The Crisis in the OCA

Back in May I opined that the OCA was moving into a situation where the continued leadership of Met. +Herman might well be openly challenged. In that post I sharply criticized some of the actions His Beatitude had taken in regards the recent scandals in the central administration. With a view to his suspension of the special committee investigating those scandals (from which all but two of its members subsequently resigned in protest), I suggested that a possible response might include a formal vote of "No Confidence" by the Metropolitan Council.

In the last few weeks the Diocese of the Midwest whose Archbishop (+Job) has been at the forefront of the demands for full disclosure, actually did in fact pass a No Confidence resolution, among others. This weekend the Diocese of Western Pennsylvania followed with their own vote calling for +Herman to be replaced. Both dioceses also have now voted to withhold vital funds from the central administration of the church pending sweeping reforms.

I will refrain from making any judgments beyond what I have posted elsewhere. However it is now clear that what was a scandal is becoming a moderately serious crisis in the OCA. There are at present two dioceses that have openly declared their lack of trust in the leadership of our primate. These sentiments are almost certainly felt in many other quarters of the OCA where diocesan conventions are not currently meeting. This is the situation which confronts the Holy Synod as it prepares to meet this week.

Setting aside for now all of the questions which have been raised about +Herman's actions in response to the scandals, the most serious issue is whether or not the Metropolitan can continue to effectively lead a church which is increasingly and openly hostile to his primacy. The central administration is in something close to extremis financially. You have two diocese withholding funds. At least one hierarch (+Job) has openly called for +Herman to resign and the same two dioceses have passed No Confidence resolutions. Of course as I noted in my earlier post suggesting this course of action, we are not a democracy. The Holy Synod makes these decisions. But the bishops must be aware that it is one thing to say "we accept him as our primate." It is an entirely different matter to govern the church effectively when the faithful do not also accept him as their primate.

How can the Holy Synod force people to send money to Syosset? How can they prevent next years All American meeting of the OCA from becoming a highly contentious event? The answer may well be learned at the conclusion of this weeks meeting of the Holy Synod. As I said before I will make no judgments in this matter beyond my previously expressed concern over some of the decisions made by Met. +Herman in dealing with the scandals. I hold no office of responsibility beyond a seat on my parish council so it is not my place to pass judgments (for which I thank God). But I feel that events may be moving at long last to some sort of decisive moment in the life of the church. Frankly I would not be terribly surprised if His Beatitude announced his retirement at this meeting. There have been some hints that the Synod may have concluded that the time has come for a change.

Should this in fact happen we must take great care to avoid the sin of triumphalism. This is especially true for those of us who in the past have been critical of the central administration and the Primate's handling of things. The issues confronting our church will not vanish with the departure of any hierarch. And I think we should also all be deeply mindful of our own shortcomings and failings before judging someone who has born the heavy cross of office like Met. +Herman.

In closing I ask all who may have occasion to read these words for your prayers for the OCA and its Synod. These are challenging times and it is doubtful that there has been a meeting of the Holy Synod since receiving autocephaly that has been faced with decisions of such moment. Let us all pray that God will grant to our bishops the wisdom to discern right from wrong, and the strength to act for the right.

No Confidence

The ongoing situation in the OCA has taken another turn. Met. +Herman has now suspended the work of the special investigative commission looking into all aspects of the scandal that has shaken the church. This was done without consulting either the Metropolitan Council or the Synod of Bishops. It is the latest in a series of steps +Herman has taken that are to say the least controversial.

Unfortunately most of these measures have clearly had as their objective the suppression of any questions that might prove embarrassing to the central administration of the OCA. The record includes making false and misleading statements, suppressing reports, abusing hierarchical authority in silencing critics or removing them from positions of trust within the church and attempting to bully the Metropolitan Council into subservient compliance with his agenda of non-accountability. This must not continue.

It has become increasingly clear that the vast majority of both clergy and laity who have any knowledge of the scandal are loosing confidence in +Herman's ability or willingness to deal in an upfront manner with the issue of accountability. This is creating a crisis in confidence in the leadership of the OCA across the board. There is at least once diocese that is in something very close to open revolt with many parishes withholding money from the central administration.

I believe that the time has come to make a statement that the stonewalling needs to come to an end. The Metropolitan Council should demand that +Herman rescind his decree suppressing the Special Commission. If he refuses the council should pass a resolution of no confidence in the Metropolitan's conduct of his office. Obviously such a measure would be non-binding. But it would send a powerful if symbolic signal to +Herman that he has pushed the envelope to its limits. The Synod of Bishops should also not permit this latest act to pass without a response.

The situation is fast reaching a point where +Herman's suitability to remain in office is coming into question. Any further obstructionism may necessitate a discussion of that very serious issue.