Letter 17: To my revered brothers, the bishops involved in this dispute.

To my revered brothers, the bishops involved in this dispute. I have been asked to offer a perspective from outside the immediate conflict, and I will do so as briefly and fairly as I can. The question of jurisdiction over the monasteries in the area between your two sees is genuinely unclear. The canonical rules were written for a world where diocesan boundaries were stable and clearly defined. They are less clear when applied to areas that were effectively unclaimed for a generation because of war and depopulation, and then resettled and evangelized simultaneously by missionaries from both sees. My proposal: the monasteries in question should be subject to the bishop of whichever diocese they are geographically within, as determined by the oldest available records of diocesan boundary. Where those records are ambiguous or absent, the monasteries should be allowed to choose their diocesan affiliation, with the understanding that the choice, once made, is binding for a generation. This is not a perfect solution. I recognize that. It will produce some outcomes that either or both of you will feel are unjust. But the alternative — continued dispute that poisons relations between your churches and sets a bad example for everyone who watches — is worse. I ask both of you to consider it seriously. Your brother in Christ.