Governing Well Part II

Fr. George,

I agree that that "lemming" comment was uncalled-for. And I agree that you're innocent of urging noncompliance — explicitly.

Now that an issue has been raised, you said, the Archdiocese will surely deal with it, as it ought to. But the rest of your commentary gives an apologia for not raising these issues. They aren't a big deal, the government doesn't care, and compliance in letter and spirit doesn't make us more Orthodox — indeed, it might well make us less Orthodox. In short, you say that the author is wasting everyone's time with what are at best trifles and at worst a Pandora's Box of heretical phronema.

With all this, I'd say you've postulated that we might do just as well, if not better, to accept rather than address irregularities. I'd even say that, by assigning so much risk to the latter, you've presented a pretty full rationale for not bothering. Not that you intended to, but who could accept everything you said and not think that it'd be a better use of time to, say, redesign our letterhead?


Let me make explicit what I left implicit: This is about power. Many laypeople (to say nothing of lower clergy and bishops) feel that Met. Philip has abused his legitimate power and seized other, illegitimate power. They believe, or suspect, that the governance of the Archdiocese has descended into an exceptional condition that demands the intervention of the people of God. (As to the possible existence of such, see my reply to your "Philip Blinks" comment.)

To exercise this right and duty, they will use whatever is to hand. How many cared about numbers of trustees six months ago? But now, mountain or molehill, the matter has been pressed into service. If Met. Philip cannot command each trustee, and if a good proportion of trustees are elected by the people — then power has shifted. If the total number is small enough to permit close study of the interests, background, and loyalties of those who would serve — then power has shifted. And if, in consequence of all this, Met. Philip cannot spend as he pleases — then power has shifted greatly .

Money, more than anything else in this base world, is power. And that is why whatever our attorney brother has to say about financial disclosure, however molehill-like it seems, could well be the tip of an iceberg for business-as-usual in Englewood and Detroit.

Fr. Alexander Schmemann wrote several times about how foreign the notions of rights and of governance by power-balance, which are so fundamental to all Western institutions, are to the Christian ethos. And they must never — can never — be the foundation of our common life. But they can serve, as even mobs of defiant faithful have sometimes served, as a last resort in a fallen world.

May our time of need pass quickly.

I am going to assume that you and your fellow delegates have a plan to accomplish these things. Because otherwise, I don't see this happening — I understand it’s a tightly scripted environment.

God strengthen you!

Second — and relatedly, in fact — let's not throw anyone off the forum unless they won't be civil. Personally, I'm a fan of the sentiment, "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

(It's certainly preferable to the climate of trickle-down fear traditional in the Archdiocese: "I may agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death against your right to say it.")