fr-d.html?zx=fbe884edfb72cf58


Something characteristic about a phony is that they often reveal what they are trying to do by accusing their victim of doing exactly what they themselves are really doing.  The accusation sounds ridiculously absurd until it is mirrored back to them.
...by coming out with slanderous blogs such as these, the blogger Daily Courier opens up his face and shows himself for what he is. An agent of the FSB and the MP, working to undermine the characters of the likes of Bishop Mitrophan and his spiritual son, Father Sergei...

Mirror this back to Fr. D. and we see who he is:

An agent trying to undermine ROCA.
And maintaining the separate existence of an R-split is the first order of this assignment.

3 comments:

Joanna Higginbotham said...

I learned about this mirroring with my psychopathic X-husband. 0nce he secretly hired a private detective on me. Then he accused ME of having HIM followed. In truth is I never even came close to having such a thought. Later, this all came out in counseling.

Joanna Higginbotham said...

I notice that Fr. D. sees "hatred" in two people in whom I see none. Is this more psychological "projection"? 0r is this a ploy to stop their mouths?

If I steal something and you point to me and say I'm a thief and warn others about me, does that mean you HATE me?

Hatred wants harm to come to those he hates. He pursues this aim actively by stalking them, invading their gatherings, cheering at their sadness and disappointments, wishing ill on them, trying to hurt them and use them for pleasure or laughs. [There's lots of laughing in hatred. Not the "tickled" laugh, or the nervous laugh - but that demonic gleeful ill-will laugh.]

Now, does that sound like Bp. Gregory G. or Cn. Anastasia S.?

Today's Epistle reading said that evil men will get worse, "deceiving and being deceived." And I think their "being deceived" is by their own selves - which happened to my psychopathic X-husband. When he accused me of having him followed it was because he believed it. He told the counselor, later, how he had noticed cars following him and how he would take unexpected turns to "ditch" them.

It is possible Fr. D. actually believes his accusations. Believing it himself, he could be more convincing to others.

Putting Fr. D.'s comment back in context I see a progression. First he tries to use Scripture and pretends to be pious. That does not work, so next he tries logic [HIS logic, that is]. Then he finds out that his logic does not work, so lastly he starts with the accusations.

What happened to the pious priest? Poof?

Joanna Higginbotham said...

In Genesis Chapter 39 there is an ancient example of this evil "mirroring." Joseph, who was sold into slavery by his jealous brothers, was propositioned by his master's wife. When he refused her advances on him, she reported to her husband that Joseph had made advanced on her.