I think there are two big things happening, one is a conflict and attempted conflict resolution amongst the bishops.

Another is a sort of blog war with OCAtruth and George M against Mark Stokoe.

There is a rather common assumption going around – that the actions of those involved in the first, the bishops, are in response to actions in the second the bloggers.

Thus any action real or rumored, of a bishop, is taken as being a response to the latest round of blog posts. I quite doubt that this is true.

I see no reason to assume that Bp Benjamin exercising his right to not let the Metropolitan into his diocese is a response to the WaPo piece.

I see no reason to assume that the nun- tonsuring or the giving of retreats in DC is central to the conflict.

OTOH, the resolution of the DoW diocesan council, seems squarely to focus on issues related to the autocephaly of the OCA and the repeated Synodal consensus on the subject,
http://www.oca.org/news/2340

as opposed to previous statements made by his Beatitude when speaking as Primate and broadcast as such (you may read or listen):
http://ancientfaith.com/specials/canadian_assembly_2010/metropolitan_jonah_keynote_address_-_the_episcopal_assembly

It is totally clear from Mark Stokoe’s own mouth, the mouth of Faith Skordinski, and Deacon Robert Solodow from the DOW that there are people who are attempting to politically maneuver things such as to discredit and ultimately remove His Beatitude Jonah from office.
This is the sickening thing here, even more disturbing is that their e-mails have implied members of the Holy Synod to be complicit is this.
If our Holy Synod had no intention for things to appear like this why would they not speak up to calm the fears of the faithful?

Also, I see nothing in their actions that indicates that they want his “conditions to be managed” what we see from multiple sources is that people (possibly certain bishops, certainly certain metropolitan council members) want him GONE. Three leaked emails from three different people on the metropolitan council indicate this.

So, yes, perhaps Fr. Hopko’s statement on its own could be interpreted differently. However, based on the actions of the Synod and statements by members of the metropolitan council I think that its more likely he is indicating a mental state.

The easiest way to clear all this up would be for the Synod members to just publicly state their love for His Beatitude and that they think he is sane and that they just wanted him to rest. But what have you heard from the Synod?
A letter to the Washington Post complaining about the article they did on His Beatitude.
A resolution from the DOW (Bishop Benjamin, who rescinded his invitation for His Beatitude to visit the monastery in California after the Washington Post Artile was released.) To have a committee controlling +Jonah’s paycheck, another committee to control his travel, and another committee to control ALL his public communication and communication with other churchs.
A refusal to meet with +Hilarion when he came back to visit. (they did yield and end up meeting).

If they had no concern or no desire to cause concern about His Beatitude’s mental health why wouldn’t they speak up and just quiet the rumors and conspiracies?

For what it’s worth, I red Fr. Hopko’s “gravely troubled” statement to mean something like “has serious problems.” Some definitions put ‘troubled’ to mean “anxious, worried, careworn” or even “characterized by unrest or disorder or insubordination” (cf. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=troubled). But to me it seems like a stretch to suggest Fr. Hopko was implying Metropolitan Jonah is “crazy.”

I have one additional observation about the way the discussion/debate/conflict is proceeding, and that is the tone that is popping up in various places. I appreciate that people on both ‘sides’ feel passionately that they have the right end of things, and naturally will express themselves pretty firmly.

But often I get the impression that some writers are not just trying to make a point, but are getting too fond of the sound of their own voices. Satirical posts, a video that comes across as “The Straw Man and the Pharisee”, sarcastic titles and phrases. These are all snarky cheap shots and (to employ a cliche) they generate more heat than light.

I hope those who sincerely want to get at the truth in all this will reconsider such tactics. Mockery and scorn are not behaviour commended anywhere in Scripture. Please let us remember that every human being, however wicked you may think they are, or even how wicked they really may be, is a living icon created in the image of God.

To Elijah: I do not know why it is you equate “Gravely Troubled” with “Less than Sane” or “Crazy.” That is not what the words say, and you seem to have missed the whole point of Fr. Basil’s post as summed up in the wish that “people understand the positions of those who agree and disagree with them and then recount them accurately in discussion and argument.”