This is a privately owned blog. It is not and has never been an official organ of any ecclesiastical organization.

"No one man, or group of men, can himself speak for the Church of Christ. It is nonetheless possible to speak from within the Church, in conformity with Orthodox tradition; and it is this that we shall attempt to do." Fr. Seraphim Rose Orthodox Word #1 Jan-Feb 1965 p. 17

Example of Narcissist/Psychopath Manipulation Taken from Real Life #1

parent post: put "parent post" in FINDER

Narcissist manipulations can be so subtle that they usually go undetected.  So the reader of this post is going to have to do some reading between the lines of what the narcissist says.

Joanna speaking:

(Throughout this post my words are written in Optima 15 teal)

In 2010 Minas suddenly resigned from Joseph Suaiden's news blog team.  This was after he had served for nearly a year, being regarded as a highly-valued reporter.  Suaiden did not take this rejection lightly.  One of the #1 rules with narcissists is NEVER reject a narcissist.  If they can't convince you to change your mind, and if then they can not force you to change your course of action; then they have only 2 possible options: a) dismiss you as a worthless nobody, or b) punish you.  The punishments can be severe.  Think of the narcissist who murders his wife/girlfriend saying, "If I can't have her, nobody will!"

In real life the narcissist's response to rejection is a combination of convince-force•dismiss-punish  with all the elements manifested and overlapping over the course of the "break-up".  That is the case in the example of when Minas resigned from Suaiden's news team.  First Suaiden tried to convince Minas to "come to his senses".  Who in their right mind would not to want to be in servitude to the great Suaiden!   When Suaiden saw that Minas could not be convinced, next he tried to get Minas to change his mind by other means.  He saw an opportunity to enlist help from a bishop in Minas' Church (SIR).  Suaiden is in the vigante Milan synod, but makes it his business to nosy around and try to associate with clergy and hierarchs in valid jurisdictions.  Of course, Suaiden had to be very careful about what he would say to the bishop  – he could not come right out and plainly ask for what he wanted.  Suaiden wanted the bishop to contact Minas' priest, or alternatively to contact Minas himself, to cause Minas to return to Suaiden's service.    

Joseph Suaiden's first step was to write an editorial, – a sympathy ploy, – and publish it on his news blog.  Next he emailed the entire lengthy editorial to the SIR bishop on the pretense of asking for permission after-the-fact to quote him in one paragraph, pointing to the mention of the SIR bishop's name to make sure the bishop did not overlook that specially baited paragraph.  The bishop took the bait.  A brief email exchange ensued.  Suaiden then forwarded the conversation to Minas.   The exchange appears below.

Suaiden was unable to get all that he wished from the unsuspecting bishop, but he did get permission from the bishop to share their email conversation with Minas.

Here is Suaiden's first email, including his blah blah blah editorial;  I've highlighted the important parts making it easier to just scroll/skim through it:

From: Dcn Joseph Suaiden joseph.suaiden@gmail.com
Date: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 5:16 PM
Subject: [NFTU: True Orthodox and Ecumenism News] EDITORIAL\
To: (SIR bishop)

Dear (SIR bishop):


I ask your blessings and prayers; I am forwarding this because I did in fact mention something you had written. I hope I have not misunderstood you, and ask your prayers and assistance if I have.

Kissing your right hand--

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden

Sun, Nov 21, 2010
[NFTU: True Orthodox and Ecumenism News] EDITORIAL: Some People Still Don't Get It
Holy Father Philaret, pray unto God for us!
   Today, a few weeks following the departure of our former fourth writer/editor throughout 2010, we came across a none-too-subtle "editorial" on the Remnant ROCOR site concerning "True Orthodox unity", or as the editor disparagingly refers to it, "a false unity of the fragments". Out of respect for the Bishops and clergy in the ROCOR-A and the Synod in Resistance, many of whom we consider friends, I have kept my mouth shut, since some of their own people are involved in this mess.
   However, this latest article is not only an attack on the very driving force of what makes NFTU what it is as a news site, but more importantly, something I believe very deeply through my own personal experience: that in our days, in these tragic days for the Church, that the Truth of Orthodoxy is preserved by True Orthodox Christians throughout the world, despite external administrative division, and that the alternative, entering into communion with the heresies of ecumenism, modernism, and Sergianism, is totally unacceptable.
   Since said former fourth writer knew well my own views on building True Orthodox unity, and since the editors of Remnant ROCOR seem to have decided today to treat such a view with some level of derision, I take their essay very personally, and very seriously.
   Fanaticism is easy to get swept into, and it is easy to confuse-- in the wrong conditions-- with well-ordered zeal or stringent adherence to tradition.  However, it is neither. Though the terms "zealot" and "fanatic" are often used interchangeably, properly defined, a fanatic is one "marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion". The obvious difference, then, between a zealot and a fanatic is that the zealot generally knows what he is talking about. (Of course, in everyday language, both are now used in a pejorative sense.)
   The Lord calls for zealots in the Scriptures. The same does not hold for fanatics.
   The content of the short essay in question on Remnant ROCOR is initially about ecumenism. In that we should be glad. As the commemoration of St Philaret of New York is the 8th of November, one would say such a choice is apt, due to his Patristic stand against ecumenism. However, within three paragraphs, the targets are no longer the ecumenists, but people who believe in True Orthodox unity.
   By comparing those who believe in True Orthodox unity to those who believe in the union of all religions, the truth is stood on its head.
   The author seems confused as to the history of ROCOR, perhaps not realizing that ROCOR had been-- in the past-- at least three Metropolitanates which were sometimes in communion, sometimes not; I would suggest reading "The Truth About the Russian Church Abroad," published by Jordanville in English in 1975, which shows that even under far uglier circumstances, unity among divided Orthodox factions can, for however long, be achieved. And this determination is not limited to the Russian Church: the author claims that "the Old ROCOR used to be approached by the Greek fragments back in the old days.  Our decision was to let them unite with each other first before we would consider uniting with them." This is historically false. Under the presidency of St Philaret, the union with the Florinites was achieved in 1969. The union with the Matthewites was achieved in 1971. Furthermore, ROCOR entered into communion with the Synod in Resistance, when there were already at least four divisions in the True Orthodox Church of Greece-- in 1994! Consequently, the truth is the exact opposite of what the author presents: the ROCOR did not wait until union was achieved between the Greek Old Calendar jurisdictions, but played an integral part in the reunion of the two factions for the sake of True Orthodoxy in general at the outset and worked towards union with all Orthodox who so requested it over the years.
   As a side note, we are in a bit of a conundrum because of why they claim they "are greatly set apart from the fragments by our Royal Path doctrine [what they deridingly call "cyprianism']. This doctrine is not logical.  So, the logically-minded fragments will never accept it.  Praise God for this because it protects us from that super-correct logic - "that outward rationalism which outweighs the inward essence of things..."
   Yet ostensibly in response to something I had written a month before about the Royal Path simply being a balance of the extremes, the claim was made that the "Royal Path is hidden"-- something which members of other traditionalist jurisdictions had labelled (and had told me repeatedly, and personally, was stated by the author) as something akin to gnosticism: "Many things are "hidden" in our Faith, especially from those who are blinded spiritually.  Christ even prayed thanking the Father that certain things are hidden from the wise and revealed unto babes.  Our sacraments are called "Mysteries" because there is a spiritual reality in them.  The spiritual reality is hidden from those who are spiritually blinded, and they can only see the sacraments as ritual...It is the same with the royal path.  There is a spiritual reality to it that is hidden more often than not.  Those unable to see the spiritual reality will usually try to define the royal path as some place or compromise between the extremes of super-correct ["true" Orthodoxy] and world Orthodoxy."
   Thus, if this "secret" new "doctrine" of the Royal Path is simply what is known politely as the "Patristic Stand of Resistance", it's far from hidden. It was clearly delineated by Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili and expounded upon by countless other authors in that Synod. It's been debated and discussed cross-jurisdictionally! There's nothing mysterious about it, and the leaders of the Synod-- were they aware of this presentation-- would probably resent the claim of "secret beliefs", which can be abused by detractors. Certainly in my own discussions with one or two of their knowledgeable clergy, there is no "hidden meaning" to their position. It may be claimed that one disagrees with them in error, but it is never claimed that their position is utterly beyond comprehension to those outside their jurisdiction.
   Getting back to the point of this essay, the simple truth is that the main authors of the Remnant ROCOR site seem primarily interested in demonizing perceived "enemies". Unfortunately, an entire website has been devoted to this claim (Of MICE and Moles), which our former writer/editor became a member of without my knowledge or support.  (After pointing this out, I imagine NFTU shall now be added to the "moles".)
   Certainly some on this strange site deserve the title of "mole" or "agent": Hieromonk Ambrose Mooney of New Zealand seems mysteriously to have unlimited time to cast aspersions upon traditionalists, and has become well-known as an Internet provocateur.
   But some people, such as the (over?) zealous laymen of the website Ekklesiastikos, have done nothing to merit the title "agent" or "mole", when they are-- like the authors of Remnant ROCOR, simply lay members of their own jurisdiction who disagree with others, bascially running a "fan site" for their Synod. Instead, this site serves to label them as "enemies of the truth". It's a sin. The men in question should be treated-- and should treat others-- with the respect accorded to Orthodox Christians. But it's not my job to police their webmasters and writers towards perceived infractions against other jurisdictions. It is my job to do so for my own.
   Sadly, for taking this position, I lost one of my writers.
   I have no idea how many times I will say this, but I will say it again and again: NFTU does not-- and will not-- work towards the support of a particular traditional Orthodox jurisdiction, including my own. It has been this way since 2006. I am grateful to God that I have somehow been consistent and objective enough that no one can figure out what jurisdiction I am with without looking it up.
   For those that do know, however, I will personally attest it's been a different story. I've been accused by people outside my Synod that NFTU is a propaganda vehicle for the Milan Synod-- and those in my Synod who have made that claim did it with a personal agenda (such claims having been removed by the request of my Archbishop, who has no real interest in making NFTU a "Milan site"). I have been accused by people inside my Synod that I am trying to "destroy the Synod" or "take it in the direction of extremists".  And finally, when people realize the truth is neither, everyone falls back on us being "crazy" or "stupid" or "ecumenists".
   On the flip side, I have read various letters of "support" over the past couple of years claiming that so long as we continued "supporting" this or that jurisdiction, we'd have the "support" of certain people. We look for no "support" other than that of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Holy Orthodox Church. We are not "supporters" of partisanship and never will be. It is against my deeply ingrained beliefs about the current situation in Orthodoxy and how to treat other people, none of which I consider dogmatic from the position of faith, but immutable from the position of ethics and morality. Because of that, I take the suggestions of Bishops and clergy-- regardless of jurisdiction-- extremely seriously.

In response to suggestions that the comments area be more strictly watched for attacks on other people (and taking into account a very recent essay written about the inflammatory nature of commentary on the Orthodox Internet by none other than His Eminence, (SIR bishop), we redoubled our efforts to keep slanderous attacks off the site. In fact, almost to the day that we were to announce more severe restrictions on commenting within 48 hours (which of course led to complaints), an unprovoked attack began with supporters of the "moderate" position, including our former writer, referring to TOC Bishops as "eunuchs" and slandering a priest, among other insults. Thus, the exchange ended with our former writer's explosive departure-- ironically for acting in a manner condemned just weeks before by his own bishop!

   (For those wondering if I acted in a biased manner in that case, long-time readers know that this was tbe rather common "boomerang effect", an effect for which I can produce evidence in the form of emails and comments over the years: after reprimanding certain people for condemning one side in a slanderous manner, the "other side" shortly feels free to attack until they are themselves reprimanded. The "uncondemned" side is ever-so-grateful until they themselves get out of line. Then NFTU becomes a site run by "partisan hacks".)
   I am convinced, after almost five years of running NFTU in a non-jurisdictional manner, that one can be an "extremist" no matter what his or her ecclesiological position. (I am not saying, however, that there aren't ecclesiological positions that are by nature extreme.) I will always be against extreme expressions of any position, because extremism of expression is against the teachings of the Fathers. The True and Saving Orthodox Faith is not one jurisdiction's exclusive property; it was handed to us by others who came before us, as it was handed to them, and it is our responsibility to impart that to others, jealously guarding its purity, but not its ownership. It is the property of mankind given by Our Lord. It is our choice to accept it or reject it.
   I hope, for all those who remember the witness of our Holy Father Philaret of New York, that what is important is to "hold fast that which thou hast"-- focusing on the purity of our Orthodox Faith, and not personal battles against other traditional Orthodox Christians, reducing Orthodox discussion on the Internet to the level of partisan secular discourse. It only serves the purpose of the enemies of True Orthodoxy to do other than treat others as we would have them treat us.
Posted By Dcn Joseph Suaiden to NFTU: True Orthodox and Ecumenism News at 11/21/2010 05:16:00 PM


From: (SIR bishop)
Date: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: [NFTU: True Orthodox and Ecumenism News] EDITORIAL: Some People Still Don't
To: Dcn Joseph Suaiden joseph.suaiden@gmail.com

Dear Father Joseph:


        I read through your remarks. I am sorry to see you embroiled in something like this. It is unfortunate. However, Orthodoxy today is in difficult circumstances.

        As for mentioning me, the only reference by you to something written by me that I could find is the following:

In response to suggestions that the comments area be more strictly watched for attacks on other people (and taking into account a very recent essay written about the inflammatory nature of commentary on the Orthodox Internet by none other than His Eminence, (SIR bishop), we redoubled our efforts to keep slanderous attacks off the site. In fact, almost to the day that we were to announce more severe restrictions on commenting within 48 hours (which of course led to complaints), an unprovoked attack began with supporters of the "moderate" position, including our former writer, referring to TOC Bishops as "eunuchs" and slandering a priest, among other insults. Thus, the exchange ended with our former writer's explosive departure-- ironically for acting in a manner condemned just weeks before by his own bishop!

        As such, there is nothing at all unreasonable about what you write.  However, though I am perhaps reading this incorrectly, is the reference to your former writer a reference to someone in our jurisdiction?  If so, I did not know that anyone in our jurisdiction was writing for you.  I say this simply because the last sentence in your paragraph, since I am mentioned earlier, could be construed to suggest that the bishop cited in your last sentence is I:

Thus, the exchange ended with our former writer's explosive departure-- ironically for acting in a manner condemned just weeks before by his own bishop!

        If this so, I assure you that I had no idea that anyone belonging to us was writing for you, and, if so, most assuredly he or she was doing so without my knowledge or blessing.  If I seem somewhat paranoid, in the past, before the Internet age, I saw references from material supposedly quoted from my private correspondence that was not, in fact, written by me and which expressed ideas that I neither held nor endorsed. I even saw several pieces signed by me with a forged signature!  You can understand, then, my paranoia.

        In any event, while I do not endorse any website beside our own Synod's, and, while it is well known that I adhere firmly but without judgement to our Synod's ecclesiology and witness, I want to assure you, as I always have, that what you and others have sent to me from your website certainly seems fair and honest in its content. Your detractors may feel otherwise, or feel that they know more about the issues than I do (which well may be the case), but such is my perception.

        I am always sorry to see nasty epithets and animus expressed in private, let alone in a public forum such as the Internet, and I hope that no one among our clergy or faithful has taken part in an Internet attack of the kind that you describe. If so, I apologize sincerely to you, once again assuring you that I would never countenance such a thing and strongly discourage our clergy and faithful from involvement in Internet rivalries.

        Asking for your prayers and assuring you of my own,

Least Among Monks,

(SIR bishop)

P.S. I will copy our clergy and faithful with our exchange, so as to reinforce my objection to their involvement in Internet exchanges and, of course, anything that would lead to insulting language against you and your work.

Joanna speaking: I am not in possession of the original 2nd email sent by Joseph Suaiden to the SIR bishop.  But I have the copy where the bishop embeds his responses.  I assume it is complete, since it includes even Suaiden's salutation.

From: (SIR bishop)
Date: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: [NFTU: True Orthodox and Ecumenism News] EDITORIAL: Some People Still Don't
To: Dcn Joseph Suaiden joseph.suaiden@gmail.com

Dear Father Joseph:


You write this:

 Our former writer, Minas Christie, is not only a member of the SiR's house mission in Florida (Fr George Poullas, which was something I encouraged, because the politics at (some other) parish, as he explained, were very unhealthy, and he was having a baby) but was, until he got sucked into this polemical group, someone I considered a good friend.

I am sorry to say that I have never heard of this individual. He is, of course, free to express his opinions, but certainly not as a representative of our Synod. I am sure that his intentions were good in defending us, and I appreciate his efforts. However, such things always lead to difficulty and regrettable argumentation and strife.

 His work was great, then all of a sudden, things between him and Ekklesiastikos suddenly became really nasty and personal. By the time I realized that someone else was "egging him on", it was already too late, though he is insistent that this was his own decision, even though others "are in agreement with him". Sadly, he was writing in the comments section; something I had been discouraging my own editors to do.

I understand. I can only assure you that his actions were unknown to me, that I do not know him, that he was not writing as a representative of our Synod, and that I apologize for anything that upset you.

I can well understand, to be quite honest, why he might have been provoked by the "Ekklesiastikos" group, so I cannot judge him. They have written some less than flattering things about our Synod of Bishops and about me and (another SIR bishop) (one of the most mild-mannered individuals you could ever hope to meet).  It is for this reason that I do not engage them and have no interest in their polemics. I find all of these things absolutely distasteful.

 Thank you for sending this out. I appreciate your own patience with me, and frankly, a news blog which has been largely an experiment to see if people from different jurisdictions could work together to focus on things that are common to all Orthodox traditionalists without compromising their own values.

Yours is a noble experiment. However, I have seen nothing, over the last few decades, that has proved to be successful in bringing Orthodox together, except for the hard truth (which no one wants to hear) and humble withdrawal from disputations. One must simply wait for "God's time," as it were. As for me, I stay to myself, hated and reviled, and witness to the flock that God has given us.

 While I know it is not your focus, your own suggestions and guidance for me have greatly improved the site's quality and our own understanding of standards.

I am much edified by your kindness in writing this. I have not apparently succeeded, however, in protecting you from the inevitable defamations of your detractors and the unfortunate disagreements that seem to occur among Orthodox for little reason, at times.

 I always considered Minas' work a great proof of the possibilities for such a site: my goal was to have a number of different writers from different jurisdictions, bringing good news and reporting on ecumenism from different angles under a set of standards of quality, each of us getting along-- though I have many cross-jurisdictional friends, none volunteered except Minas, and he found lots of great stories every week. (He worked with us a little under a year.)

Again, I am sure that his motivations were good, but I would never have advised him to become involved something like this. Nor would I have blessed him. Of course, we are not a cult, so I cannot ultimately forbid anyone from acting as he or she wishes.

 I had no idea how much bitterness that could engender among folks that despised the idea of anything but polemic and nasty bile, and in this recent process I lost a good co-worker, and probably a friend (he hasn't written me since, having only asked that if he sends me anything to put up to take my name off it, because -- his new reasoning goes-- he's already publicly stated he wants nothing to do with us.)

I am sorry that your friendship ended in this way. I hope that you will both reconcile and realize that all of the enmity that abounds in Orthodoxy today, and not any personal deficits, in most cases, are the source of dissension. This is how the evil one works. As St. Paul says, we set out to do good and find ourselves embroiled in things that we never meant to be. That is why we stay to ourselves and immediately withdraw when matters become nasty.

 I don't blame him, but a pair of individuals who by now I am sure you are familiar with, and probably not in the best way. (One is a certain reader I asked you about and the disaster which followed, and the other-- his co-worker-- is a lady whom we considered a distant acquaintance, but whom I have had little contact, as I avoid speaking to women in general.)

We must simply look beyond the personal animosity, as I said, or, as we do, simply disengage from controversy.

 I am also including his email address: he could use guidance, and I bet he'd listen to whatever you say with filial respect. His email is mrxristidis@gmail.com.   He just had a new baby, which we announced on NFTU back in August I think.

You may, if you like, send this exchange to him. Indeed, I strongly encourage you to do so, in the spirit of transparency. I would feel more comfortable with that kind of introduction, since I certainly do not want him to think that I somehow do not appreciate his efforts, even if I would have discouraged them. In this way, too, you may open a door to repairing your friendship. This is an important thing -- far more important, in fact, than becoming acquainted with the spats and arguments that occur on the Internet.

 Kissing your right hand,

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

Once again, I humbly ask your forgiveness and encourage you to repair this rift with your former co-worker. With your prayers, and assuring you of my own,

Least Among Monks,

(SIR bishop)


From: Dcn Joseph Suaiden joseph.suaiden@gmail.com
Date: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: [NFTU: True Orthodox and Ecumenism News] EDITORIAL: Some People Still Don't
To: "MR. XRISTIDIS" mrxristidis@gmail.com

On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Dcn Joseph Suaiden joseph.suaiden@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Minas,

As I mentioned (SIR bishop) in my article, I have copied him on that post. I am sending on this exchange with him for the sake of transparency. I would suggest reading it yourself (because some of it deals with you) rather than sending it off or tossing it. I don't know if he'd agree with you coming to NFTU again (I know, I know! "never again") but I do know that instead of listening to "good" or "bad" hearsay concerning the SiR, Royal Path, even some of these other jurisdictions, that it's always better to talk to the Bishop. He knows a lot more about these parties than Joanna and Daniel. 

Anyway, I don't know if you'd be happy with what I did (probably not) but at least it's important to know that I didn't make up the whole "being polite to people outside our jurisdiction" thing. It's not because I have a "pie in the sky" dream of unity-- it's just about common decency, and I am sure the (SIR bishop) agrees with that basic principle.

Anyway, I doubt you'll ever forgive me, but I had to say something, and I hope what I did was right. If you ever want to speak to me again, feel free to call or email. Either way, his email is in the post below if you don't already have it.

The exchange is below. 

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

(Suaiden included the entire exchange shown above for Minas' review.)


Joseph Suaiden knew just exactly how to get this bishop's attention and how to impress him; you have to know the bishop's personality to see that easily.   But you only need to be aware of basic human nature to see why the bishop first asked Suaiden, "...is the reference to your former writer a reference to someone in our jurisdiction?"

This was exactly the question Suaiden hoped to hear from the bishop.  In answering that question Suaiden knows he only has this one chance to sell the bishop on the idea of taking some kind of action to "correct" Minas.  He gives the bishop the necessary contact information – starting with the name of Minas' priest.  We can assume this was Suaiden's first hope – that the bishop would complain about Minas to Fr. George Poullas.  

Suaiden was also hoping that the bishop would make note about the "polemic group" that Suaiden blames for leading Minas astray, the "someone else" who was "egging him on", the "pair of individuals", a "certain reader and his co-worker".  Suaiden also wanted those people to get into trouble.  He hoped the bishop would also mention these people when he contacted Fr. George (the bishop does know who these people are).

The whole editorial, while not addressed directly to the bishop, was designed for the bishop to read.   Brown-nosing and buttering-up the bishop, "poor me" boo-hoo, pseudo-virtuous self-justification, syrupy sweet self-promoting, and feigned heartfelt concern for his "dear" lost friend, – Suaiden hoped that the bishop would be convinced, if not to contact Fr. George, then to contact Minas directly himself.  To make that option readily available Suaiden provides the bishop with Minas' email address.

Well, Suaiden gave it his best shot, and while he did not get all he wanted, he did not walk away completely empty-handed.  He had the email exchange and the bishop's recommendation that it be forwarded to Minas "for transparency".  At least Minas would see that one of his own bishops is on Suaiden's side.  At least Minas would see that he created a liability for himself by leaving Suaiden's news blog, and that he had better reconsider.

So the same night Suaiden forwarded the exchange to Minas with his introduction.  But what he wrote in his introduction is seen by Minas (and by me) as Suaiden still playing the same role, wearing the same costume, as he did for the bishop: pretending to be sweet.   Suaiden knew he was fooling the bishop with his act.  But he was not so sure he was going to fool Minas. "Anyway, I don't know if you'd be happy with what I did (probably not)..."    Suaiden already knows, before he hits the "send" button, that Minas is likely going to be aware that he just received a punishment.  Gotcha, Minas!  The true Suaiden peeks out from behind his mask and with all his ill-will showing, he winks at Minas.  And there is nothing Minas can do about it. This is harder to see, it is so passive-aggressive.  From the outside Suaiden looks like the sweet angel.  However, later his real ugliness shows through.

That was back in 2010.  Something about malignant narcissists: they can punish you forever.  Today, in 2015 the punishing and dismissing still continues.  A recent example: Suaiden claims that Minas was a terrible reporter, and that he had been a "nice guy" by letting Minas join his news team.  Minas refutes that lie here:
This report will help with Minas' refutation.

The end.


8 months after Minas resigned from reporting for Joseph Suaiden's news blog, Suaiden still had not removed Minas' name from the roster.  Minas made repeated requests to have his name removed.  Suaiden kept stalling, saying ok, but then not doing it, and then saying he was too busy right now, and like excuses.  Minas had to get firm, eventually there was another blow up.  Here is his last attempt to get Suaiden to honor his request and remove his name from NFTU:

Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:14 AM
To: "joseph.suaiden" , Joanna Higginbotham , Dan Everiss
Dear Mr. Editor of NFTU

     I'm writing this to ask you to remove my profile as a past writer for your blog NFTU.  I do not want to be associated with it, you or your synod in any way.  I feel by keeping me listed as being a past associate with you as a form of harassment and an effort to defame me as well.  I do not agree with your agenda of jurisdiction ecumenism or your Milan Synod and "Western Rite" as being a true and canonical body.  It should be no problem for you to do this since I see you have removed all the Stavros Markou references at his request and that you yourself have said on the E Cafe that all the stuffs submitted by me were copied from other sites or you yourself had to edit and rewrite my other contributions, thus claiming the credit and degrading stuff written by me, which is OK with me.  So, why keep my name as having written anything for NFTU other than an attempt to harass and defame me and an underhanded attempt to link the S.I.R. and ROCA to you or your synod with your theory of "True Churches".  I repeat, I want nothing more to do with you or NFTU, remove my name and bio from your "About" section, and while you're at it, see what you can do about removing my comments on other stuff as well.

    Perhaps I should write your bishop, taking a page out from some of your own laughable methods, such as when you wrote that long winded and whining letter to Archbishop Chrysostomos of Etna to gain his sympathy (which didn't work) and support (and thus you interfering in the internal life of a jurisdiction not your own!) and somehow trying get me in trouble when I quit my association with you and NFTU.  Was this another example of your supposed efforts at "unifying"? 

   If you're going to continue to ignore my request I must warn you I do have other options which I will pursue, so let's end all this game playing of yours so you, NFTU, E Cafe, and your Milan Synod can go on about their merry way.  Quit trying to make yourself look good at my expense by your attempts at keeping me in association (bondage) to you and your NFTU.


Minas, or as you would refer to me, the Mice Mole Gang Of Three Refugee Remnant Reject or some such clever (in your own mind) moniker you have awarded me and my friends.

From: joseph.suaiden@gmail.com
Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:05 AM
To: mrxristidis@gmail.com, joannahigginbotham@gmail.com, oregdan@hotmail.com
Cc: nycexs@gmail.com


I am a little disturbed by these utterly insulting emails. I really regret not having listened to friends and colleagues who warned me of potential problems.

As it stands, I have had a lot to do these weeks, and I have not had time to fulfill your request. I cannot remove the stories you wrote; Diaconissa says we can remove your name, however. Further, we will gladly remove you from the list of profiles.

I will add that while I edited your work, I do this for anyone writing on NFTU. This is part of my job as "general editor": I edit stuff. Contrary to your assertion, the purpose of such a position is to make your work look better, not to claim it is mine.

Lastly, DO NOT EVER THREATEN ME. As I've said above, I will gladly do what I can to remove you at your request, schedule permitting. I would like an apology for your doing threatening comments below. If not, anyone who knows me knows I have a penchant for laughing off threats and their associated requests. We must not fear men, but God.

Think on that before you respond.

In Christ,
Dcn Joseph

Date: Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:36 PM
Subject: Thanks
To: "joseph.suaiden"

Thanks Mr. Suaiden, removing me as being associated with you would be great, you do seem to have a heart, I don't care what most people say about you. However, I'm sorry you take my request as a threat, your " Lastly, DO NOT EVER THREATEN ME" threat and request for an apology threat is really rather amusing, who do you think you are Johnathan Gress ? Perhaps you should contact your friends on  E cafe and cry to them, maybe that  will comfort you a bit. As you say, "We must not fear men, but God.'
 sincerely, Minas

From: Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Date: Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: Thanks

You're welcome. May God grant you peace before the end.

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY
A Mission of the Orthodox Metropolia in North America
Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America and the British Isles

Then, on August 3rd, a month later, Suaiden is still justifying himself.  Here is an excerpt of a soon later editorial on one of his blogs:

Wednesday, August 3, 2011
I've just about had enough with the "Remnant ROCOR" faction
   ... I didn't do anything to deserve the treatment I received from Minas Christie, who continued to write somewhat threatening letters to remove his name from NFTU. We keep former writers on our site as a service to them, since they deserve credit for the work they have done. Minas asked his name to be removed while we were very busy (I actually forgot). Then threats came eight days later. He was removed post-haste and with a smile. We retained Minas even when others turned on us for doing so. It was not until he began insulting clergymen of other jurisdictions that we said enough was enough, and he quit on his own...

Minas then, in a private email to me (Joanna), expressed his wonder of why Suaiden would  claim to be so threatened:

August 4, 2011
...I don't really see how I threatened him so much he has made me out to be a thug. The only other one was just left in the NFTU contact section previously, which he ignored.    After I sent this one and he finally did remove me from it's about us section.  I sent him a thank you, that's all, what a jerk making me look like I had been harassing him...

I know the answer:  This is one of the most favorite games of the psychopath/narcissist:
Narcissists use this ploy so often that it can even be a red flag.  They play innocent to get sympathy.  It is always the other guy who did something to them.  But in this case, ask: Why did Minas have to make repeated requests?  

The psychopath often has learned what buttons to push on humans in general (like the sympathy ploy); he also learns what buttons to push on individuals with whom he associates.  A simple passive-aggressive technique to rile up somebody who asks something, is to repeatedly ignore their request.  They know how to provoke their victim.

Stage:  Husband watching TV.  Wife working in kitchen.

wife:  Honey, would you please take out the garbage?
Jake:  Sure, Babe.

(30 minutes later)

wife: Sweetie, did you forget about the garbage?
Jake:  No, no, Lovie, I'm coming.

(30 minutes later)

wife: Jake, can you please get the garbage, NOW!?  (getting excited)
Jake: Yes, I'll be right there.  (said with extreme calm)

(30 minutes later)

wife: Jake! what about THE GARBAGE?!
Jake: I'm coming!
Jake: You're a bitch.


Also take a look at where Suaiden excuses himself by saying that  We keep former writers on our site as a service to them, since they deserve credit for the work they have done.  This is supposed to make Suaiden look so kind and so Christian.  But what if the former writer does not want to be kept on the site?  Didn't Minas make it clear that he did not want to be kept on the site 7+ months earlier?   It was more than obvious Minas did not want any credit; he repeatedly asked to have his name removed from everywhere on Suaiden's website.  Suaiden stalled and made excuses to ignore him.  So Minas, wondered out loud if maybe he should write to Suaiden's bishop, something Suaiden had already done to Minas – and Suaiden takes that as a threat (?!).

...and Suaiden takes that as a threat.  Very interesting.  Serious students of psychopathy want to note the "projection" in this real-life scenario.   Victims take note: when you are in a relationship with a psychopath, they will accuse you of doing to them what they are actually doing to you.  When a malignant narcissist accuses you of  doing something to them that you know you are not doing, then know that they have just revealed to you what they are secretly doing to you.


email exchange of when Minas first left Suaiden's news blog (NFTU)
incomplete record, some conversation is missing

What prompted Suaiden to complain to Minas about his behavior is that Minas had been demanding Ekklesiasticos identify themselves instead of hiding behind anonymity while they pretended to have some kind of clerical authority.  This was taking place on an Euphrosynos Cafe forum where Suaiden was also a participant.  Suaiden had been trying to get in good with various super-corrects, and he was totally embarrassed when Minas, a member of Suaiden's NFTU team, wasn't going along with the pretense that the Ekks are mature and respectable leaders of true Orthodoxy.

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Dcn Joseph Suaiden wrote:
What are you doing? Please. Stop slamming on Ekklesiastikos. Fr (_____) already told me who they were. Enough is enough.
You're starting to look obsessed.
In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

 to Dcn
show details 9:29 PM (47 minutes ago)
He did ? why would you believe him ? Well then who are they ?

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Dcn Joseph Suaiden wrote:
Father (_____) told me they were two guys named Constantinos and Leonidas. He gave me a little more info, but as they've tried to keep their identities private, I'm respecting that. Not priests, not kids. He told me because he was concerned that the identity of the arguers would become more important than the argument.
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

To: Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Two guys named Constantinos and Leonidas doesn't say too much. How do you know he's telling the truth about this anyways, because he's a priest ? I personally don't believe him as he is so hostile towards SIR and ROCOR/A, basically calling them heretics, which is probably what he thinks about your synod. From what I've been told he seems to have a vendetta against SIR.  Meanwhile the EKK continues their work anonymously. I think there more than two guys writing as the EKK and wouldn't doubt he's also part of it

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Dcn Joseph Suaiden wrote:
Hello Minas: I wish you'd reconsider. Part of the reason for the conference call was to see how relations could be improved through the NFTU site, not worsened. I know the whole Ekklesiastikos thing was a problem, but there's more to it than what you may have thought.
     Please-- at least stay through the conference call as an editor. If you can't make it, hear the recording. Then decide.
     In the meantime, I'll put this up.
In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

Date: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: HOT TIP !
To: Dcn Joseph Suaiden
I'll listen to the recording if you want, but Ive already made up my mind. I will send you tips that I find when I can and you can post them yourself if you wish. I'm though with commenting and I hate to tell you this but your vision of all the OC jurisdictions uniting are only a pipe dream I'm afraid.

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:41 PM, MR. XRISTIDIS <mrxristidis@gmail.com> wrote:
Fr J
Please don't hat tip me if I give you anymore leads, as I have already said I won't post or comment on NFTU anymore. If you would like me to find stuff from time to time and send it along to you, as I said , I will but I want to distance myself from NFTU, nothing personal. You wouldn't want people to think I'm a neurotic liar, would you ?

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:52 PM, Dcn Joseph Suaiden <joseph.suaiden@gmail.com> wrote:
is someone putting you up to this-- never mind, ok
In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

From: MR. XRISTIDIS <mrxristidis@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: PS
To: Dcn Joseph Suaiden <joseph.suaiden@gmail.com>
No, Joanna is not putting me up to this if that's what your thinking, I just decided this all on my own, if she agrees with me about it I can't help it. look at it this way, now they can't accuse you of giving Cyprianites too much voice on NFTU anymore



Narcissistic Personality Disorder

from Joanna's notepad 
misc. quotes from the internet...

It's about control.  They threaten to complain to your superiors about you, or to have you arrested, or to sue you; and they are very capable of carrying out their threats, they will self-destruct and burn bridges (example: divorce) to prove their point.

NPD's hate people who ignore them or laugh at them, who see through them. They will become aggressive, ... NPDs who are in Narcissistic rage, angry at being unmasked. I have never seen a NPD give up a source of supply willingly [a supply source is someone who gives them attention/servitude].  

A NPD on a rampage is dangerous, they are calculating and vengeful - any slight they feel they have suffered has to be punished. Think of how a spoiled child acts and you will understand NPD rage.

Just don't think you can win by playing by their rules - they make up the rules to their games.  The Narcissist will fight you tooth and nail to win.  They will never forgive you for besting them.


Serious students of psychopathy will also want to notice this sentence in Suaiden's note to Minas introducing his email exchange with the SIR bishop where he writes:  ...I don't know if he'd agree with you coming to NFTU again...

This is also a psychopathic form.  Suaiden honestly thinks there is a chance that because of what is in his emailing that Minas could consider returning to NFTU.

This indicates the depth of the fantasy life of the psychopath.  

Add this to the "punishment" aspect where he lifts his mask just enough to give Minas a "gotcha" wink.    This note along with the email exchange has dual uses of either convince or punish.  If Minas is stupid enough, or manipulatable enough, to go back to NFTU; then Suaiden wins.  If Minas sees through Suaiden, and especially if Minas is stirred to anger; then Suaiden wins.

In fact, if Minas shows no anger, then it would be typical for the psychopath, to fantasize that his victim is seething with rage inside.  The psychopath would greatly enjoy this fantasy. 

If you are following me in this train of thought, then you know that now we are getting into the area of human evil.  Humans becoming demon-like.

True story of something that happened to a man (living today) who decided to give up witchcraft and become Orthodox.  One night several demons visited him in his bed.  They paralyzed him and told him that he belongs to them.  He had 2 choices only for eternity: either be tortured or become a torturer like them.

Do you see the parallel of tortured/torturer with convinced/punished?


Joseph Suaiden's whole editorial is a sympathy ploy.  He is playing the victim – a favorite game of narcissists, because it often works.  In this scene he is playing the victim of persecution for his psuedo-virtue of insisting his volunteer reporters exhibit non-discriminatory courtesy to members of all jurisdictions.  This self-justifies his controlling behavior over Minas.  But, the courtesy ideal is just there to cover up his true motives for wanting Minas to be cordial with the anonymous members of Ekklesiasticos.   Suaiden, who before was critical of Ekklistiasticos' anonymity, suddenly stopped criticizing after he learned their identity.

Minas's first notice of his resignation was given informally in the comments section of a November 1, 2010 NFTU post.  The post is still there, but the comments are deleted.  However, a copy of the thread is saved on the Of Mice & Moles blog.   I am not free to re-post it entirely because of my ROCA Synod's internet policy that we do not publicly criticize our clergy.  So it will only be shared privately with concerned persons.  But I will share part of an edited version here.  

First, though, let me put forth just a little bit of background: a report submitted by Minas to OfMiceAndMoles blog in 2010 regarding the anonymous blog Ekklisiasticos which shows why Minas was on their case:

Start 2010 Report
by Minas Christie

Ekklisiastikos is a polemic, anti-SIR (Synod In Resistance) blog website edited by an anonymous group of  people. Just who they are, and how many, seems to be a closely guarded secret. They give the impression, yet deny, that they speak officially for their jurisdiction, the GOC ( Kallinikos Synod)

After talks between SIR and GOC(K) broke down earlier this year, Ekklisiastikos sent a series of questions to SIR. Although Ekklisiastikos claims they are not a official organ of their synod, the SIR did take the time, in their own time, to issue a response to the self-important mystery men. Enraged by the time span taken and response given them, they proceeded to paint Bishop Auxentios as irritated and conceited. Apparently the Ekklisiastikos gang took offense to what Bp. Auxentios wrote, although it seemed reasonable given the attitude they project.

In their response to Bp. Auxentios, Ekklisiastikos writes, "Bishop Auxentios—who claims to speak in the name of his 'former professor' Elder—demonstrates, once more, his contempt of the dialogue between Ekklisiastikos and the Synod in Resistance". I would like to ask why the SIR should even have to bother answering any of Ekklisiastikos questions to begin with, are they a higher authority than their own bishops?  I have called them wanna-be bishops, which they took offense to, but really, that's how they seem to come across, wanna-be bishops minus any manners.

Ekklisiasticos' bishops had ample opportunity to ask questions in the dialogue, had they wanted. Instead what they did was make demands, much like  Ekklistiasticos does.  Can we be sure they don't officially speak for their bishops?

Bishop Auxentios noted that, "Ekklisiastikos is not seeking an honest and sincere dialogue but warfare and polemics  ... their questions were put forth in a spirit of superficiality … with astonishing arrogance and with shocking aggressiveness  ...for the sake of winning among other things, while the answers of those in Resistance are written in the spirit of the Fathers, with a candid edge …  in a spirit of tough love that honest, sincere people will respond to."  Wow, I would have to agree with Bishop Auxentios' assessment of these jokers.  [Me too.  Especially the part about astonishing arrogance and shocking aggressiveness.  -jh]

A question was raised on the news blog, NFTU (Notes From The Underground), as to why the Ekklisiastikos' response to Bishop Auxentios was not published on NFTU.  Fr. Augustine of the Milan Synod, an editor of NFTU, gave this response: "Well, not since I found out that Ekklisiastikos isn't an official organ, but, little more than a personal magazine that doesn't speak for the GOC-Chrysostomos [now GOC-Kallinikos]. If we published that, then we'd have to publish every controversial statement made on Euphrosynos Cafe!"

There was an exchange of comments on NFTU between Milan Synod Deacon Fr. Joseph Suaiden and GOC-  Kallinikos Synod priest and Ekklisiastikos apologist, Fr. Steven Allen on the subject of the Ekklisiastikos website and it's anonymous group of editors. Fr Joseph, believing initially that these mystery men were not only speaking officially for their synod, but also believing that they were priests of that synod, said, "Ekklisiastikos' questions were widely distributed and almost immediately after the dialogue between the two Synods ceased. I assumed (wrongly, as I now see) that it was an official continuation of some sort of that dialogue."

Later Fr. Dcn. Joseph Suaiden called them "children." This upset Fr. Steven who said, "The editors of Ekklisiastikos are not "children; they are young men. ...They do not claim to speak for the Synod... Their website is useful; it does good for the Church."

Fr Joseph's response...
"If I had known these were just unofficial polemicists (who are not children) I would never have posted these questions online. The fact that they were passed out through different channels, and it was suggested as a news story for NFTU, indicated to me I should have treated it in a more official manner....  What I believe is a good thing is simply that all sides are expressing their viewpoints openly. This is not happening.  When I begin to see official documents responding to these official documents this will become somewhat more positive. In the sense that the SIR has been gracious enough to respond to unofficial channels and issue clarifications is indeed positive.  However, the fact that in reality it will make no difference on the other hand reflects badly on your Synod... If they are misrepresenting the positions of other Bishops to bolster their own, it does not do good for the Church, it does harm!  Spreading misinformation is not good for the Church but harmful for the faithful looking for understanding and at its most basic is a sin."

I would have to agree with him in his assessment of these jokers.

Fr. Steven....
"The editors of the Ekklisiastikos website are not clergymen, but rather young laymen with strong theological educations, who are zealous for the Faith and very active members of the GOC ( Kallinikos Synod). There is nothing inherently unacceptable about their choosing to be anonymous; their writings should be judged on their own merit. If what they say is true, it is true. If what they say is untrue, it is untrue. The hierarchs and senior clergy of the GOC are most certainly not "hiding behind" this website.  It is, beginning to end, an independent website which is completely the responsibility of its editors."

It is true I believe, as Fr. Steven says, that "the hierarchs and senior clergy of the GOC are certainly not hiding behind this website."  In fact, Ekklisiastikos is being promoted on the Greek GOC(K) website as a useful link and also on the GOC (HOTCA) website in the U.S.A. I guess even though it is an "independent website" it must still have it's hierarchs' blessings.

I think it is unacceptable that they choose to remain anonymous, what's the reason for this?  As Fr. Joseph answered in response to this he says....
"Well, if you know who they are, then we will take you on your word that they are not clergymen. Even I was under the impression that they were clergymen, however, so this answer surprises me.

This leads to an unfortunate problem, however; on the one hand, the SIR is in fact clarifying its position in public, then a group of kids (no matter how educated they may be) have neither the right nor responsibility to speak for their Synod. We are left with a theological cloud so to speak, because we are not able to discern what the actual response of the GOC-Chrysostomos (now Kallinikos) is or would be to the letters in question.

That's really unfortunate, to say the least, because it is precisely a Synod of Bishops who should be responding. The age of mystery men who speak for the Synods and then later don't really of the early days of the popularity of the Internet needs to end, and frankly, with this revelation of yours that these are not clerics but children (which somehow still made it to the official websites of the GOC-K), indicates that obviously such shadow boxing is still in vogue in some circles."

I did, I admit, egg them on with my responses to them on Euphrosynos Cafe (EC) after they posted  "A response to Bishop Auxentios" which angered them and prompted them to respond to me,  "Dear brother, you lost your temper too (as Bp. Auxentios did) and we end here our responses to your posts!  Obviously you are not serious and you don't have serious arguments!   Christ is in our midst!"

Well Ok, that's fine, I really don't care what they have to say and don't care to carry on with them, however it did seem they weren't through with me and wanted to carry on via a private message to me on the EC which said...
"Your bishops know very well who we are.  We also have talked to them in person!   Όσο ομιλείτε κ. Χρηστίδη, εκτίθεσθε..ανεπανόρθωτα!  Thus..the best for you is to remain silent!"

Do they think they are some kind of super heros like the Justice League and need to maintain their secret identities in order to protect the innocent and save the world ?....LOL

"Thus..the best for you is to remain silent!"  - Is this some kind of veiled threat on my person?

Oh me oh my !!!....LOL

I told those jokers they need to stop taking themselves so seriously.  Will their Mommies ground them and cut off their allowances if they find out what they've been up to while their Mommies were out?'

Corresponding with Joanna Higginbotham about this gang of mystery men, the Ekklisiastikos, I mentioned to her that Fr. Steven called them "young laymen with strong theological educations, who are zealous for the Faith and very active members of the GOC (Kiousis Synod)" and that Fr. Joseph had called them "children.  She replied in part, "It makes sense now.  Way back in my first encounter with them, one of them emailed me thanking me for my St. Philaret blog, but O how painful for them it was to see that quote everywhere [in the description of the blog] [I was supposed to feel sorry for him and remove the quote.]  ......the last communication I had with them they dismissed me with disgust as an imbecile not able to understand them.  I thought it was very childish.  To learn that they are not mature, neither in years nor in spirit, makes sense."

Ok, I am treating these guys as a joke, I admit, but why not, they won't tell the world who they are, how many of them there are or where they are. They can only be considered to be a band of internet trolls or goons as far as I can see.  As Joanna has advised me, "Minas, please don't let them get another word out of you.  Remember: don't feed the trolls"

I think that until they reveal who they are I will take her advise, and also advise anyone who reads what they have to say to take it with a grain of salt, after all, would you buy anything from an anonymous person trying to sell you something over the phone or computer?
End 2010 Report

Now here is the edited thread of commentary leading up to and including where Minas submits his resignation  This was originally posted in and taken from the comments section of a 11/1/10 NFTU post titled "2010 GOC Youth Conference Report with Photos":
• exact times were not recorded – the conversation below was  Nov. 1 – Nov. 4

mrxristidis [Minas, NFTU team member, SIR Synod]:
I just received a tip from one of my sources that the Ekklisiastikos had sent a brigade there to work undercover security for this event. Evidently this is the main reason the event ran so smoothly and that no heretics or schismatics could gain entrance to spoil the conference. Well done lads!

FrAugustine431 [NFTU team member, Milan Synod]:
Come now, Mrxristidis! That makes it sound like Ekklisiastikos is the TOC-Chrysostomos Mossad! Well, now that we think about it, maybe we should start trainig TOC militias.

Sorry, I just can't help poking fun at these people. The Ekklisiastikos bunch seem like some super secret organization that a government uses but denies it supports (or even exists ). Kind of like that old TV show Mission Impossible. This lame group likes to say what they want without telling anyone just who is is saying it or how many there are saying it for that matter. I think they must fancy themselves much like those Mexican Lucha Libre masked wrestlers do, if their identities were to be reveled they just wouldn't seem to have the same impact, so they hide behind the picture of the wise old Orthodox elder. Seems like the only one who knows their true ID's is Fr Steven Allen, the priest that serves the church where this youth conference was held, but he's not talking, other than to say they are young laymen and there's nothing wrong with them wanting to remain anonymous. This kind of reminds me of Batman and Robin and their loyal butler Alfred. 

Tzourtzoulos [GOC, supporter of Ekklisiasticos]
I really enjoy this conspiracy theorist guy..! 
Well done to Ekklisiastikos' team!

Where's the photo's BTW

Fr. Anastasios,NFTU team member, GOC Synod]
Photos: http://www.hotca.org/photos/category/79-2010-yout... 
Report: http://www.hotca.org/news/conferences/267-2010-yo...

What ! no photos of Tzourtzoulos?

Fr. Anastasios
Yes, the Ekklisiastikos website is linked on hotca.org. Unfortunately--and I know this will come as a disappointment to some--the reality is rather mundane. In August 2009, I was redesigning the Metropolis website, and needed some button links to add in to that space, since it was blank. So I added a link to the Synod website, and a link to a Calendar, and then a link to Ekklisiastikos, because I appreciated some of the translations they were doing. I intended to add further links as time permitted and I found more resources. 

Unfortunately, I had to take the Calendar link down when we were not able to produce one in time for 2010, and I have had no time to add more button links, being busy adding other types of content to the website, etc. The result is that there are still only two of the buttons up, and one of them happens to be the link to Ekklisiastikos. 

Just because a website is linked, does not mean that all content on it is approved of. We see disclaimers of the sort appearing on various websites all the time. I think there is valuable information that would not otherwise be available located on Ekklisiastikos. There have been statements at times which I thought were too strong. But such does not entail a coordinated attempt to use Ekklisiastikos as an attack arm of the GOC...the reality is just so much more mundane and straightforward than that....Sorry to curb everyone's excitement. 
-Fr. Anastasios

... not wanting to read an article at length, due to lack of interest. That's the way I felt when I started reading Ekklisiastikos's "A response to Bp. Auxentios of Photiki." 
So, Fr Anastasios, aside from your explanation, I want to ask you, Do you know the secret identities of the Ekklisiastikos Mafia or is this information kept from you also ? Also do you think it's the right thing to do keeping these mystery men (or boys) true identities secret ? What purpose does this serve the church ? Are we all to just accept anything they say without knowing who is saying it ? One more thing, why is there a link to their blog on the Greek GOC(K) website, did you do their website also and include it for the same reasons ?

Fr. Anastasios
Yes, we cannot read everything; the internet is a blessing in some ways, but there is simply too much to process. So we have to make our choices. 

Yes, I know one of the people who is a contributor to Ekklisiastikos. I personally prefer to post what I do by name. However, I respect the right to post anonymously; people these days love to use ad hominem and even make threats. I myself have been threatened with lawsuits in the past for my web work! So I don't blame some people for using a pseudonym, although I think posting with one's own name is preferable. As such, I will respect these men and their right to post anonymously so as to not focus on themselves, but rather on the arguments made. It serves to keep discussions on topic and not to try and psychoanalyze for hidden motives and attack the commentator, etc. As for "just accepting what they say without knowing who they are"....I encourage people that contact me about Orthodoxy not to trust me just because I am an Orthodox priest; I ask them to verify from objective evidence what I say. In the same way, who cares if you know who they are? Judge what they say, the arguments made. 

There is a link to their blog on the official website in Greece, because of the same reasons;  Bp Photios respects some of the work they do. As for whether he endorses everything they say and do, you would best ask him yourself. 
In Christ, 
Fr. Anastasios

I have a feeling some of these Ekklisiastikos contributors are really GOC priests and possibly even bishops who use this blog to post polemical statements and accusations against other bishops and synods anonymously. Well, that's just my opinion and of course I can't prove it because they are just a bunch of nameless people hiding behind a computer screen. Some people may define them as internet trolls or goons for what they had to say about Bp. Auxentios of the SIR, this is one accurate definition of their "work". But judging them on their anonymity and not wanting to focus on themselves, but rather their arguments made, I think they are perhaps eunuchs

Deacon Joseph,[NFTU editor, Milan Synod]:
This is out of line.

Yes, you're right, I was out of line and I wish to apologize to the nameless bunch of young educated laymen who make up the Ekklisiastikos. As far as I know they are not priests or bishops even though they may seem to give the impression they are. Nor are they eunuchs.

Joanna Higginbotham, [Rocor]
Bulls eye! 
That makes the most sense, it's a fine-tuning of the facts collected so far. 
-I could tell you were already a little too close for their comfort, and getting ready to close in. 

I don't know what to say - whatever I say needs to be addressed to our people and not to the GOC.   I'm only concerned in keeping our people from confusion and strengthening their understanding.  The NFTU forum is not really the place to do that. 

It is clear to me that the GOC clergy are definitely involved with this blog – this is not just some independent blogger buddies.   How revealing that the GOC clergy say these anonymous young men are "educated." 

And yes, it is obvious that the purpose for the blog is to attack the Royal Path.  Do you see any of us writing lengthy essays on the phariseeism of the super-correct? [and then shamelessly emailing it to everyone whether they would be interested or not?] No – we don't have to. We have the truth on our side. 

I don't want Tsourtsouli to think he is right in saying you are a conspiracy theorist – that needs to be corrected. More accurate is to say you are an "investigative reporter." 

There is nothing theoretical about the clergy making lame excuses for the bloggers' anonymity, pretending the reason is humility when it is obvious they are hiding something.  And there is nothing theoretical about the clergy making lame excuses for promoting this supposedly laymen's blog on their official websites. 

We detected a mean spirit in this blog, not too carefully concealed, and we sense there is a deceitful purpose behind it.  And now there is no doubt anymore that the GOC clergy are somehow involved in it. 

Thank you for your continued work and for this follow-up. 
-Joanna Higginbotham

Reader Petros 
You're right, we don't see you shamelessly plugging your view on the "super-correct pharisees" everywhere for everyone whether they would be interested or not. 

On the actual topic; I'm glad our Metropolis has kept these Youth Conferences going. We have our share of problems, just like everyone else (no matter how "royal" their path), but this sort of yearly contact is what we need to keep the next generation founded in the Faith. 

I'm sorry you're so bent out of shape about some online bloggers (whoever they are), but the education of our youth is a much more important topic than this nonsensical battle of online personas.

Joanna Higginbotham
Dear Reader Petros, 
I apologize. I did not mean for my comment to go to the top and be another comment on the GocYouth post. I was trying to answer MMC. I do not yet know how to use this advanced method for commenting. 
-In Christ, Joanna

Xenia Suaiden
"The nftu forum is not really the place to do that."

NFTU is not a forum, it's a news site. NFTU has a forum but this commenting system is not it. I believe that many people think that and that is why we get so many off topic comments, lengthy comments and people who comment without reading the guidelines before posting a comment, but that will change soon enough.

According to the article written about the youth conference by Fr Anastasios on the HOTCA website he says "I am presently the youngest priest in our Holy Metropolis, and as such have been invited several times to speak to the Youth. This year, I was asked by Fr. Steven to prepare a discussion of technology and social media, and how they can be properly used by Orthodox Christians." and he also says in a comment here "I respect the right to post anonymously; people these days love to use ad hominem and even make threats" Fr Steven also stated in a comment made to Fr Joseph about the EKK in a previous article on NFTU "There is nothing inherently unacceptable about their choosing to be anonymous" Well, I guess this is how they view teaching the youth of their jurisdiction how Orthodox Christians may properly use Technology and social media to attack and insult bishops and other jurisdictions anonymously. I do find there's a lot wrong with their views and I'm sure many others do also

Xenia Suaiden
Please stick to the topic of the article.  I'd like to remind everyone of the comment guidelines.  We have been busy moving and I have not been online to read the comments.  Once again, I would like to remind everyone that we could always post new threads which do not relate to the articles on the forum. 

Fr. Anastasios
Dear Menas, 
You can feel free to stop bear false witnessing against me any time you wish. 
Fr. Anastasios

Yea whatever

Deacon Joseph
Any chance we can discuss this off the board? I don't like where this is going. A number of clergy have been offended by this thread. I don't think your Bishop would approve of this: for that matter, I am sure of it. Interjurisdictional address for the editors will be discussed on the call, but if you want to talk before that, let me know. 
In Christ, 
Deacon Joseph Suaiden 
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

At this point Joseph Suaiden emailed Minas privately: 
What are you doing? Please. Stop slamming on Ekklesiastikos. Fr (_____) already told me who they were. Enough is enough.
You're starting to look obsessed.

Dear Fr. Joseph, Deaconess Xenia, Hierodeacon Augustine and readers of NFTU:  I know I have gotten off the thread with comments that started out as a joke.  I know that NFTU has been accused of being bias and I can't help it if I am somewhat prejudice, as is everyone else towards a particular point of view.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that people will follow whatever drummer, flute or fiddle player they like and it usually doesn't matter what someone else thinks or say's about whatever they believe, their minds are already made up and won't be changed.  So, I asked myself, what good is this doing me or anyone else commenting on anything.  What good am I doing spending so much time looking for articles to post here and arguing with nameless, faceless people online.  Nobody really cares what I think unless they agreed with what I've said to begin with.  So, I'm through with all this, I've got better things to spend my time on, this all is taking up too much of my life.  I'm sure this move will please all you Ekkites, but don't think I'm doing it for, or because of you.  I will continue to read NFTU and EC, but as far as me taking anymore of a active role in these forums, I'm gonna have to say goodbye to them.  Fr Joseph, I hope you understand and I know you will carry on just as well and probably better without me.  May God bless us each and everyone.

(This was originally in the comments section of a November 1, 2010 NFTU post: "2010 GOC Youth Conference Report with Photos".  I've taken a portion from my private archive and made it semi-available.  If anyone thinks to ask me to take all or part of this down, I will consider it once changes have been made to the current situation that would render the information immaterial.  But as of right now, it still is pertinent.  Ekklisiasticos blog is still listed on the official GOC websites.  It is still anonymous.  GOC is still represented on NFTU by former priest Anastasios Hudson.  June 2015)



This below is taken from a Euphrosynos Cafe "discussion" where Suaiden, speaking to Minas, makes a derogatory reference to ROCOR Refugees bloggers as "royally-pathological".  In this "discussion" Suaiden is making excuse for his being a divorced deacon, and other things.  Minas brings up the letter that Suaiden had written to Minas' bishop 2 weeks earlier.
December 10, 2010

by mmcxristidis » Thu 30 December 2010 2:43 am
I don't appreciate you belittling my friends or me either when you claim I quit your ragtag blog NFTU.  As I have told you before Joanna and Daniel had nothing to do with my quitting it. 

It did have everything to do with your attitude towards me.  I was doing you a favor.  As your appeal for others (who had more sense than to to join NFTU and do your job for you) went a couple months ago on this very forum, you said you were looking for "Hungry Dogs".  Well, you were being honest about what they should expect if they joined you I must say, being dogged.  You began treating me as a indentured servant, doing most of your legwork, scolding me and threatening to tell my bishop.  In fact you did write a whining letter to +AB Chrysostomos, crying about this and that and trying to do one of the things you do best which is brown-nosing.  The +AB politely humored you and in the end pretty much told you he wasn't interested in your agenda of jurisdictional ecumenism, which is another reason I quit you.  Perhaps I should print it here for others to see, how pathetic !  You act like a combination school bully and snitch when you don't get your way, first threatening, then if that doesn't work you do a "I'm gonna report you to the principle" routine.  So why don't you just shut up and quit trying to demonize my friends.

Perhaps I may address some more things about you later on when I have more time, you're right, I have better things to do than concern myself with you.  Anyone with half a brain who has studied you a while should be able to come to the conclusion that your a narcissistic, self-centered, self-righteous, self-serving blowhard who, in my translation of one of the sayings of my saintly Greek Grandmother, are someone who can't be digested with or without salt.

One more thing, I meant to say the OCA is nearly graceless.

by Suaiden » Thu 30 December 2010 3:15 am

There appears to maybe be a genuine misunderstanding in this exchange.  Minas wrote, "...when you claim I quit...",  and it is not clear that he is referring to Suaiden's accusation (not claim) that Minas was influenced to quit by his friends (the ROCOR Refugees royally-pathological gang of three).  I say maybe this is a misunderstanding, because psychopaths (of all types) are great opportunists – they will snatch any mistake made by their victim and run with it to muddy up the waters.  (This ECafe page is rife with examples starting at the top.)  But psychopaths also make mistakes, so it could be a genuine misunderstanding – it could go either way.  

However, I will point out, that somebody who knows Minas, who knows his writing, (as Suaiden should know, having been his editor) would see that his very next sentence, (...Joanna and Daniel had nothing to do with it...) modifies the first sentence.  In fact, the two sentences together make absolutely no sense if you try to understand it as per Suaiden's interpretation.

Suaiden's reaction is revealing.  Knee-jerk reaction, he contradicted Minas (YOU DID QUIT) and then he proves his assertion (YOU DID IT PUBLICLY).   Today this outburst backfires on him, because today he is trying to publish it that Minas was a rotten reporter and that Suaiden had to fire him.  Psychopaths always lie and change stories to put them on top.

Suaiden is also upbraiding Minas.  From Suaiden's point of view, what Minas did was bad.  Quitting nftu was bad, and doing it publicly was more bad.  Minas, you bad dog.