“And Caesar’s spirit, raging for revenge,
With Atë by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch’s voice
Cry “Havoc,” and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.”

Through that passage Marc Antony predicted that war would follow Caesar’s assassination. If Shakespeare were composing his masterpiece today, in place of the Marc Antony character he might cast this website’s Administrator warning us of the “Havoc” that was to occur subsequent to the ROEA’s original dialog outreach. Caesar’s spirit could be written out of the script and replaced with the BOR raging for revenge for the ROEA severing ties in 1951. The Atë character (the Greek goddess of mischief, delusion and folly) might be replaced with BOR surrogates hot from Bucharest lauding subjugation through reunification. It’s a perfect fit.

The ROEA must surely now regret not realizing, when reunification dialog commenced, that the BOR would “let slip the dogs of war.” The BOR’s approach to “joint dialog” is consistent with tactics employed throughout its 61-year conquest to retake ROEA. Look at the pattern of foul deeds and deception. Originally the BOR was complicit in the 30-year conspiracy to assassinate the character of Archbishop Valerian. Later, the “maximal autonomy” gambit was pursued. Then it was the withholding of documents stratagem. Now, as BOR’s latest ploy, its surrogates suggest contrary to ROEA by-laws that each Parish be allowed by simple vote to immediately choose between ROEA/OCA and ROAA/BOR. “Havoc,” indeed.

The BOR is obviously now running out of schemes and getting desperate—its surrogates’ volume increases on this website. So, how does the ROEA successfully end the “Havoc?”

“Ay, there’s the rub….” (Hamlet, Act III, Scene 1).

I agree with the Administrator–enough with BOR’s chicanery. Further dialog by the ROEA has been conditioned on ROEA’s favorable analysis of ROAA data and documentation which the ROAA chooses not to produce or that BOR has instructed be withheld. Seize this opportunity! Such withholding gives ROEA cover to immediately tighten “the dogs,” halt the gears of useless discourse and move toward the future. To me, focusing our energies trying to recreate a 1935-style relationship with Bucharest is tantamount to “groaning for burial.”

The ROEA should instead focus all of its energies and resources toward forging the ultimate unification of all Orthodox Christians of 21st century America into a single Patriarchate. That’s no easy task, but it’s foreseeable. See Ann Rodgers entry, dated April 15, 2012 on this site.

What’s already happened merely sets the scene for the really important stuff, which is the stuff upon which greatness will be made. Or, as Shakespeare so aptly put it, “What’s past is prologue.” (The Tempest, Act II, Scene 1).

As members of the same Church, we should be discussing the best way forward for all of us and not just for some of us. How can we speak of unity if we divide ourselves in the process? Clearly, debate and discussion is the way forward – not ad hominem attacks and insults. You see – unity really does start at home, in the parish, in the Episcopate. This is the Christian way.

… It seems those who are most against the unity lack the actions to back up their words…

3) Your not clarifying this very much.

You still don’t get it. If you continue the Romanian thing to the bitter end, you will have no one to support the wonderful churches we now have – and it will be our grandchildren who will abandon them and possibly land up believing in nothing! Our over 100 year old history in North America proves this. And this is precisely the point. This discussion should not be about our differences but about what will keep our children/ grandchildren Orthodox as they inevitably become Americanized? Isn’t it better to adapt to their evolving needs – going from Romanian parishes to American ones, so that Orthodoxy might be saved here, long term, in the process?

2. I’m sure you are not coercing me, but please stop claiming that the majority of Episcopate members want to abandon the OCA and be subjected to BOR rule. The last vote we have is people overwhelmingly choosing the ROEA/OCA over the ROAA/BOR, and this for most immigrants, including those arriving post 1989. And then you again dare speak in God’s name claiming that God wants unity … How happy would he be if going under BOR means that our children will walk away …

3. The Due Diligence answers from the ROEA/BOR were “unsatisfactory” according to ROEA/OCA representatives, otherwise we would have had a different report from them at our last Congress. Since 2010 we are awaiting satisfactory responses to our questions, and this has been noted in our Congress presentations. By the way, we have not yet seen the official list of questions sent, yet you claim they are a joke. Please enlighten us. Also, meetings and exchanging words is nice, but documents and financial statements are what is required in any Due Diligence process. Where’s the beef??

4. Again, no one should vote on anything until Due Diligence is satisfactorily completed. Anything else leaves the administration of the Episcopate, including the Episcopate Council, liable to court proceedings. As previously mentioned in a response to Adrian “this matter is more and more relegated to the backburner as more and more post- 1990 children become Americanised, and the pressure from Romania to make this happen falls on less and less fertile soil, as the number of emigrants hitting these shores is overtaken by more and more children being born here.” And finally, understand that unity is not the real question even if it makes fiduciary sense. The real question is under whom this unity/merger should take place: under the local American OCA or the foreign Romanian BOR.