I am slightly off topic here but I did not want to start yet another thread.
All this talk about the Metropolitan and not one word about Archpriest Alexander Garklavs, who is as much a man of God, a decent man, a steady and uncompromising leader of the OCA as any clergy man in the history of this Church.
May I remind folks that while the bishops may be the senior officers, the priests and deacons are the ones who make the Church work. The priests, as deputy bishops, and the rest of their congregations are where the true work of the Church happens. For every Hierarchical Divine Liturgy, Vespers, Matins, what have you, there are thousands upon thousands that are led by priests.
I am saddened that there was an apparent conflict of personality between the Metropolitan and the Chancellor. It was the moral and pastoral responsibility of the senior leader to approach the junior one and work things out, as much as it was the responsibility of the junior leader to accomodate the senior. It seems that Father Garklavs was much too honest and straight with the Metropolitan, and perhaps went by the book too much to suit the Metropolitan.
In any case, I am acutely aware that I have come very close to the boundary of gossip. Please consider the foregoing not as fact but strictly as my personal and perhaps wrong opinion. I am not writing this with any motive other than to eulogize the brilliant service of Father Garklavs and to put things in perspective that has been gravely skewed so far.