A response to racism in American Orthodoxy

[Platina]

 

[~Anastasia~]

.

I'm unaware really of this whole controversy, so I'm not sure how public the names are. But you might want to remove the names (or any not publicly involved) and repost this. Since I don't know the situation, I'm not really sure. But normally we try to protect individuals.

 

[Platina]

done

 

[~Anastasia~]

done

Thank you so much!

 

[gzt]

View attachment 219082

All right, I'm glad we're off the seminarian. The original article names the person who took the photo (and what parish he attends!) - it wasn't Campbell or Montgomery. I'm not sure why those people matter. So he says he went there 30 minutes later - later than what? The facebook post of somebody who isn't the photographer? Anyway, he says he says he passed later and the symbols were gone - such an argument would depend on passing earlier and seeing the message without the symbols, then seeing the symbols at a later time (and even then, somebody was making racist graffiti, so I'm not sure what we're trying to prove here?). This only suggests people painted over racist symbols when they saw them and then painted over the rest of the message - as would naturally happen there.

 

[gzt]

Also what's with putting "graffiti" in scare quotes in his message.

 

[gzt]

And lastly get rid of the borders message and just talk about somebody putting the various symbols up - the really disturbing thing is that the cross is alongside the TWP and icons of other hate groups - unless you're saying the employee said the cross was put up there totally independent of everything else that's up there.

 

[Platina]

I read it as he's saying the message was there first, and then the symbols were added later. I could be misunderstanding.

He probably used quotes because it's not really graffitti as such, given that that's what the rock is there for.

 

[Platina]

But look, if an open letter is going to speak of the seminarian, and then this letter is going to get pasted around everywhere, the seminarian is going to be talked about. If they didnt want it talked about, they shouldn't have included it. Plus, realizing that misinformation is part of this whole campaign is helpful for knowing how to relate to this whole thing.

 

[Platina]

unless you're saying the employee said the cross was put up there totally independent of everything else that's up there.

It very well could have been. We simply don't know. It could have been an Orthodox person's reponse to the other stuff for all we know.

 

[gzt]

I read it as he's saying the message was there first, and then the symbols were added later. I could be misunderstanding.

He probably used quotes because it's not really graffitti as such, given that that's what the rock is there for.

Yes, he's saying that, but what he's saying doesn't support that. EDIT: it supports, if anything, the opposite.

But look, if an open letter is going to speak of the seminarian, and then this letter is going to get pasted around everywhere, the seminarian is going to be talked about. If they didnt want it talked about, they shouldn't have included it. Plus, realizing that misinformation is part of this whole campaign is helpful for knowing how to relate to this whole thing.

Perhaps, I'm just saying I'm not interested in discussing that. It seems the only ones discussing it are his supporters - I've avoided looking for discussion of the seminarian but details of the allegations are not circulating, the accusers don't seem to be making a case in the court of public opinion, the only thing going around is from the seminarian. Also, what misinformation? You're claiming the rock thing is misinformation and it isn't. I don't think being a Rock Truther is a hill you want to die on.

It very well could have been. We simply don't know. It could have been an Orthodox person's reponse to the other stuff for all we know.

It certainly could be, but given what we know about TWP, and their claimed responsibility for it, the simplest suggestion is that it's all together. Nobody is tying the graffiti on the rock to the seminarian, for instance.

 

[gzt]

I hope so, but I doubt it as well. I read what one of the signers demanded the seminarian do for him to leave the seminarian alone, and is was pretty ridiculous.

Yes, this is part of why I am opposed to setting up a court of public opinion - and if you do you open it up to both sides. I presume this was in some forum where the accused was making his case.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yes, this is part of why I am opposed to setting up a court of public opinion - and if you do you open it up to both sides. I presume this was in some forum where the accused was making his case.

yes, and asking forgiveness. the problem is that some of those who made the petition are still after him, and are known to go to extreme lengths to push their agenda.

 

[gzt]

The petition is just asking for hierarchs to make some good statement about white nationalism and such. The people who set it up are Orthodoxy in Dialogue. The signers are just random folks from all over. People going after him might be in the last group, but I don't think they're in the first group - unless OiD is the source of the allegations. I guess I'm confused about all the sources of everything - I presumed there was something more to this than just one sentence in an article suggesting some unnamed person in a seminary was a white supremacist, as otherwise there wouldn't be any hubbub.

 

[ArmyMatt]

The petition is just asking for hierarchs to make some good statement about white nationalism and such. The people who set it up are Orthodoxy in Dialogue. The signers are just random folks from all over. People going after him might be in the last group, but I don't think they're in the first group - unless OiD is the source of the allegations. I guess I'm confused about all the sources of everything - I presumed there was something more to this than just one sentence in an article suggesting some unnamed person in a seminary was a white supremacist, as otherwise there wouldn't be any hubbub.

it's not so much the notion of getting the bishops to hammer home what we know to be heresy (racism of any kind), but some of the folks who are pushing this document are known to go after people, falsely accuse them, threaten them physically, alter what folks say to push an agenda, etc.

 

[gzt]

So are some of the opponents of it.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I am sure there are, although I have only seen the threats from the guys on the side of the petition.

 

[gzt]

And none of us have seen the information underlying the accusations.

 

[rusmeister]

Supporting Black Lives Matter and inventing a racism problem in the Church is absurd.

Hi all!

Carefully breaking my self-imposed exile, I can say, not as an attack on any member, but in reading the statements of the organization "Black Lives Matter" (the one that sports the black-and-yellow logo, not general movements against violence or racism such as the similarly named "Black Life Matters", etc), it is clear that the organization supports and promotes the modern sexual anarchy and attacks the traditional family that the Church affirms, as well as the modern delusional fantasy known as "transgender". Supporting that organization does mean supporting (however unintentionally) their attacks on Church teaching on marriage, sexuality and the family. Therefore, we cannot even be sure that what its founders think of as social justice actually IS justice. But it ought to be enough that they attack clear, established Church teaching.

For example, they say (and I quote):
"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise)."

They promote "Black Villages". What are we to make of that? What would anyone say if we promoted "White Villages"? Racism can go in any direction, and this group certainly seems to aim to be exclusionary, something we see to be racist.

They also speak about "patriarchy", and hold the assumptions of the radical Left. There's a lot that could be said about that, but I think their stated commitment to disrupt the family as the Church teaches it should be is sufficient to condemn the organization as one equally as unacceptable for Orthodox (or any) Christians - despite the good intent to stop actual injustice against blacks - as "white supremacy" (which I think we all agree is bad).

https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/what-we-believe/

Their old page was more fun, though:
Guiding Principles | Black Lives Matter

 

[prodromos]

Nice to see you Rus