Impressions of the September 2009 Metropolitan Council Meeting

There already are on the OCA’s Web Page Several Posts about the Metropolitan Council –Synod of Bishops Meetings which took place this past week in New York.  You can read the official OCA news releases:   http://www.oca.org/news/1934, http://www.oca.org/news/1936, http://www.oca.org/news/1938, and http://www.oca.org/news/1939.  I do not intend here to repeat “the news.”   I am  offering only my personal impressions of the Council Meetings.

The official Minutes of the Meetings will be released when they are approved by the Synod of Bishops, but it is possible that some form of the unapproved minutes might be made public in the near future.  One of the challenges of the Internet Age is that people are ready to read the reports from these meetings far faster than the staff can prepare them.   This is a special challenge in a Church which requires approval of the Synod of Bishops before any decision is considered official.

I came home from the meetings feeling very encouraged about the Orthodox Church in America. I was very impressed with the other members of the Metropolitan Council – their dedication and willingness to sacrifice for the church is most note worthy.  They bring to the Metropolitan Council an array of talents and wisdom, integrity, love for the Church, concern for the church membership, a willingness to serve, a desire to bring about unity in the Church.   We dealt with very difficult and potentially divisive issues, and yet there was a willingness to speak the truth in love, not to avoid difficulties but rather to confront them, and to treat others with respect despite disagreements in positions taken.   The openness and honesty in being willing to address the most difficult issues was very impressive – it showed the Christian Church in action.  Bishops listened and participated, and the chancery staff was fully engaged in the process.

Because of the nature of the issues which the MC deals with – legal, pastoral, personal – there are some parts of the discussion which will not be made public.  The issue of transparency was discussed as well.  In America, transparency is seen as the sign of integrity.  It is a very difficult balancing act in weighing the right to know versus the right to privacy, especially in a litigious society.   Some MC members feel more free to speak their minds when they know sessions will not be recorded or made public.   Some decisions have implications which cannot be made public for legal reasons or because individual statements might be later falsely construed as official policy or absolute decisions of the OCA.    So a balancing act is always ongoing in the deliberations.

I can say that every major issue which I heard someone raise before the meeting was addressed in one form or another during the week.  I will not say all issues were resolved, but the OCA showed an inner strength by allowing all topics to be discussed.  I think that just about everybody – bishops, attorneys, members, chancery staff  – were uncomfortable with one discussion or another.   The good news is that we were openly  and straightforwardly discussing. 

Sadly the SIC’s request for an audit of the NY/NJ Diocese turned up a similar scenario to the OCA’s – the financial records from 2001-2005 for the Diocese are missing so many documents that no audit can be conducted thus apparently no record can be established about where the Diocesan money went.  They had $60,000+ in the bank at the beginning of 2001 with decent financial records; then from 2001-2005, no records to speak of and the bank accounts are empty.  No one apparently is going to be held accountable for the debacle. 

Positively, the central church administration has shown it can live within its budget.   Accounting procedures are in place which gives me some confidence that the OCA is being fiscally conservative and responsible.  It appears at this point that the OCA will both live within its budget and will have a small financial surplus at the year’s end, despite the world’s economic downturn.   Monies raised by FOS are being used solely for ministries in the various departments.  The MC gave a firm “NO” to proposals for new and additional fund raising attempts despite the fiscally tight scenario the OCA faces.   As a result of this new fiscal conservatism, responsibility and accountability, I for the first time in more than a decade can tell people that I think it is good and wise to donate to FOS to support the work, mission and ministries of our church.   If you feel called to support church ministry on the OCA level, I would encourage you to consider making a donation to FOS now or when it issues its next appeal.

I thought a true sign of maturity was the ability of the bishops, church administration and the MC to sit together in one room and discuss painful and difficult issues.   There was a willingness to face up to issues, to point out disagreements rather than avoid them, to listen to the concerns of others, to hear the concerns and priorities of the various groups which had come together for the week:  hierarchs, central administration staff and members of the MC.   There was an expressed need for the MC to sit down with the Metropolitan and have (as someone called it) “a come to Jesus meeting.”       Despite frustration and fears, I thought people remained composed and respectful while making their voice heard.   Rather than talking about the Metropolitan or bishops (and behind their backs or anonymously on the Internet) the consensus of the MC was to speak directly with the Metropolitan and the bishops. 

I believe we have moved to the point where we are becoming much more concerned about the present – about the issues facing us today and about the problems of our own creating (by our current actions) than by problems of the past (which are largely confined to legal).  The determination to look ahead – such as in strategic planning – shows that we are maturing and moving beyond the scandalous behaviors of past leaders.   The grievous and egregious problems caused by the former leadership now are the past.  We are still paying for this past but the reality of the recent MC meeting is that we are dealing with the problems that we created and we are looking at our future.   The future we are looking at through the strategic planning process.  The present we are dealing with in issues of our own creation – including the vision and style of the new Metropolitan.    The work of the current Metropolitan belongs to the current age, and really is our present, our problem, our blessing.   In having a session in which we talked to the Metropolitan about the Metropolitan we stopped dealing with past problems and focused on current concerns.  The past failed leadership is irrelevant to these current concerns.   In this sense, we have moved ahead and we are looking to the future.