Topic: Has anyone heard anything about Met.Jonah resigning? / Met Jonah Resigns / Holy Synod Releases Official Statement about Met. Jonah's Resignation

[podkarpatska]

I do agree, speaking as a lawyer, that the act of hiring a lawyer - particularly in light of much which has been published in the secular media and posted online - is a prudent move for the Metropolitan.

As I opined though, I suspect that this is not so much as to fashion a claim against the OCA but rather to be proactive in protecting his name and reputation and to stop newspapers from misstating the underlying canonical dispute among the OCA's hierarchs and +Jonah as to imply that he, +Jonah might have been an active player in some actual misconduct rather than, at best, someone who may have mishandled an administrative situation in some way or another regarding the allegations against a priest and/or the reception of a monastic community. I would not be surprised if this lawyer has written to the Chicago and Philadelphia daily papers advising them of his client's role in these matters and requesting in the strongest of terms that they cease and desist from any further implications that the bishop was an active actor in the underlying mess of the allegations. I also suspect that he would have written the Synod asking that they refrain from any further public comments at this time until the dust settles. (Those two steps are what I would have done 'ab initio'.) (I am deliberately being 'wordy' here because even using certain 'buzzwords' that have taken on a 'street' meaning or implication in America in light of the troubles within the Roman church so I hope my point is understood.)

I also wouldn't read too much into the fact this lawyer is a canon law specialist. His background is clearly in western canon history and practice (DePaul and Georgetown Universities and the Anglican Church) but with respect to matters of local church governance and non-papal organizational matters that background certainly would be relevant in dealing with an Orthodox body - with certain caveats.

All in all a non story in my estimation at this time.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

^^ Podkarpatska--Thank you for your usually excellent analysis. I certainly hope that +Jonah lawyered up for the reasons that you have enumerated.

[ilyazhito]

This clearly smacks of cover-up. If there was a longstanding conflict between the Synod and Metropolitan Jonah, then the Synod probably wanted some cover for removing +Jonah. Although there has been speculation of a "gay cabal" and a "lavender mafia" floating around in the internet, I do not believe those arguments, although there is a definite anti-Metropolitan Jonah faction. Whatever it is called, this group that removed +Jonah did a disservice to the OCA.

You are warned for seven days for not using a title for Metropolitan Jonah. I modified your post to make it compliant with the rules. If you wish to dispute this action, please send me a PM. Thanks, Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

This clearly smacks of cover-up. If there was a longstanding conflict between the Synod and Metropolitan Jonah, then the Synod probably wanted some cover for removing +Jonah. Although there has been speculation of a "gay cabal" and a "lavender mafia" floating around in the internet, I do not believe those arguments, although there is a definite anti-Metropolitan Jonah faction. Whatever it is called, this group that removed +Jonah did a disservice to the OCA.

The "anti-Metropolitan Jonah faction" that asked for his resignation was the Holy Synod of the OCA. It is very true that there has been a "long-standing conflict" between +Jonah and the following folks in accordance with +Jonah's own admission at the Seattle AAC:

"These last three years have been the three most difficult years of my life. I have been under a relentless barrage of criticism for most of this time from every forum I am meant to oversee: the Chancery officers and staff, the Metropolitan Council, and — most troubling to me — the Holy Synod of Bishops."

So, it is hard for me to understand why anyone would say that +Jonah's resignation was a surprise, the result of a cabal or any such group, or a disservice to the OCA.  It just took the Holy Synod a few years to come up with the conclusion that Jonah himself reached in his resignation letter: "I had come to the realization long ago that that I have neither the personality nor the temperament for the position of Primate.."

The only question I would think that most folks would have would be "Your Eminence, what took you so long?"

[ilyazhito]

Metropolitan Jonah's resignation was a disservice, because it produced the third interregnum for the last 5 years.  The +Jonah/Synod war was a sign of internal problems that are not easily rectified. This has produced divisions, and divisions could lead to possible instability and/or schism, although it is not likely if the new metropolitan can unite the OCA. Although destruction of the OCA is likely, if the infighting continues, the "resignation" could become an incident similar to the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, which was followed by WWI.This could lead to a mass exodus to ROCOR and other jurisdictions.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Metropolitan Jonah's resignation was a disservice, because it produced the third interregnum for the last 5 years.  The +Jonah/Synod war was a sign of internal problems that are not easily rectified. This has produced divisions, and divisions could lead to possible instability and/or schism, although it is not likely if the new metropolitan can unite the OCA. Although destruction of the OCA is likely, if the infighting continues, the "resignation" could become an incident similar to the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, which was followed by WWI.This could lead to a mass exodus to ROCOR and other jurisdictions.

Only if the OCA is full of people who are cultists, who follow a guru. May be that is so, but in that case their departure would be to the gain of the OCA and the loss of any jurisdiction that receives them. The pre-Metropolitan Jonah internal problems were of the kind that exist in many churches; they just were brought into the open, unlike other instances where they are able to to swept under the rug. The "+Jonah vs everybody else" problems were caused in +Jonah own words by himself. It really is a problem that does not have long-term implications. In retrospect, the OCA Holy Synod made a big mistake in electing him and they have now corrected their error. However, the bigger problem is how Team +Jonah has waged the war against "the Holy Synod, Chancery Staff and the Metropolitan Council" (using +Jonah's Seattle speech). In effect, Team +Jonah, consisting of Father Fester and other supporters, have launched a scorched earth policy not merely to defend +Jonah but to eradicate his real and perceived enemies. The only real question that remains is what was/is the role of Metropolitan Jonah in Team +Jonah. By his continued silence in not supporting the decisions of the Holy Synod and indeed his own resignation, +Jonah looks more and more complicit. I appeal to him to think of the good of the Church he once headed and end the current madness.

[Basil 320]

Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation.  

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

The Holy Synod was scheduled to meet at the Chancery today, no report as yet on the OCA web site.  Topics to be addressed would be the matter of the investigation of the sexual harassment allegation against Bishop Matthias of Chicago, and an assignment for Metropolitan Jonah, in response to his request included in his letter of resignation, whose remuneration was scheduled to end at this time.  Last week, Bishop Michael was reported to have said  Bishop Matthias would be exonerated.

[mike]

Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation. 

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

The Holy Synod was scheduled to meet at the Chancery today, no report as yet on the OCA web site.  Topics to be addressed would be the matter of the investigation of the sexual harassment allegation against Bishop Matthias of Chicago, and an assignment for Metropolitan Jonah, in response to his request included in his letter of resignation, whose remuneration was scheduled to end at this time.  Last week, Bishop Michael was reported to have said  Bishop Matthias would be exonerated.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation.  

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

Some additional developments.

Some of the folks at Monomakhos have been talking about schism.

Monomakhos has posted a request for support (signatures) for a letter to the OCA Holy Synod, the Assembly of Bishops and the autocephalous churches asking for an independent third party investigation of the circumstances that led up to +Jonah's resignation.

There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so.

The action by Bishop Alexander did take place. Although unfortunate IMO, the other side of the coin is that some folks at St Nicholas Cathedral, to include the Choir Director and former Church Council Vice-President (the Kalvesmakis), are some of the most vocal members of Team +Jonah. Also, the approach of Team +Jonah has been a scorched earth type policy, where all obstacles are overcome with vigor, to include character assassination, schismatic appeals, and utter disdain for the Holy Synod.

Regarding Metropolitan Jonah's status, he has resigned as Metropolitan of the OCA and Archbishop of Washington, and asked for another hierarchical assignment. He is in effect in hierarchical no-man's land, in that he is not an active diocesan bishop, nor an auxiliary--the closest that his status resembles is that of a "retired" bishop. In other words, he cannot be at Parma, except as an observer, and he cannot participate in the deliberations of the Holy Synod, except as an invited guest. I remain open to correction on this, of course, as I am in anything that I post. However, one of the current main points of Team +Jonah is that he had resigned only as  the Metropolitan of the OCA and not as Archbishop of Washington. I think that this is a ridiculous claim because of (a) the two positions are conjoined and (b) he did after all asked for another assignment. In any case, this is how it goes in our current maelstrom that is caused by one hierarch.

[Basil 320]

Oh my, transcripts of Bishop Matthias' text messages to the 22 year old young lady who made the sexual harassment allegations are posted on Monomakhos.

[podkarpatska]

Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation.  

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

Some additional developments.

Some of the folks at Monomakhos have been talking about schism.

Monomakhos has posted a request for support (signatures) for a letter to the OCA Holy Synod, the Assembly of Bishops and the autocephalous churches asking for an independent third party investigation of the circumstances that led up to +Jonah's resignation.

There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so.

The action by Bishop Alexander did take place. Although unfortunate IMO, the other side of the coin is that some folks at St Nicholas Cathedral, to include the Choir Director and former Church Council Vice-President (the Kalvesmakis), are some of the most vocal members of Team +Jonah. Also, the approach of Team +Jonah has been a scorched earth type policy, where all obstacles are overcome with vigor, to include character assassination, schismatic appeals, and utter disdain for the Holy Synod.

Regarding Metropolitan Jonah's status, he has resigned as Metropolitan of the OCA and Archbishop of Washington, and asked for another hierarchical assignment. He is in effect in hierarchical no-man's land, in that he is not an active diocesan bishop, nor an auxiliary--the closest that his status resembles is that of a "retired" bishop. In other words, he cannot be at Parma, except as an observer, and he cannot participate in the deliberations of the Holy Synod, except as an invited guest. I remain open to correction on this, of course, as I am in anything that I post. However, one of the current main points of Team +Jonah is that he had resigned only as  the Metropolitan of the OCA and not as Archbishop of Washington. I think that this is a ridiculous claim because of (a) the two positions are conjoined and (b) he did after all asked for another assignment. In any case, this is how it goes in our current maelstrom that is caused by one hierarch.

I have many thoughts on this matter and while I am not a member of the OCA, my family and my diocese, the ACROD,  have been intertwined with the OCA and its predecessor, the Metropolia for most of the past century. I have not wanted to say much of anything on this subject over the past month or so as I believe that the hierarchy, clergy and faithful of the OCA have to sort this out as a family - sometimes at odds, sometimes disfunctional but always as a family. However, in the past few days it seems as if the old time strategy of circling the wagons and surrounding them with armed soldiers ready to fire at once towards the middle is about to rear its ugly head once again. Hence, a few thoughts.

I will start off by stating once again that both Bishop Michael of New York and Bishop Mathias have been and remain personal friends. However, I have no personal sources or information about what is going on other than what has been reported on various websites. Frankly I truly fear that the scorched earth tactics of the faction which seeks the restoration of the former Metropolitan can end in no way other than division, schism and failure. Not too many of you online are old enough, or frankly have been Orthodox long enough to remember when we had no unity of communion in the world of North American Orthodoxy. While it would vary from region to region one year the Greeks would boycott the Metropolia, the next year the Metropolia would boycott the Greeks, almost everyone would ignore the Antiochians amd the Serbians, absolutely everyone would boycott the Ukrainians and the rest of us were on the margins - sometimes invited in, sometimes not so much. This was the status quo of American Orthodoxy through the end of the 1970's and even into the 1980's. A restoration may cause a return to the 'bad old days' and set back any realistic hope of administrative unity beyond our lifetimes.

Notwithstanding the long simmering old world issues surrounding Constantinople and Moscow, we in the Americas were fortunate during the 1970's and 1980's to have strong Bishops like +Iakovos of thrice blessed memory, +Philip of a strong persuasive personality and others and strong and opinionated clergy like Frs. Harakas at Holy Cross and Hopko at St. Vladimirs just to name a few. These men essentially were able to look beyond the Byzantine politics of the old world and move to at least a form of communal unity among the jurisdictions of the Standing Conference. Since then there has been a period of ups and downs in most of our jurisdictions - new hierarchs coming and going, strains between long term members and converts - often possessed of an abundance of zeal which is not always appreciated or understood by the rest of us and so on. But as the work of the EA has shown, progress is being made and much has been accomplished.

I will just say what I have told a few of you in PM's what I fear will happen should the OCA Synod fall and +Jonah be restored. Some of you will dismiss my thoughts as needlessly provocative and pessimistic. Perhaps, but our Orthodox history on this continent leads me to fear for the worst.

1. Much, if not most,  of the Orthodox world would view a restoration of +Jonah which was either forced upon or not endorsed by the current Holy Synod as illegitimate and would deem what would remain of the current OCA after such an event as either non-canonical or un-canonical - if not vagrante.

2. Moscow will be coy and play their hand when it suits them - probably cutting a 'deal' with the remaining pro-Russian elements in the OCA, Rocor and the MP parishes.....

3. Inter-Orthodox relations on this continent will be set back to the worst of times in the Metropolia's history.

4. Many current OCA hierarchs, clergy and parishes will try to flee to a safer harbor, however they will be restrained by threats of  litigation - ironic as so many former Anglicans who lost their property abide with +Jonah....

5. What may remain could  be essentially a Protestant oriented, Congregationalist body dressed in eastern robes and run by poseurs.

6. The stupid issue of property rights, which we have tried to move beyond over the past seventy years or so throughout  the old Metropolia and ACROD and the UOC-USA will be reinvigorated on the parish level.

6.  The only winners will be the devil and his minions.

This is a horrible mess and one that seems to be unfolding in all of worst manners possible. It seems to me that if Metropolitan Jonah were sincere in his original letter of resignation that he would publicly disavow the restorationists. To date, this seems not to have happened.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Oh my, transcripts of Bishop Matthias' text messages to the 22 year old young lady who made the sexual harassment allegations are posted on Monomakhos.

So, Bishop Matthias now faces the jury of everybody, instead of his fellow bishops, and before the investigation into the allegation is complete. After this came out, +Matthias did say that he was innocent of sexual harassment. After reading the published documents, I agree with him.  I see the publication of the correspondence as a vengeful response by Team +Jonah to Bishop Matthias' publication of the explanation for +Jonah's resignation. This is just the sort of scorched earth tactics that Team +Jonah has pursued. It is past time that +Jonah put a stop to this kind of foolishness.

[Orual]

Some additional developments.

Some of the folks at Monomakhos have been talking about schism.

There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so.

The action by Bishop Alexander did take place. Although unfortunate IMO, the other side of the coin is that some folks at St Nicholas Cathedral, to include the Choir Director and former Church Council Vice-President (the Kalvesmakis), are some of the most vocal members of Team +Jonah. Also, the approach of Team +Jonah has been a scorched earth type policy, where all obstacles are overcome with vigor, to include character assassination, schismatic appeals, and utter disdain for the Holy Synod.

I invite you to produce evidence of these accusations: 

1) That Monomakhos commenters are advocating or collectively appealing for schism.

2) That Metropolitan Jonah is encouraging others to work to get himself reinstated.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Some additional developments.

Some of the folks at Monomakhos have been talking about schism.

There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so.

The action by Bishop Alexander did take place. Although unfortunate IMO, the other side of the coin is that some folks at St Nicholas Cathedral, to include the Choir Director and former Church Council Vice-President (the Kalvesmakis), are some of the most vocal members of Team +Jonah. Also, the approach of Team +Jonah has been a scorched earth type policy, where all obstacles are overcome with vigor, to include character assassination, schismatic appeals, and utter disdain for the Holy Synod.

I invite you to produce evidence of these accusations: 

1) That Monomakhos commenters are advocating or collectively appealing for schism.

2) That Metropolitan Jonah is encouraging others to work to get himself reinstated.

I will answer the second question first. I have two such indications. The first was a posting on Monomkahos (I will try to find it for you as I go there to get evidence for the first question). The second came from an unimpeachable source whom I cannot reveal. This person and I go back a long ways and he told me in confidence.

I will come back and answer the first question.

[Schultz]

Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation.  

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

The Holy Synod was scheduled to meet at the Chancery today, no report as yet on the OCA web site.  Topics to be addressed would be the matter of the investigation of the sexual harassment allegation against Bishop Matthias of Chicago, and an assignment for Metropolitan Jonah, in response to his request included in his letter of resignation, whose remuneration was scheduled to end at this time.  Last week, Bishop Michael was reported to have said  Bishop Matthias would be exonerated.

who is Bishop Michael of Baltimore?

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Some additional developments.

Some of the folks at Monomakhos have been talking about schism.

There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so.

The action by Bishop Alexander did take place. Although unfortunate IMO, the other side of the coin is that some folks at St Nicholas Cathedral, to include the Choir Director and former Church Council Vice-President (the Kalvesmakis), are some of the most vocal members of Team +Jonah. Also, the approach of Team +Jonah has been a scorched earth type policy, where all obstacles are overcome with vigor, to include character assassination, schismatic appeals, and utter disdain for the Holy Synod.

I invite you to produce evidence of these accusations:  

1) That Monomakhos commenters are advocating or collectively appealing for schism.

2) That Metropolitan Jonah is encouraging others to work to get himself reinstated.

I will answer the second question first. I have two such indications. The first was a posting on Monomkahos (I will try to find it for you as I go there to get evidence for the first question). The second came from an unimpeachable source whom I cannot reveal. This person and I go back a long ways and he told me in confidence.

I will come back and answer the first question.

To follow up, I went back to the first essay that coincided with the resignation of Metropolitan Jonah. The attention of Monomakhos had been on the upcoming Diocesan Special Assembly and the decision of by Archbishop Nikon to cancel the nomination for the new DOS bishop. It quickly shifted to the resignation.

From the thread “Ineptocracy” posted on July 7, 2012 394 Comments

Introduction by Carl Kraeff: Some of the earliest commenst are cited. This is the appetizer course. For the other courses, please read for yourself. Note: Aside from George Michalopulos, and Bishop Tikhon (Fotzgerald), ProPravoslavnie, Helga and Nikos are regulars.

ProPravoslavie says July 7, 2012 at 11:00 am: Time to prepare to go under Moscow

Geo Michalopulos says  July 7, 2012 at 12:06 pm: Hard to say. My feeling is that Traditionalists will go to the nearest ROCOR parish. If there’s no ROCOR parish nearby, a mission can be set up. The word on the street is that His Holiness Kirill is using ROCOR to get around the fact that the MP/American parishes are restricted in number. I do know for a fact that ROCOR now has a Western Rite Vicariate that has actually outrgown Antioch’s in number of parishes (or so I was told).

fatherpep@gmail.com says July 7, 2012 at 7:32 pm: The situation regarding OCA parishes leaving for another jurisdiction could be different than that experienced by conservative Episcopalians. The Episcopalians had money for lawyers, court costs and other expenses of litigation. If a large number of OCA parishes decided to leave for another jurisdiction simultaneously, it may not be possible for the headquarters to litigate the status of parish property. Also, if Moscow were to somehow determine that autocephaly was improvidently granted and act to revoke it, and assert jurisdiction over the “rebel” churches, it is possible that civil courts would decline to interfere in what would be viewed as an internal church dispute, not subject to resolution in courts. Or, as was noted above, the central OCA administration could find itself in temporary possession of many buildings, stripped of sacred vessels, removable icons, metric books and whatever else was not nailed down. And, with no clergy, congregants, or services, would the structure still qualify as a “church”, exempt from property taxes?.

StephenD says July 7, 2012 at 6:13 pm: It is being said here too and overtures are beng made to ROCOR…The delegation from here may not go ..

Helga says July 7, 2012 at 4:43 pm: Mamie, CB, George, I would suggest that there is a very important reason for DOS clergy and lay delegates to attend the forthcoming assembly: to introduce a motion of no confidence in Archbishop Nikon’s leadership. That would empower Metropolitan Jonah – who has the right, though the Synod has assumed this authority on occasion – to remove Archbishop Nikon as locum tenens.

•   IRT Bishop Tikhon (Fitzgerald) says July 7, 2012 at 5:13 pm: Helga, you are assuming that Metropolitan Jonah has not signed a letter of resignation

•   George Michalopulos says July 7, 2012 at 5:25 pm: Your Grace, if he did that, then there would be nothing left to discuss. Whatever moral authority the OCA had would be over and done with. At this rate, I’d just be happy for HH Kirill to derecognize our autocephaly.

•   IRT Helga says July 7, 2012 at 5:50 pm: Just as happy? I would be actively petitioning for it. Let’s bring Met. Jonah, the Diocese of the South, and everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

•   IRT Nikos says July 8, 2012 at 11:38 am: The “resignation” of +Jonah is not just from the office of Primate of the OCA, but from the active episcopacy. You don’t think that this gang of hoodlums would relieve +Jonah from one job so they can put him in Dallas. That is not going to happen. This so called holy synod has finally got their man. The OCA is a joke.  It may be up to the DOS to draw a line in the sand and tell the synod enough is enough. And let them try and besmirch +Jonah’s name in public and in writing saying he is crazy, mentally ill. The dysfunction within the OCA synod is now fully exposed for all the world to see…

•   IRT Helga says July 8, 2012 at 1:45 pm: Nikos, you’re still speaking as if the OCA Synod would still be legitimate if they forced Met. Jonah to resign. That would not be the case.

•   IRT Nikos says July 8, 2012 at 3:01 pm: Helga, I think that clergy and laity are catching on. The synod is now scrambling to make sure that every diocesan bishop is in contact with their respective chancellors to explain the synod’s action against +Jonah. Message control is in full swing and +Nikon is hoping that the DOS will go quietly and meekly into the night…I have already heard talk of parishes wanting to leave the OCA. Well, that isn’t easy if you own your own property. The OCA can lay claim to it, but if a community is in rented facilities, there is no attachment of the OCA to that rented property. So it is possible under those circumstances that a priest and community could seek canonical protection under another jurisdiction. Let’s pray it never comes to that, but boy this synod is sure giving people more reasons everyday to question if the OCA is legit anymore.

[Seraphim98]

Just speaking for myself.

1. I would welcome the restoration of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah to the primacy of the OCA. He has always had my axios.

2. Short of that I would welcome his presentation to the Diocese of the South as our Bishop.

3. I do not see Metropolitan Jonah's original election to the primacy as a mistake. A surprise, but not a mistake. Providence, but not a mistake.

4. I do not see the Monomakos crowd, so called, advocating either scorched earth or schism…rather I see a call for justice and accountability…sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

5. I find the actions of the Holy Synod and the Metropolitan Council in this matter difficult to understand and reconcile with what I was taught about the Orthodox faith, it's canons, it's standards for leadership and pastoral care. Granted there is a great deal in this world that I don't know and maybe the cure for my ignorance may be found somewhere therein.

6. I agree if Metropolitan Jonah is reelected there will be yet more troubles within the OCA, esp. with respect to the Holy Synod. I do not believe this would cause so much trouble outside with other jurisdictions, and indeed I suspect it may serve to help thaw some of the chilliness that has over frosted relations between the OCA and the MP who (I have been given to understand) did not like the way things were handled at all and still insists on referring to Metropolitan Jonah as His Beatitude and not His Eminence as Syosset apparently prefers. It would likely mean the anticipated resignation of most if not all of the sitting Holy Synod. That doesn't mean Metropolitan Jonah should accept them all, though perhaps he may feel inclined to accept one or two…maybe three.  That of course would be hard on the OCA as new bishops would have to be found and the OCA is in short supply of qualified and willing men.

7. If Metropolitan Jonah is not reelected or short of that given the Diocese of the South, it is in that context I would think the the survival of the OCA would be most jeopardized. If one of these two things doesn't happen at Parma, it is then I would suspect clergy and parishes would most feel the need to find safe harbor with the MP or elsewhere. If he is not reelected as Metropolitan but given to the Diocese of the South, there will still be choppy waters….and a lot of healing to do…but from that vantage point it seems doable, with the OCA able to survive, and maybe even prosper and grow again.  And I do not regard people talking now about a possible future need for safe harbor elsewhere to be reasonably construable as an advocacy of schism…just trying to figure out in advance what to do if the ship insists on sinking.

8. If Metropolitan Jonah is not reelected Metropolitan and not returned to the Diocese of the South but is given another Diocese instead then how things will go is harder to figure out. If Fr. Gerasim or someone like him then ends up on the throne of the DoS then Metropolitan Jonah will not have to stand alone on the synod as it is currently constituted and that in itself would be cause for hope of healing and a return to growth and vigor. If someone antithetical to the likes of Fr. Gerasim or Metropolitan Jonah is given the throne of the DoS…especially if they are of a sort antithetical to the labors and vision of the late Archbishop Dimitri which he implanted within his flock…then things in the OCA may go from bad to worse until either God intervenes or there is no more OCA.  

9. Then again, so long as the bishop elected does not fall into nor preach open heresy…everything may not fall apart in the OCA. It may trudge on…but it will be at least another 15 to 20 years before it will recover from the aftermath of the test it currently faces…until there is a new generation of priests and bishops who may it please God to be holy, devout and wise in the exercise of their office and ministry. The only way I see to the end of the current troubles once and for all is to restore Metropolitan Jonah to the primacy of the OCA's Holy Synod.  

10. I have no idea what to think about Metropolitan Jonah's silence in all this, though I do not think it to be without what he considers good reason, and though I do suspect he was lead to believe the whole synod had asked for his resignation when it was not, which explains his initial resignation. I do not know if he should recant his resignation, show up at Parma and be vested in the midst of the people and priests and see who stands with him, or just wait quietly to see what happens. Personally, in this situation, his silence has served him well…it certainly speaks volumes about his character and humility and his trust in God not man….and vindicates for me any support at Parma to restore him to the Primacy if he is willing.

As far as I am concerned his initial election was the mercy and grace of the Holy Spirit on the OCA. I look upon the rejection of Metropolitan Jonah's leadership for no canonical cause as an effective rejection of the providence of God. Had he fallen into heresy,  serious moral scandal, fiscal malfeasance…I could see it and accept it as a blown opportunity. But his resignation was not demanded for any of those reasons…and what reasons were provided proved to be damp tissue that fell apart the moment it was touched.

Yes, in his resignation letter he said he didn't have the temperament to be first primate of the Holy Synod…but in my book his letter is open to more than a surface reading.

At Parma, I think the Holy Synod has an opportunity to restore peace to Christ's Church. I hope they take it.  We will know by how that decision is received in Christ's body, whatever that decision may be. The right one, even if it is not popular will restore peace, and the wrong one even if it is popular will keep things stirred up until a Holy Synod is constituted who will do what is right…whatever that right may prove to be.

If what they did with respect to Metropolitan Jonah was right, God will vindicate them. If God does not vindicate them, and if they do not make corrections, then we may live to witness the final years of the OCA.

[PeterTheAleut]

Just speaking for myself.

1. I would welcome the restoration of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah to the primacy of the OCA. He has always had my axios.

2. Short of that I would welcome his presentation to the Diocese of the South as our Bishop.

3. I do not see Metropolitan Jonah's original election to the primacy as a mistake. A surprise, but not a mistake. Providence, but not a mistake.

4. I do not see the Monomakos crowd, so called, advocating either scorched earth or schism…rather I see a call for justice and accountability…sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

5. I find the actions of the Holy Synod and the Metropolitan Council in this matter difficult to understand and reconcile with what I was taught about the Orthodox faith, it's canons, it's standards for leadership and pastoral care. Granted there is a great deal in this world that I don't know and maybe the cure for my ignorance may be found somewhere therein.

6. I agree if Metropolitan Jonah is reelected there will be yet more troubles within the OCA, esp. with respect to the Holy Synod. I do not believe this would cause so much trouble outside with other jurisdictions, and indeed I suspect it may serve to help thaw some of the chilliness that has over frosted relations between the OCA and the MP who (I have been given to understand) did not like the way things were handled at all and still insists on referring to Metropolitan Jonah as His Beatitude and not His Eminence as Syosset apparently prefers. It would likely mean the anticipated resignation of most if not all of the sitting Holy Synod. That doesn't mean Metropolitan Jonah should accept them all, though perhaps he may feel inclined to accept one or two…maybe three.  That of course would be hard on the OCA as new bishops would have to be found and the OCA is in short supply of qualified and willing men.

7. If Metropolitan Jonah is not reelected or short of that given the Diocese of the South, it is in that context I would think the the survival of the OCA would be most jeopardized. If one of these two things doesn't happen at Parma, it is then I would suspect clergy and parishes would most feel the need to find safe harbor with the MP or elsewhere. If he is not reelected as Metropolitan but given to the Diocese of the South, there will still be choppy waters….and a lot of healing to do…but from that vantage point it seems doable, with the OCA able to survive, and maybe even prosper and grow again.  And I do not regard people talking now about a possible future need for safe harbor elsewhere to be reasonably construable as an advocacy of schism…just trying to figure out in advance what to do if the ship insists on sinking.

8. If Metropolitan Jonah is not reelected Metropolitan and not returned to the Diocese of the South but is given another Diocese instead then how things will go is harder to figure out. If Fr. Gerasim or someone like him then ends up on the throne of the DoS then Metropolitan Jonah will not have to stand alone on the synod as it is currently constituted and that in itself would be cause for hope of healing and a return to growth and vigor. If someone antithetical to the likes of Fr. Gerasim or Metropolitan Jonah is given the throne of the DoS…especially if they are of a sort antithetical to the labors and vision of the late Archbishop Dimitri which he implanted within his flock…then things in the OCA may go from bad to worse until either God intervenes or there is no more OCA.  

9. Then again, so long as the bishop elected does not fall into nor preach open heresy…everything may not fall apart in the OCA. It may trudge on…but it will be at least another 15 to 20 years before it will recover from the aftermath of the test it currently faces…until there is a new generation of priests and bishops who may it please God to be holy, devout and wise in the exercise of their office and ministry. The only way I see to the end of the current troubles once and for all is to restore Metropolitan Jonah to the primacy of the OCA's Holy Synod.  

10. I have no idea what to think about Metropolitan Jonah's silence in all this, though I do not think it to be without what he considers good reason, and though I do suspect he was lead to believe the whole synod had asked for his resignation when it was not, which explains his initial resignation. I do not know if he should recant his resignation, show up at Parma and be vested in the midst of the people and priests and see who stands with him, or just wait quietly to see what happens. Personally, in this situation, his silence has served him well…it certainly speaks volumes about his character and humility and his trust in God not man….and vindicates for me any support at Parma to restore him to the Primacy if he is willing.

As far as I am concerned his initial election was the mercy and grace of the Holy Spirit on the OCA. I look upon the rejection of Metropolitan Jonah's leadership for no canonical cause as an effective rejection of the providence of God. Had he fallen into heresy,  serious moral scandal, fiscal malfeasance…I could see it and accept it as a blown opportunity. But his resignation was not demanded for any of those reasons…and what reasons were provided proved to be damp tissue that fell apart the moment it was touched.

Yes, in his resignation letter he said he didn't have the temperament to be first primate of the Holy Synod…but in my book his letter is open to more than a surface reading.

At Parma, I think the Holy Synod has an opportunity to restore peace to Christ's Church. I hope they take it.  We will know by how that decision is received in Christ's body, whatever that decision may be. The right one, even if it is not popular will restore peace, and the wrong one even if it is popular will keep things stirred up until a Holy Synod is constituted who will do what is right…whatever that right may prove to be.

If what they did with respect to Metropolitan Jonah was right, God will vindicate them. If God does not vindicate them, and if they do not make corrections, then we may live to witness the final years of the OCA.

How much do you really know about what happened between Metropolitan Jonah and the Holy Synod?

[Orual]

Some additional developments.

Some of the folks at Monomakhos have been talking about schism.

There are indications that +Jonah himself is encouraging folks to get himself reinstated. It is not clear why he is doing so.

The action by Bishop Alexander did take place. Although unfortunate IMO, the other side of the coin is that some folks at St Nicholas Cathedral, to include the Choir Director and former Church Council Vice-President (the Kalvesmakis), are some of the most vocal members of Team +Jonah. Also, the approach of Team +Jonah has been a scorched earth type policy, where all obstacles are overcome with vigor, to include character assassination, schismatic appeals, and utter disdain for the Holy Synod.

I invite you to produce evidence of these accusations:  

1) That Monomakhos commenters are advocating or collectively appealing for schism.

2) That Metropolitan Jonah is encouraging others to work to get himself reinstated.

I will answer the second question first. I have two such indications. The first was a posting on Monomkahos (I will try to find it for you as I go there to get evidence for the first question). The second came from an unimpeachable source whom I cannot reveal. This person and I go back a long ways and he told me in confidence.

I will come back and answer the first question.

To follow up, I went back to the first essay that coincided with the resignation of Metropolitan Jonah. The attention of Monomakhos had been on the upcoming Diocesan Special Assembly and the decision of by Archbishop Nikon to cancel the nomination for the new DOS bishop. It quickly shifted to the resignation.

From the thread “Ineptocracy” posted on July 7, 2012 394 Comments

Introduction by Carl Kraeff: Some of the earliest commenst are cited. This is the appetizer course. For the other courses, please read for yourself. Note: Aside from George Michalopulos, and Bishop Tikhon (Fotzgerald), ProPravoslavnie, Helga and Nikos are regulars.

ProPravoslavie says July 7, 2012 at 11:00 am: Time to prepare to go under Moscow

Geo Michalopulos says  July 7, 2012 at 12:06 pm: Hard to say. My feeling is that Traditionalists will go to the nearest ROCOR parish. If there’s no ROCOR parish nearby, a mission can be set up. The word on the street is that His Holiness Kirill is using ROCOR to get around the fact that the MP/American parishes are restricted in number. I do know for a fact that ROCOR now has a Western Rite Vicariate that has actually outrgown Antioch’s in number of parishes (or so I was told).

fatherpep@gmail.com says July 7, 2012 at 7:32 pm: The situation regarding OCA parishes leaving for another jurisdiction could be different than that experienced by conservative Episcopalians. The Episcopalians had money for lawyers, court costs and other expenses of litigation. If a large number of OCA parishes decided to leave for another jurisdiction simultaneously, it may not be possible for the headquarters to litigate the status of parish property. Also, if Moscow were to somehow determine that autocephaly was improvidently granted and act to revoke it, and assert jurisdiction over the “rebel” churches, it is possible that civil courts would decline to interfere in what would be viewed as an internal church dispute, not subject to resolution in courts. Or, as was noted above, the central OCA administration could find itself in temporary possession of many buildings, stripped of sacred vessels, removable icons, metric books and whatever else was not nailed down. And, with no clergy, congregants, or services, would the structure still qualify as a “church”, exempt from property taxes?.

StephenD says July 7, 2012 at 6:13 pm: It is being said here too and overtures are beng made to ROCOR…The delegation from here may not go ..

Helga says July 7, 2012 at 4:43 pm: Mamie, CB, George, I would suggest that there is a very important reason for DOS clergy and lay delegates to attend the forthcoming assembly: to introduce a motion of no confidence in Archbishop Nikon’s leadership. That would empower Metropolitan Jonah – who has the right, though the Synod has assumed this authority on occasion – to remove Archbishop Nikon as locum tenens.

•   IRT Bishop Tikhon (Fitzgerald) says July 7, 2012 at 5:13 pm: Helga, you are assuming that Metropolitan Jonah has not signed a letter of resignation

•   George Michalopulos says July 7, 2012 at 5:25 pm: Your Grace, if he did that, then there would be nothing left to discuss. Whatever moral authority the OCA had would be over and done with. At this rate, I’d just be happy for HH Kirill to derecognize our autocephaly.

•   IRT Helga says July 7, 2012 at 5:50 pm: Just as happy? I would be actively petitioning for it. Let’s bring Met. Jonah, the Diocese of the South, and everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

•   IRT Nikos says July 8, 2012 at 11:38 am: The “resignation” of +Jonah is not just from the office of Primate of the OCA, but from the active episcopacy. You don’t think that this gang of hoodlums would relieve +Jonah from one job so they can put him in Dallas. That is not going to happen. This so called holy synod has finally got their man. The OCA is a joke.  It may be up to the DOS to draw a line in the sand and tell the synod enough is enough. And let them try and besmirch +Jonah’s name in public and in writing saying he is crazy, mentally ill. The dysfunction within the OCA synod is now fully exposed for all the world to see…

•   IRT Helga says July 8, 2012 at 1:45 pm: Nikos, you’re still speaking as if the OCA Synod would still be legitimate if they forced Met. Jonah to resign. That would not be the case.

•   IRT Nikos says July 8, 2012 at 3:01 pm: Helga, I think that clergy and laity are catching on. The synod is now scrambling to make sure that every diocesan bishop is in contact with their respective chancellors to explain the synod’s action against +Jonah. Message control is in full swing and +Nikon is hoping that the DOS will go quietly and meekly into the night…I have already heard talk of parishes wanting to leave the OCA. Well, that isn’t easy if you own your own property. The OCA can lay claim to it, but if a community is in rented facilities, there is no attachment of the OCA to that rented property. So it is possible under those circumstances that a priest and community could seek canonical protection under another jurisdiction. Let’s pray it never comes to that, but boy this synod is sure giving people more reasons everyday to question if the OCA is legit anymore.

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

[Seraphim98]

How much do you really know about what happened between Metropolitan Jonah and the Holy Synod?

Personally, not a great deal.

I've read various sermons/articles by Metropolitan Jonah, and was there at his consecration. I know the confidence Archbishop Dimitri had in him.  

I have seen various of the public responses/reports of the Holy Synod with respect to Metropolitan Jonah.

I have taken cues both from what I've read, from those whom I know who have at times been closer to things than myself.

I know how what has been done has affected the mood and opinion of those in my parish. Some have no particular opinion. Some do, and of those who do…which is substantial, all of them think very highly of Metropolitan Jonah, liked him as our Metropolitan, and wishes if he is to no longer be Metropolitan that he be returned to us in the DoS.

I know the Holy Synod and Metropolitan Jonah have had difficulties working together, and it seems that the administrative structures at Syossett get along even less well.

I know the Holy Synod published untrue allegations concerning Metropolitan Jonah that are at the very least cruelly defamatory. Which reasons they gave for asking for his resignation. If they were mislead, they've not made apology.

I know that they hold Metropolitan Jonah and his family in a kind of economic limbo which strikes me as very uncharitable, even unChristian.

I know that they have refused so far to grant him canonical release to another jurisdiction if any wanted him…which makes no sense at all.

I know that they refuse to let him serve or commune in any OCA parish but for one, though he has done nothing wrong.

I know that if they have other reasons than the ones they presented which were proven to be false…even actively disavowed by the very woman who was supposedly raped or nearly raped…….they have yet to make them known.

I know they are actively censoring voices of those who question the wisdom of what they have done and/or who question the truthfulness and accuracy of their pronouncements with respect to Metropolitan Jonah. That alone tells me volumes.


So…no, I don't know a lot personally. Mostly what I read and hear…and I do take care to hear both sides, those who love Metropolitan Jonah, and those who hate him, those who approve of the Holy Synod's actions and those who do not. I even read those who advise staying far away from this hot mess of a situation as possible. That said, everything I hear and read leads me to the conclusion that an innocent man, a good man, an honorable and just man (insofar as any of us my rise to claim these virtues) has been sorely mistreated by his brothers in the episcopate, and mistreated without even the courtesy of an intact fig leaf.

It has been argued by those on both sides of this situation that Metropolitan was a poor administrator…or at least a naive one at the beginning. He himself admitting to having limited administrative skills…at least in the context of the service he found himself…in another context/synodal constitution he may have done better.  This may well be so, but it is not a sufficient reason, so far as I know, to remove an Orthodox bishop or to ask him to remove himself. That is the world's reasoning.

Everything I have learned leads me to believe he has not been treated right or honorably and I would like to see that corrected. I don't want to be silent while a good man is bullied and humiliated in public because others have the power to do so and do not refrain from doing so. If the Holy Synod and Syossett can justify what they have done, let them. I and others of their respective flocks are willing to listen. If not…then I remain of the opinion God's choice for our Metropolitan was hounded from his office for "real" reasons not make known…but regardless…unless real and substantive reasons are forthcoming I cannot in good conscience stand anywhere but with His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah. To me, this is to stand with Christ in the hour He was rejected by His own.

[PeterTheAleut]

How much do you really know about what happened between Metropolitan Jonah and the Holy Synod?

Personally, not a great deal.

I've read various sermons/articles by Metropolitan Jonah, and was there at his consecration. I know the confidence Archbishop Dimitri had in him.  

I have seen various of the public responses/reports of the Holy Synod with respect to Metropolitan Jonah.

I have taken cues both from what I've read, from those whom I know who have at times been closer to things than myself.

I know how what has been done has affected the mood and opinion of those in my parish. Some have no particular opinion. Some do, and of those who do…which is substantial, all of them think very highly of Metropolitan Jonah, liked him as our Metropolitan, and wishes if he is to no longer be Metropolitan that he be returned to us in the DoS.

I know the Holy Synod and Metropolitan Jonah have had difficulties working together, and it seems that the administrative structures at Syossett get along even less well.

I know the Holy Synod published untrue allegations concerning Metropolitan Jonah that are at the very least cruelly defamatory. Which reasons they gave for asking for his resignation. If they were mislead, they've not made apology.

I know that they hold Metropolitan Jonah and his family in a kind of economic limbo which strikes me as very uncharitable, even unChristian.

I know that they have refused so far to grant him canonical release to another jurisdiction if any wanted him…which makes no sense at all.

I know that they refuse to let him serve or commune in any OCA parish but for one, though he has done nothing wrong.

I know that if they have other reasons than the ones they presented which were proven to be false…even actively disavowed by the very woman who was supposedly raped or nearly raped…….they have yet to make them known.

I know they are actively censoring voices of those who question the wisdom of what they have done and/or who question the truthfulness and accuracy of their pronouncements with respect to Metropolitan Jonah. That alone tells me volumes.


So…no, I don't know a lot personally. Mostly what I read and hear…and I do take care to hear both sides, those who love Metropolitan Jonah, and those who hate him, those who approve of the Holy Synod's actions and those who do not. I even read those who advise staying far away from this hot mess of a situation as possible. That said, everything I hear and read leads me to the conclusion that an innocent man, a good man, an honorable and just man (insofar as any of us my rise to claim these virtues) has been sorely mistreated by his brothers in the episcopate, and mistreated without even the courtesy of an intact fig leaf.

It has been argued by those on both sides of this situation that Metropolitan was a poor administrator…or at least a naive one at the beginning. He himself admitting to having limited administrative skills…at least in the context of the service he found himself…in another context/synodal constitution he may have done better.  This may well be so, but it is not a sufficient reason, so far as I know, to remove an Orthodox bishop or to ask him to remove himself. That is the world's reasoning.

Everything I have learn leads me to believe he has not been treated right or honorably and I would like to see that corrected. I don't want to be silent while a good man is bullied and humiliated in public because others have the power to do so and do not refrain from doing so. If the Holy Synod and Syossett can justify what they have done, let them. I and others of their respective flocks are willing to listen. If not…then I remain of the opinion God's choice for our Metropolitan was hounded from his office for "real" reasons not make known…but regardless…unless real and substantive reasons are forthcoming I cannot in good conscience stand anywhere but with His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah. To me, this is to stand with Christ in the hour He was rejected by His own.

You admit you don't know much, yet you seem awfully confident in your judgment. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

[Seraphim98]

You admit you don't know much, yet you seem awfully confident in your judgment. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

It may not be, but I work with what I've been given…and what's been given really points in one direction. If those in the know wish to provide something more that puts everything in a new and better light, it would be welcome.

But how much does any of us have to know to object to the mistreatment of someone?

Besides my judgments are pretty simple and in line with the Gospel so far as I know.

a. What evil has Metropolitan Jonah done that he should be so vilified by his own brother bishops? If nothing make it right. If something make it known.

b. If they don't want him, let him go to those who do, either to the DoS or to another Jurisdiction which may want him.

c. In any case deal honorably with him in accordance with Christian Charity and the canons of the Orthodox faith.

d. If they have done right, and are sure of it, then stand firm, be at peace and let God vindicate them (no censorship of the marginally washed masses necessary). And if they have come to see they have not done right, repent and make such amends as are appropriate.

Nothing outrageous or scandalous or defamatory that I can see.

[PeterTheAleut]

You admit you don't know much, yet you seem awfully confident in your judgment. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

It may not be, but I work with what I've been given…and what's been given really points in one direction. If those in the know wish to provide something more that puts everything in a new and better light, it would be welcome.

If you haven't been given much, then you probably shouldn't work at all. I suggest that the best path is to recognize that you don't know much and therefore refuse to render judgment based on what little you think you do know. One does well to not judge, knowing everything, than judge, knowing nothing.

[Basil 320]

Some Developments:

People on "Monomakhos" are planning on voting for Metropolitan Jonah for the Primacy again; and voting to expand the 17th AAC agenda.

City of Parma Police have been asked to serve as security during the 17th AAC.

Bishop Alexander of Toledo who is the Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese of Washington, vetoed a duly elected AAC Alternate, a devout member of the St. Nicholas National Cathedral and War Memorial, who had written an essay questioning the Synod's forcing Metropolitan Jonah's resignation.  

The essay had been posted on the web site of Orthodox Christian Laity (OCL), but was recently deleted.  Archbishop Nathanial of Detroit, Locum Tenens of the OCA's Primatial Throne, is on the OCL's advisory board along with his Chancellor of the Romanian Episcopate, and is scheduled to celebrate the Hierarchal Divine Liturgy, which is planned to be held at St. Nicholas Cathedral, during the forthcoming OCL annual conference.  Bishop Michael of Baltimore is scheduled to concelebrate.

The OCA website identifies Metropolitan Jonah as "retired" apparently to keep him from being invited to the 3rd annual AOCB assembly.

The Holy Synod was scheduled to meet at the Chancery today, no report as yet on the OCA web site.  Topics to be addressed would be the matter of the investigation of the sexual harassment allegation against Bishop Matthias of Chicago, and an assignment for Metropolitan Jonah, in response to his request included in his letter of resignation, whose remuneration was scheduled to end at this time.  Last week, Bishop Michael was reported to have said  Bishop Matthias would be exonerated.

who is Bishop Michael of Baltimore?

My mistake.  I should have said Bishop Mark of Baltimore, the Metropolitan's auxiliary bishop responsible for Departments and Commissions of the OCA.  Bishop Mark was previously the Bishop of Toledo (I think) of the AOCANA, who attempted to impose a requirement for annual private auditing of parishes in his diocese and ran into conflicts with Metropolitan Phillip because he was butting heads with parish priests who were Metropolitan Phillip's buddies.  Met. Phillip was transferring him to the Northwest, whereupon, he negotiated with the OCA for transfer to it, which Met. Phillip approved.  He was initially appointed Administrator of the Diocese of the South, but ran into conflicts with many in the Diocesan Cathedral.  It was revealed that he was responsible for accessing the e-mail account of the previous Chancellor of the Diocese of the South and transmitting pertinent e-mail messages to OCANews for publication, the internet site of Orthodox Christians for Accountability.  His appointment to the Chancery is recent.

 I apologize for the error in my previous post, Reply No. 459.

[Αριστοκλής]

As I read and attempt to follow the problems of the OCA over these troubled years I do so with a real sense of sadness, and concern for Orthodoxy in America. It recalls to me too much of the old Byzantine problems - intrigue, innuendo, accusations, speculations, forced depositions/resignations -  those in the ninth century along with other periods.

[gzt]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

[podkarpatska]

As I read and attempt to follow the problems of the OCA over these troubled years I do so with a real sense of sadness, and concern for Orthodoxy in America. It recalls to me too much of the old Byzantine problems - intrigue, innuendo, accusations, speculations, forced depositions/resignations -  those in the ninth century along with other periods.

That is where I am coming from as well. Sobors full of fear, vitriol and schism are nothing new to us and typically, nothing good shall come of them. Given the historical, long-term,familial interrelationships among the BCC, ACROD and the OCA - the base of each come from the same counties, villages and parishes in Europe, our people  have had more than their share of turmoil and strife in the United States.

As to changing jurisdictions, that is not so easy for parishes or priests. People may come and go but priests and bishops must be released from a canonical bishop to the omophor of another canonical bishop. ROCOR is part of the EA and under the omophor of Moscow these days and the times when they would just take any dissident Slavic congregation or start a new parish to compete with an existing one under sanction with another canonical bishop are gone - there will be no more Clymer, PA  or Mayfield, PA situations coming out of this mess. The options are limited to the non-canonical jurisdictions and that is a difficult choice for many to make.

If one thinks that the deposition and discrediting of an entire Synod of Bishops by an unhappy group of laity (even if it is a loud and angry majority (which I do not think the restorationists actually are)) would be casually accepted by European and Mideast Synods, you know little or nothing about Church history or the political realities under which Synods and national Churches operate. Change, disruption and depostions fuel the paranoia  of those institutions and they will not simply accept the same from the OCA which is relatively insignificant from their point of view.

Pray for peace and pray that Metropolitan Jonah does the right thing under the circumstances which is to lay low, disavow his supporters and live out his career in quiet obedience to the collective will of his peers. Sorry, but that is the way it should go for a  priest or bishop - monastic or otherwise.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I would also add that it is bad enough to revolt and jump ship over dogma or praxis; it is worse when it is done over personalities. As a veteran of 26 years in the USAF and as a son of a priest, this smacks to me to be treason, cultism and the work of the Evil One. However, as an ordinary Joe, I am limited to calling this schism, which is usually defined neutrally as a division between people.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

How much do you really know about what happened between Metropolitan Jonah and the Holy Synod?

Personally, not a great deal.

...I know the confidence Archbishop Dimitri had in him.  

I know the Holy Synod published untrue allegations concerning Metropolitan Jonah that are at the very least cruelly defamatory. Which reasons they gave for asking for his resignation. If they were mislead, they've not made apology.

I know that they hold Metropolitan Jonah and his family in a kind of economic limbo which strikes me as very uncharitable, even unChristian.

I know that they have refused so far to grant him canonical release to another jurisdiction if any wanted him…which makes no sense at all.

I know that they refuse to let him serve or commune in any OCA parish but for one, though he has done nothing wrong.

I know that if they have other reasons than the ones they presented which were proven to be false…even actively disavowed by the very woman who was supposedly raped or nearly raped…….they have yet to make them known.

I know they are actively censoring voices of those who question the wisdom of what they have done and/or who question the truthfulness and accuracy of their pronouncements with respect to Metropolitan Jonah. That alone tells me volumes.

So…no, I don't know a lot personally...

I have quoted only those statements of yours where it would near impossible for a regular person to know. I think that you must be a highly placed priest, influential lay person or Metroplitan Jonah himself to have this much intimate and detailed knowledge, and hold such  catergorical opinions based on the published record. You know Seraphim, your writing is quite irenic and you write exceedingly well. Its is also possible for a person to think that the Holy Synod's action was not based on a particular canon or that any acton against +Jonah should have been through a spiritual court. I do not think that the published record would support the statements that I quoted. Which leads me to suspect that you protest too much when you claim not to know much. What is the term for one who comes to the herd as a meek and mild sheep?

[gzt]

OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.

[podkarpatska]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I would also add that it is bad enough to revolt and jump ship over dogma or praxis; it is worse when it is done over personalities. As a veteran of 26 years in the USAF and as a son of a priest, this smacks to me to be treason, cultism and the work of the Evil One. However, as an ordinary Joe, I am limited to calling this schism, which is usually defined neutrally as a division between people.

As one with over thirty years of bureaucratic governement administrative experience and as a son, brother and nephew of  priests, I agree with Carl. Folks need to step back, take a deep breath and pray for unity.

[podkarpatska]

OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.

Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.

[gzt]

OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.

Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.

Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.

[pensateomnia]

Oh my, transcripts of Bishop Matthias' text messages to the 22 year old young lady who made the sexual harassment allegations are posted on Monomakhos.

So, Bishop Matthias now faces the jury of everybody, instead of his fellow bishops, and before the investigation into the allegation is complete. After this came out, +Matthias did say that he was innocent of sexual harassment. After reading the published documents, I agree with him.  I see the publication of the correspondence as a vengeful response by Team +Jonah to Bishop Matthias' publication of the explanation for +Jonah's resignation. This is just the sort of scorched earth tactics that Team +Jonah has pursued. It is past time that +Jonah put a stop to this kind of foolishness.

Don't let your objections to George's publication of the documents cloud your judgment. By the standards of secular law, workplace training, seminary-level pastoral care classes, and our own Orthodox canonical tradition, the behavior was, in fact, sexual harassment.

According to these standards, it doesn't really matter how one's behavior was "intended"; it matters how it was *perceived* by the person on the receiving end. Managers, clergy, and other people in authority know this. It's Sexual Harassment 101. It is a clergyman's responsibility to consider how his actions might be perceived and to go out of his way to make sure that his words and actions don't have even the *appearance* of impropriety.

The canons are just as rigorous: Many things are forbidden, and clergymen laicized for them, not because they are inherently wrong or because the offender intended wrong, but because they cause a scandal. Perception matters.

[podkarpatska]

OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.

Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.

Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.

Those who follow postings here, know that I am something of an 'insider' in some ways as to Church comings and goings, I may be old fashioned, but when I opine here without any foundational background, I usually say so as I did in reply 460 above: "I will start off by stating once again that both Bishop Michael of New York and Bishop Mathias have been and remain personal friends. However, I have no personal sources or information about what is going on other than what has been reported on various websites"

I think that is a good practice, particularly on a controversial subject like this one. As the tired maxim goes, we are all entitled to our personal opinions, but not our own unique set of facts.

[Orual]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.

Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.

Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.

I agree with you that it may be possible that Seraphim was using the word "know" incorrectly. If that is the case, I will apologize to him profusely for my insinuations, but not for taking his words at their face value.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Oh my, transcripts of Bishop Matthias' text messages to the 22 year old young lady who made the sexual harassment allegations are posted on Monomakhos.

So, Bishop Matthias now faces the jury of everybody, instead of his fellow bishops, and before the investigation into the allegation is complete. After this came out, +Matthias did say that he was innocent of sexual harassment. After reading the published documents, I agree with him.  I see the publication of the correspondence as a vengeful response by Team +Jonah to Bishop Matthias' publication of the explanation for +Jonah's resignation. This is just the sort of scorched earth tactics that Team +Jonah has pursued. It is past time that +Jonah put a stop to this kind of foolishness.

Don't let your objections to George's publication of the documents cloud your judgment. By the standards of secular law, workplace training, seminary-level pastoral care classes, and our own Orthodox canonical tradition, the behavior was, in fact, sexual harassment.

According to these standards, it doesn't really matter how one's behavior was "intended"; it matters how it was *perceived* by the person on the receiving end. Managers, clergy, and other people in authority know this. It's Sexual Harassment 101. It is a clergyman's responsibility to consider how his actions might be perceived and to go out of his way to make sure that his words and actions don't have even the *appearance* of impropriety.

The canons are just as rigorous: Many things are forbidden, and clergymen laicized for them, not because they are inherently wrong or because the offender intended wrong, but because they cause a scandal. Perception matters.

Right. And, that is the reason why we have bishops and a Holy Synod. The woman made a charge, as was her right. The Holy Synod and Bishop Matthias did the right thing at this point in accordance with OCA policy. The scandal was deepened, however, by the publication of these letters which made all readers into de facto investigators, jury members and judges, whether they wanted to or not. In publishing the correspondence, George became a scandalizer himself. The stated reason why George did so is also another scandal in itself--to quote him:

"Why are we publishing them? One reason. The letter that was released by the Synod of Bishops to justify their removal of Met. Jonah was full of innuendo and errors of fact. They have yet to correct it and offer an apology. We do not trust them to deal responsibly with the facts.
We also believe that once Monomakhos readers are properly informed of Bp. Matthias’ misbehavior they will agree that he must be retired."

His words speak for themselves.

[gzt]

OTOH, this is considered "common knowledge" on certain forums, whether or not they really "know" it in senses typically used by epistemology.

Uh, I know this is a religious forum that tends to wax philosophical from time to time, but in real world termininology, such unsourced internet 'common knowledge' is usually referred to as gossip.

Yes, that's the best term for it. It's quite possible for somebody to uncritically consider political information sourced in that way as "knowledge" whether or not they have any possible way of checking whether it is strictly veridical, and that would be the first assumption I have about Seraphim98, rather than that he is actually politically connected. But, you know, the world is very small, so he could very well be so.

I agree with you that it may be possible that Seraphim was using the word "know" incorrectly. If that is the case, I will apologize to him profusely for my insinuations, but not for taking his words at their face value.

Not so much that he's misusing it, but that he's mistaken (or failing to think critically) if he thinks he actually knows it.

[Orual]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.

I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.

FOLLOW UP: I still need more time to find that particular indication that I had read on Monomakhos. In the meantime, I offer you +Jonah's Facebook page, where he shared the link to the OCA Investigation Petition Letter. Admittedly this is not a strong indicator but usually people do not share pages that they dislike.

http://www.facebook.com/metropolitanjonah

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.

I think you should have had this prepared before making those allegations.  I am not impressed with what you have given so far.

Then again, you apparently come from a place where a bishop who sends a girl text messages about having a crush on her and wanting to stay at her apartment alone, and tells her to keep it a secret, is not sexually harassing her.

I am just heartbroken that I have unable to quickly and thoroughly impress you. Tell you what: I am done with you. I am suspending my search of Monomakhos for the second indication of +Jonah's involvement in this. The reason is simple: I did not expect, nor appreciate, that sucker punch you just threw at me; I had not brought in the +Matthias matter into our conversation, had I?

[podkarpatska]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.

FOLLOW UP: I still need more time to find that particular indication that I had read on Monomakhos. In the meantime, I offer you +Jonah's Facebook page, where he shared the link to the OCA Investigation Petition Letter. Admittedly this is not a strong indicator but usually people do not share pages that they dislike.

http://www.facebook.com/metropolitanjonah

Fair's fair...this is not the Metropolitan's page unless he is being personally 'disingenuous'.There is a disclaimer on it:  "*Unofficial fanpage* Founding Abbot of St John of San Francisco Monastery, California, 1996-2008; Metropolitan of All-America and Canada, 2008-present. Official OCA fanpage: facebook.com/orthodoxchurchinamerica *His Beatitude does not check this fanpage*"

[Benjamin the Red]

Is it now schismatic to switch jurisdictions?  That just says some of them want to go under Moscow.  Whoopdedoo.

This is only one person, but the sentiment expressed here is not just "switching jurisdictions":

...everyone else who wants to come along under Moscow, and declare the remainder vagante and break communion with them.

I looked back at the original thread.  It looks to me like that comment was made in response to George's statement that Moscow would "de-recognize" the OCA's autocephaly, and this poster's contention that he/she wanted that to happen.  

I don't really know how "de-recognizing" an autocephaly would happen.  It's about as likely as everyone involved waking up one morning and reconciling while singing "Good Morning Starshine" in unison.  

However, if somehow nobody recognized the OCA as an autocephalous church anymore, the remains of the OCA would be non-canonical if they didn't go under another church, like Moscow.  So while that would be schism, it would not be those who remain with the canonical church who would be the schismatics, but the putative independents.

One more thing:  I am still interested in hearing how Metropolitan Jonah is behind all this.

Folks can switch jurisdictions and do, but often it is because they end up in a new location where they have no other choice but attend the available parish. Let me give myself as an example: when I was in the USAF, I moved around a lot and thus ended up attending GOA and AOIA churches at times, even though I started in the Bulgarian Church overseas and ended up in the Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA in the United States. I have also witnessed individuals switch parishes in a locality because of personal issues. I am not talking about these examples as examples of schism. I am talking about a concerted movement based on a common theme that transcends individuals. The Old Believers schism was caused for such a reason, the old/new calendar dispute caused schisms, dogmatic disputes caused the EO-OO schism, as did the EO-RC schism. In this instance, the situation is quite different than individual happenstances.

To fully respond to your question on +Jonah's involvement in all this, I am still rereading the copious comments on Monomakhos.

Regarding the indications of schism, I just showed you how it started, but it got worse over time. I will select the low-hanging fruit and present them to you in a platter, but you must give me time--let's say a week.

FOLLOW UP: I still need more time to find that particular indication that I had read on Monomakhos. In the meantime, I offer you +Jonah's Facebook page, where he shared the link to the OCA Investigation Petition Letter. Admittedly this is not a strong indicator but usually people do not share pages that they dislike.

http://www.facebook.com/metropolitanjonah

*Unofficial fanpage* Founding Abbot of St John of San Francisco Monastery, California, 1996-2008; Metropolitan of All-America and Canada, 2008-present. Official OCA fanpage: facebook.com/orthodoxchurchinamerica *His Beatitude does not check this fanpage*