POSTED: Archpastoral Letter to Diocesan Clergy and Laity - 02/07/08
January 11, 2008
Theodosios the Great
No. 10
ARCHPASTORAL LETTER
To the Faithful Clergy, Monastics and Laity of the
Diocese of the Midwest:
My Beloved in the Lord,
GLORY TO JESUS CHRIST!
On May 31, 2007, I addressed a letter to you titled “A Sorrowful
Epistle” for the purpose of good communication, information and our ongoing
concern for accountability, regarded by many as being championed by the Diocese
of the Midwest. My friends, I could easily title this letter “A Sorrowful
Epistle”, as even my recent Nativity message to you, despite the brightness of
the Winter Pascha. But it is not my intention for this communication to be a
sermon, but rather a clarification regarding the reporting of the recent
session of the Holy Synod. As usual, some of the comments and conclusions on
the internet have been thoughtful and considerate, others inaccurate and
speculative, others amusing and naïve, others downright nasty and condemnatory.
I have stated several times that
it is unlikely that an author of fiction, even the likes of Stephen King on his
best day, could pen a story – with plots, sub-plots, colorful and shady
characters, schemes, scenarios and plot twists, all characteristic of our
on-going crisis in the Orthodox Church in America – that could be deemed
credible enough for publication. Our on-going saga is too incredible, yet it
goes on and on without any indication of an end.
The main purpose for the
specially scheduled meeting was to issue a final ruling on the appeal of the
former chancellor regarding his deposition from the priesthood. Of course,
there were other items on the agenda, including the “investigation” of the
widely-publicized alleged problems in Alaska. There was no report. Near the end
of the meeting, a stunned Holy Synod listened to canonical charges raised by
the Alaskan bishop accusing me of interfering in his diocese – obviously a most
serious accusation. When the reading of the charges concluded, which called for
a spiritual court which would lead to my deposition from Holy Orders,
Metropolitan HERMAN asked for my response. I stated, “I have nothing to say.”
It was only when questions were raised that I offered explanations in
self-defense – explanations which I share with you now.
1. In late June or early July of
last year, while driving my car I received a call on my cell phone from a
priest, an old friend, who stated that he has information of great importance
that he felt compelled to share with me as a member of the Holy Synod. In a
nutshell, the information involved allegations which, if found to be true,
could implicate the Orthodox Church in America, and the Holy Synod and
Metropolitan Council in particular, in terms of liability in accordance with
Alaskan State law. I stated that I would share the information with the Metropolitan,
who, in accordance with the Statute of the OCA, is the only hierarch who can
inquire about the life of another diocese. Since I do not possess a “legal
mind” and because I could not take notes of our conversation since I was
driving, I knew that I could not commit the information to memory. I asked the
priest to jot down the main points and any pertinent information so I could
give an accurate report to the Metropolitan. To my surprise this resulted in a
25-page document which has also, somehow, been made public.
2. I discussed this potential
problem with His Beatitude and a few other hierarchs and we all agreed that a
meeting was in order. It was set for July 24, at the Metropolitan’s residence
in South Canaan, PA. Only one hierarch that I contacted was unable to attend.
The purpose of said meeting was to discuss possible liability, not to discuss
the Bishop of Alaska, as reported. No one cautioned me that there might be a
canonical violation regarding interference into the life of another diocese. In
fact, the priest in charge of investigations, who was present for a portion of
the meeting stated that the meeting was a good idea and that we were acting
most responsibly, in accordance with guidelines established by the Holy Synod.
3. Following that meeting and the
meeting of the Holy Synod on July 31, I began getting calls from Alaska and
from persons involved with the various alleged situations and from trustees of
St. Herman’s Seminary. I wish to stress that I did not initiate even one conversation.
If I received a voice-mail message, I returned the call as a courtesy, that’s
all. People complained, they lamented, in some cases even wept. I listened,
tried to console and when asked for advice, directed them to the Metropolitan
and to the Holy Synod. I was asked in December why I didn’t contact the Bishop
of Alaska, and others have speculated about that. I think the answer is obvious
– the man, sixteen months earlier, tried to force me to resign from my position
as bishop of my diocese and from the Holy Synod. I am sure that he would not
welcome any information from me and I was not eager to speak with him.
I unequivocally deny that I
interfered in the life of the Diocese of Alaska. At the same time I state
vigorously that what has gone on and goes on in Alaska, allegedly and in
reality, is damaging to my people of the Diocese of the Midwest, and that is
certainly my concern. But I raised this concern in proper canonical order to
His Beatitude as Primate of the Church for him to address the issues. This
remains my defense.
4. Going back to the December 13th
meeting, I explained to the bishops that in my nearly 25 years of episcopal
ministry I have never, until that moment, been accused of interference in
another diocese. Our Diocese of the Midwest is large and widespread. As any
other, we have our share of concerns and difficulties. I don’t need to look for
trouble; it finds me easily enough. While I never enjoy problems and trouble, I
deal with them. I remain perplexed by the descriptions voiced by one of my
brother bishops. Yes, I rely on the wise counsel of my Chancellor and Deans,
also some trusted priestly friends. I guess that makes me “presbyterian.” I
greatly value the deliberations and integrity of our Diocesan Council and
decisions of our annual Assembly. By these I surmise that I value “democracy.’
I always look toward the good of the Christian community on all levels:
diocesan, deanery and parish. That must render me a “Congregationalist.” I try
to listen to everyone; I try to keep an open mind, but always in the light of
the Gospel and Holy Tradition. But ultimately, as expressed by President Harry
Truman, “The buck stops here.” The final decision is mine and mine alone, and I
accept the responsibility for each decision.
5. For about the last six years,
especially the last two, interaction with the other bishops of the Synod has
been difficult and our relationships strained. Most recently dealing with some
in a proper spirit has been impossible. Yet I maintain before God and all of you,
that I love them all. But the only occasions that I am at peace is when I
commemorate them during Proskomedia. I
pray that the same peace will prevail during face-to-face meetings. I have
already stated in my “Sorrowful Epistle” that I am greatly offended by the
“bishop bashing” frequently witnessed on the internet. But also disturbing are
the attempts in various comments to separate me from the others, to seemingly
drive a wedge between us. I know that people want to show support for my
unworthiness, and their intentions are good, but inadvertently they make life
more difficult for me.
6. On some occasions I have been
accused of being ambitious and even of being envious of those in “higher
places.” For people who know me, these concepts, at least initially, can be
most laughable. If I can speak in terms of ambitions, I am pleased to share
them with you:
a) I
seek to retire from the active episcopate (God-willing) in three years, two
months and one week (as of this writing). I am not capable – mentally, physically
or spiritually to serve beyond that.
b) I
seek to retire as the Archbishop of Chicago and the Midwest.
c) I
seek to live out my days in peace and repentance. The following verse from St.
Paul is most appealing:
“…that you also
aspire to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business, and to work with your
own hands, as we commanded you…” (I Thess. 4:11)
7. It has been revealed on the
OCA Website that the Diocese of the Midwest would release OCA assessment monies
that have been held in escrow.
During the meeting of the Synod,
when I was confronted with the possibility of deposition, two other factors
weighed in: withholding and my style of leadership. Having been backed into a
corner, figuratively speaking, I was hardly in a position to maintain a hard-line
position. I had been giving thought during the session that, given that the
deposition was complete but the new Investigative Committee announced that it
was systematically continuing with its work and would have a report by March,
2008, perhaps the benchmarks established by our Diocesan Council had been
essentially met and, giving the Committee the benefit of a doubt, the escrowed
funds could be released. I should have liked to give the matter sufficient,
prayerful thought, but, given my precarious situation, I had to make a
split-second decision. I agreed to release the assessment money. I could not
risk jeopardizing the integrity of our Diocesan Council by adding to or
reinterpreting the established benchmarks. Please know, however, that thus far
only the December 2007, payment has been released.
8. Much speculation and rumor has
been circulating regarding my apology to the Bishop of Alaska. Permit me to
offer clarification on this issue. Metropolitan HERMAN, desiring to reach some
peaceful resolution to a most serious and volatile situation asked Archbishop
DMITRI to chair a separate meeting with Archbishop SERAPHIM and Bishop TIKHON
(as co-arbiters), Bishop NIKOLAI and myself. During said meeting, additional
comments, questions and explanations were offered. Please know that no one at
any time forced me to apologize to the Bishop of Alaska.
a.) Yes, I
did offer an apology to him, for being a source of irritation to him, for
upsetting him and causing him pain. I wish to be at peace with everyone. I stated
again that my apology was for those reasons and not for interfering in
his diocese of which I am not guilty.
b.) Yes, I
did prostrate myself before him, begging forgiveness. I would do it again, in
the same spirit that I wish to be at peace with everyone, and also to prevent
our Diocesan Church from being confronted with further uncertainty and
tribulation.
And now, how should I conclude
this long, but sincere, letter to you, my brothers and sisters, my spiritual
children? Perhaps I can once again refer to the withholding of our assessments
– the result of a serious and often agonizing decision, accomplished in
conciliar fashion, as is the custom in our Diocesan Church. Various people
asked me as to what it has accomplished. My answer:
1.) We helped the
Central Church Administration to begin the process of living within its means,
after decades of frivolous spending and misplaced priorities. We have
introduced the CCA to the notion of closer association with Sam Adams than with
Dom Perignon.
2.) We encouraged
and assisted the Central Church Administration to downsize and to reshape that
which was a ridiculously top-heavy bureaucracy.
But, my friends those two points
are only starters. The ‘flip side’ of withholding is that I have become a very
unpopular man with many, and unfortunately, I have exposed you, my friends, to
ridicule and abuse. Sometimes it is not easy to remain a free man in the
Midwest. But remain, we must; remain we shall. Unless there are additional
changes, or, should I say, corrections in accordance with the Statute of the
Orthodox Church in America, and something more than lip-service to seeking the
truth, and finally, genuine re-evaluation of who we are as an autocephalous
church and that we are not two million members strong, or one million, or
400,000, I do not place much hope in the effectiveness of the scheduled All
American Council this year. I regret that I have been unable to do more to
bring this crisis, for us in the Midwest now two and one-half years old, to an
end. May God forgive me. I ask your forgiveness as well.
Faithfully yours in Christ,
=JOB
Archbishop of Chicago and the
Midwest
| 
