As an OCA member who occasionally followed the scandals, I am glad the Holy Synod put out this statement.
I have met Metropolitan Jonah and have been supportive of him. He is a man of not only wisdom, but an ability
to communicate the spiritual to those of us with a more secular mindset (not that that's a good thing).
I was thinking the Holy Synod were just some old fuddy-duddies who were resisting change.
(I know Orthodox don't think much of change).
But as a parishioner friend said to me, the actions of the Holy Synod have been unanimous. Furthermore,
I read biographical excerpts on these people, and wow, many have lived difficult or at least thoughtful lives.
Could *all* of them been wrong?
There is no excuse for covering up a crime. I believe that I had a run-in (nothing major, but nevertheless disturbing)
with the priest at the center of this scandal. I reported the incident to my priest, because I felt it was my duty as a member
of the OCA. I did not want to see the church's reputation tarnished by this priest and maybe more importantly, members
being harmed by his actions.
The apparent fact that the Metropolitan tried to sweep this under the rug and, worse yet, pawn him off on another
jurisdiction is to say the least disturbing. If true, this is reason enough to request the Metropolitan's resignation.
Thus the Synod's letter. I'm glad to hear their side of the story and feel bad for doubting them.
(This post is a reaction; upon hearing other evidence I reserve the right to change my mind.)
You said: "Could all of them be wrong?" My answer is YES
. Satan can be very deceptive, and if you don't believe me, then read the book on the life of Saint Nektarios.
Now my suggestion to the OCA, find an Archbishop that excels in double speak, that is willing to hide in his cell, and will only come out to greet the rich and powerful. Also one who's smart enough to respond to everything with that time old recipe of: I will tend to it in two weeks, two months or two years.
I know I'm being sarcastic and I apologize for it. Let's just say my cynicism comes from my years of experiences. As for the Metropolitan, I have no knowledge of what's going on although someone did tell me yesterday that he was getting too close to the Russian Church. It might be true, or it might not be true, if though it is true, then what would that entail and why would it cause friction? Also if it is the case, wouldn't it be smarter to tell the congregants exactly what the problems are, as well as the pros and cons, instead of pacifying them with tales of having covered up sexual abuse, (something that doesn't seem to fit in with his character), and by doing so, commiting slander and calumny towards a hierarch?
Again I say, if they are doing it with the belief that it's for the good of the Church, and that the end justifies the means, then I would ask them how anything can be good for a Church when the means are sinful? The Holy Spirit cannot work through sinful means, and the Church is the Holy Spirit.
Anyway I've said enough and I apologize for it. I'm not a member of the OCA so I really have no right to give my opinion...and that's exactly what it is, my opinion and nothing else. So take it as such.