Ecumenical Church. Ecumenism in the Orthodox Church: the opinion of the patriarch and the attitude of the priests

(47 votes: 4.5 out of 5)

• Deacon Andrey
• hierome
• T. Goricheva
• St.
• priest
• Andrey Ivanovich Solodkov
• archim. Seraphim (Alexiev), archimandrite. Sergius (Yazadzhiev)
• prot.
• Does the Russian Orthodox Church need to participate in the ecumenical movement?” St.

Ecumenism(from the Greek οἰκουμένη (oikumene) - inhabited world) is a widespread modern concept that has three meanings:

1. Communication of Orthodox Christians with representatives of Christian and non-Christian communities. Such ecumenism is a dialogue between the Orthodox Church and other religious communities, aimed at coordinating peacemaking actions in the non-Christian world. This dialogue does not imply the creation of a single organization or the adjustment of dogmas.

2. A liberal movement with a tendency to unite various denominational movements within the framework of one church. This form of ecumenism is denied by Orthodoxy, since the artificial creation of a “new church” will be a denial of an already existing one, preserving apostolic continuity and intact dogmatic teaching, and will lead to the derogation of Christian spirituality, for it will proceed from the neglect of the grace-filled gifts of the Church and all the treasures of patristic wisdom. (cm.: ).

3. The doctrine of the possible unification of all religions in some new one (). This understanding of ecumenism is characteristic, for example, of the neo-pagan New Age movement. It is emphatically anti-Christian. Like other false teachings, it is categorically denied by the Orthodox Church.

Not unity, but truth, according to the experience and conviction of Orthodoxy, should become the main goal of the ecumenical movement; unity is, according to this experience, nothing other than the natural consequence of truth, its fruit and blessing.

If the Lord said that where two or three are gathered in His name, there He is in the midst of them, then doesn’t it follow that for the salvation of a person there is no fundamental difference in what particular Christian denomination he belongs to, and in general, whether he is a member of any Church?

Speaking about presence among those gathered in His name, the Savior did not expand the meaning of His words to such an understanding, according to which any social group that declared the purpose of its unity to confess the name of Christ automatically becomes a place of God’s special presence, His Holy Church, a partaker of God’s blessings.

The problem is that not every confession of Christ (teaching about Christ) is pleasing to God, just as not every religious activity carried out under the guise of true Christianity.

History teaches that even the most malicious heretics often united around the name of Christ, such as the Ebionites, Docetes, Arians, Monophysites, and Monothelites. Despite the fact that they all declared themselves to be true Christian believers, representatives of each such community did this in a break with the Apostolic Tradition, each in their own way (see:).

We must not forget that it was under the slogan of serving Christ that such outrages as persecution, torture, reprisals, trials were committed).

Teaching about the Church as a godly assembly of believers, the Lord did not mean any religious communities in general, but the one and only True One. It is this Church that Holy Scripture speaks of as the pillar and affirmation of the truth (), as one that must exist until the end of time and which the gates of hell will not overcome (). This is the Orthodox Church.

The idea that any Christian community, including the Orthodox Church, contains only part of the truth, and the fullness of the truth can only be seen in the totality of all these communities, serves as one of the main arguments motivating those supporters of ecumenism, whose task is the formation of a New Church in the basis of cooperation between currently disparate “Christian” communities.

ECUMENISM(from the Greek “house”, “inhabited world”) - a complex concept that includes the doctrine of a single Christian Church and the movement for the reunification of Christian churches. Elementalism is based on the idea that Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians are equal in dogmatic and doctrinal terms, since the once united Church was historically divided into a number of “branches.” Hence the main task of E. is to postulate the unity of the Church and preach it. Ethnicity as a movement is a phenomenon of the 20th century, caused by the general processes of globalization and the growth of mass atheism.

It is believed that for the first time the term "E." American theologians from the seminary in Princeton (USA) used it in 1937. However, the development of Elements began much earlier. The first ecumenical forum - a missionary conference - took place in 1940 in Edinburgh (Scotland). The purpose of the conference was to bring together Christians of different denominations, since English-speaking Protestant and Catholic missions in the African colonies of the British Empire faced opposition from other faiths, including extremely hostile ones. The First World War and the persecution to which believers were subjected in the USSR contributed to the development of ecumenical ideas. Among them, ideas began to emerge about the need for universal peace, a united struggle against atheism. The Vatican and a number of Protestant churches have issued peace messages calling on Christians around the world to unite to prevent the destruction of humanity. Thus, in 1920, Anglican bishops proposed a movement program to achieve doctrinal and canonical unity, called the “Lambrecht Triangle.” The program assumed unification on the basis of four provisions: the authority of Holy Scripture, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist, episcopate (see. Bishop). In the same year, the Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople called for “rapprochement and mutual cooperation” between Orthodox and Catholics. In the mid-1920s, various ecumenical initiatives took place: meetings and discussions of Catholic and Protestant youth at the residence of the Belgian Archbishop Mercier in Malin, the creation (1926) of the Center for Religious Research “Truth” in Paris, etc.

In 1928, Pope Pius XI issued a special encyclical, in which E. was condemned as pan-Christian and leading participants to religious indifference, and the use of the expression “union of churches” was prohibited.

The ecumenical movement became more active in the second half of the 1930s. In 1935, Catholic priest Paul Couturier proposed a week of prayer “for the unity of Christians.” Conducting such prayers with the participation of representatives of various faiths has become a tradition that continues to this day. In 1937, work began on creating a coordinating structure for the ecumenical movement, which culminated in 1948 in Amsterdam (Netherlands) with the creation of the World Council of Churches, which at that time united representatives of 147 churches and denominations. Currently in Europe, the largest inter-church centers, uniting almost all Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox, except the World Council of Churches, is the Conference of European Churches (CEC). In 1997, on the initiative of the CEC and the Conference of Catholic Bishops of Europe, the European Ecumenical Assembly was held in Graz (Austria), in which about 10 thousand people took part. The conference took place at three organizational levels. At the first, leaders of Christian religious associations at plenary sessions exchanged views on the main issues of inter-Christian cooperation. At the second, working groups functioned, created on certain specific topics of relations between Christians in Europe, which prepared proposals for the highest church leadership. The third, the largest in terms of the number of participants, hosted meetings between believers of different faiths from different countries, performances by musical ensembles, singing groups, and other joint events. Thus, repentance before God for the sins of previous generations was organized, in which participants threw stones into the river, having previously put their own signatures on them as a sign of personal repentance. Public meetings and discussions were held between national participants of the delegations belonging to different faiths. Thus, the meeting of Russians was chaired by the Orthodox Metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad Kirill, Catholic Archbishop T. Kondrusevich, and the leader of Russian Baptists P. Konovalchik. The Assembly adopted a final document which stated, in part: “Recognizing all the difficulties and obstacles within us, as individuals and as Churches, we recognize that reconciliation is a process that must begin with a change in our own minds and hearts. In upholding freedom of conscience, the Churches must cooperate rather than compete... Living for reconciliation means that we recognize each other's differences as gifts that help us discover together the amazing diversity of God's unique world.”

Nowadays, the concept of "E." applies not only to Christian but also to other denominations. Ethics is viewed as the desire of believers for the worldwide unification of existing religious faiths, while ignoring dogmatic differences in religious doctrines. In this regard, a distinction is made between “Christian” and “non-Christian” E. The latter contains statements about the spiritual wealth of the true spiritual life of all, including non-Christian religions. The essence of “non-Christian” E. was expressed by Swami Vivekananda: “We Hindus do not just tolerate, we identify ourselves with any religion, praying in a mosque with a Muslim, worshiping fire with a Zoroastrian and kneeling before the cross with a Christian.” The basis of “non-Christian” E. is the concept of “spiritual”, as the one God-creator for all people. The presence of different religions from the point of view of “non-Christian” E. is a product of the historical development of mankind, a reflection of the cultural and ethnic characteristics of the development of different peoples. "Non-Christian" E. views the Church as a Teaching, and not as the "body of Christ."

Since 1986, there has been a “non-Christian” ecumenical movement created on the initiative of the Pope; the World Day of Prayer for Peace was held in the Italian city of Assisi. Representatives of all major modern religions of the world were invited to the meeting (representatives of the highest clergy of 12 religions participated), including Christians of various faiths, Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians, Judaists, Muslims, and African animists.

A variety of modern Ethics are attempts to find a manifestation of Christianity in other religions of the world (Metropolitan George Codre), based on the idea of ​​the existence of the Holy Spirit independently of Jesus Christ and His Church (the so-called “ecumenical pseudo-Christianity”).

“Non-Christian” Ethics is especially popular in countries where atheistic views have long been dominant. It manifests itself in people’s faith in an abstract God, “devoid” of any confessional design (the so-called “everyday” E.). “Non-Christian” ecumenists view faith as a liquid (water) poured into vessels (confessions) of different shapes. It should be noted that some part of the orthodox clergy views Estonianism as a negative phenomenon that contributes to the development of proselytism.

Understanding of E. and attitude towards it are different among the clergy of different faiths.

Russian Orthodox Church and E.

The basis of the philosophy of Russian Orthodox Ethics is set out in the works of V. Solovyov, who, in particular, argued that the “body of Christ” can only be the Universal Church, which is a manifestation of the universal religion. The presence of a universal religion presupposes the development of a new universal religious consciousness. Most successfully in their church activities, E.’s ideas were and are being carried out by the heads of the department for external church relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitans Nikodim (d. 1978), Kirill and priest Alexander Men. The latter, in particular, argued: “Every Christian reflects the entire experience of the Church, and this is the basis of Christianity. Theology is a reflection and testimony of the whole truth of the Church. Christianity in the deepest sense is not provincial, not individualistic, and therefore, before anything in To reject the Church, we must make sure that it does not coincide with the truth of the Church, and not with our tastes and desires. Theology is the path of the rebirth of the whole person in accordance with Christ. “And he who sows and reaps the fruits of theology is the same Christ.”

The modern Orthodox understanding of Ethnicity, according to A. Osipov, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, is based on an understanding of the unity of Christians only on a purely church basis, placing the external secular unity of Christians in the background. Believing that the main goal of Christianity is the eternal salvation of man, Orthodox Christianity presupposes the existence of a certain spiritual basis for all-Christian unity, which would lead the Christian along the path of life and not death. Falling away from the true path of spiritual life is tantamount to falling away from the Church, which leads to spiritual death. In this case, no unity - psychological, ideological or doctrinal - makes sense. Deep mysticism, characteristic of many Christian congregations, does not save one from spiritual death in case of deviation from the true path.

In Orthodoxy, there is a distinction between a “broad view” of E. and a “narrow” view, which expresses the attitude of Orthodox fundamentalists towards it. This difference was expressed in a mild form by the authoritative Orthodox theologian St. Patriarch Sergius: “Let a person be Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant, as long as he is a Christian in life, - and he can be calm... But such breadth, so convenient in life and soothing, is not satisfies truly church people, accustomed to giving themselves a clear account of their faith and convictions. Under this breadth they sense simply skepticism, coldness towards faith, indifference to the salvation of the soul.”

The “broad view” of Orthodoxy supports the idea of ​​“one tree and branches - the Churches”, the “narrow view” insists that the existing Christian churches evaluate their teachings in relation to the teaching and practice of the Ancient Church, as the most complete and pure expression of the apostolic preaching and the spirit of Christ, and, finding anything changed, would return to the beginning. Orthodoxy calls for unity with that one Truth, which only Orthodoxy has and, within the framework of ecumenical ideas, can and should be overtaken by other Christian denominations. Orthodox E. assumes the possibility of true unity of Christian churches only under the condition of the unity of faith, the foundations of spiritual life, the principles of church structure and Holy Tradition.

It should be noted that in Orthodox theoretical theology there is also a direct denial of E. In 1972, Patriarch of Alexandria Nicholas VI noted: “I condemn ecumenism and consider it not just a heresy, but a pan-heresy - the container of all heresies and evil beliefs. We are well aware of the anti-Christian forces that control behind the scenes ecumenism... Ecumenism is directed against Orthodoxy. It represents the greatest danger today, along with the unbelief of our era, which deifies material attachments and pleasures." Some Russian Orthodox theologians consider E. as a new Arianism (see. Ariana).

The ecumenical movement in the Russian Orthodox Church (hereinafter referred to as the Russian Orthodox Church) has several levels: as the establishment of the unity of various Orthodox churches (located both on the territory of Russia and outside it), as the unity of Christian denominations, as the unity of all religions. Ethnicity of the last level is stimulated by internal political problems, in particular, the civil war in Chechnya, where the indigenous population professes Islam.

In the second half of the 1980s, preparations began for the Pan-Orthodox Council, which should formulate a pan-Orthodox position on the main problems of our time. An Inter-Orthodox Preparatory Commission was created, which outlined ten topics for conciliar discussion. By the beginning of 2000, unity was achieved on 6 of the proposed topics. The problem of holding the Council is complicated by the fact that as new states are formed, the number of autocephalous Orthodox churches, whose hierarchs, as a rule, share the views of the political leaders of the new states on solving important problems of our time, is growing. According to Patriarch Alexy II, the Church turned out to be a political widow with each successive regime change. Representatives of Orthodox faiths sometimes find it more difficult to dialogue among themselves than with representatives of other religions. Thus, it is very difficult to achieve agreement between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (“Karlovites”), individual Orthodox hierarchs of Ukraine, Moldova, Bulgaria, and Estonia.

Over the past decade, the Russian Orthodox Church has intensified its efforts to establish contacts with confessions officially operating in Russia. In December 1998, the Holy Synod gave a special instruction to the Department for External Church Relations “to carefully study the forms and prospects for further cooperation between the Moscow Patriarchate and the Old Believers, preparing appropriate proposals for the development of dialogue between them.” Metropolitan Kirill did a lot of work on interfaith cooperation. In January 1999, the work of the Christian Interfaith Advisory Committee was renewed, the main task of which was to organize joint events to celebrate the 2000th anniversary of Christianity. In November 1999, an International Interconfessional Conference was held in Moscow at the St. Danilovsky Monastery, the final document of which stated that “the diverse problems of the coming millennium encourage the Christian community to actively cooperate in joint searches for an adequate response to the challenges of modern times, to realize the responsibility of Christian communities for the destinies of humanity."

At different stages of the development of the ecumenical movement, the highest hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church treated it differently. In 1948, with the approval of I. Stalin, the Moscow Pan-Orthodox Conference was held, timed to coincide with the 500th anniversary of the Moscow diocese’s exit from the canonical subordination of Constantinople and the proclamation of its autocephaly. At the meeting, an unsuccessful attempt was made to create an “Orthodox Vatican”, as opposed to the existing non-Soviet churches, including the Orthodox. At the Meeting, a resolution was adopted “The Ecumenical Movement and the Orthodox Church”, which, in particular, noted: “The creation of the “Ecumenical Church” as an international influential force is, as it were, a fall before the temptation rejected by Christ in the desert, and a deviation of the Church towards the path of capturing souls human in the realm of Christ by non-Christian means." In 1956, the attitude towards the ecumenical movement changed, the CPSU Central Committee gave permission to establish contacts between the Russian Orthodox Church and the World Council of Churches, and in 1961 the Russian Orthodox Church became a member of the WCC. During these same years, the Russian Orthodox Church acted as a co-founder of another ecumenical organization - the Conference of European Churches, which worked for 28 years under the representation of the current Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II. In 1962, by a special resolution of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, the Russian Orthodox Church received permission to send observers to the Second Vatican Council of the Roman Catholic Church.

Participation in the ecumenical movement was not only of fundamental, but also practical importance for the Russian Orthodox Church. In one of his public speeches, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II noted: “The participation of the Russian Orthodox Church in the ecumenical dialogue in the difficult 1960s helped us: the whole Christian world learned about us, about our situation. Now are we really going to tell our brothers: today In our country the Church is free and we have no need to communicate with you anymore.”

In the modern Russian Orthodox Church, E. is not supported and is actively condemned by supporters of the so-called. national-orthodoxy. This movement, which became influential in the early 2000s, proclaimed the ideal to be strived for, a state in which Orthodoxy (represented by the Russian Orthodox Church) is the state ideology, while secular authorities provide the Russian Orthodox Church with full support, limiting administratively and legislatively the rights of other religious communities Under the influence of the “national Orthodox”, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, held in February 1997, “taking into account the confusion that the practice of so-called ecumenical services produces in the Orthodox environment and the emergence of new trends in the theology and practice of Western Protestantism,” decided to bring it to “inter-Orthodox discussion of the whole range of issues related to the participation of Orthodox Churches in contacts with the heterodox world."

Roman Catholic Church and E.

Ecumenical ideas in the history and philosophical doctrines of the Catholic Church had the original form of unifying Catholics and Orthodox (see. Union). The development of the modern understanding of the “Christian” ecumenical movement in Catholicism is associated with the activities of Pope John XXIII (in the world Giuseppe Angelo Roncalli). While still a church diplomat, in 1926 he wrote: “Catholics and Orthodox are not enemies, but brothers. We have the same faith, the same sacraments, first of all the Eucharist. We are divided by some misunderstandings in matters of the Divine construction of the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ. But those who were at the origins of these misunderstandings died many centuries ago, so let us put aside the old disputes and begin, each in his own circle, to work in order to instill a sense of kindness in our brothers, setting them our own good example.” However, as already noted, in 1928 E. was condemned by Pope Pius XI. The attitude of the Catholic Church towards Egypt changed after the accession of Pontiff John XXIII to the throne. On his initiative, the Second Vatican Council was convened in 1962-1965, which on November 21, 1964 promulgated the Decree on E. ("Unitaris redintegratio"). The decree called one of the main tasks of the Council “to promote the restoration of unity between all Christians.” The decree is the official position of the Catholic Church in relation to Ecumenical movement.

According to the Decree, true unity is determined by the one Eucharist, which “signifies and realizes the unity of the Church.” There is a certain sacramental connection between the Church, the Eucharist and the episcopal ministry. Since the Eucharist creates the Church, the unity of the Church cannot be reduced to a mechanical union. The visible unity is destroyed due to the fault of people who were born in the sin of division and therefore cannot be blamed for it. If people confess Jesus Christ and are baptized, they already enter into some kind of communion with the Catholic Church. Communities of such people can receive grace, and their churches "are able to open access to fellowship in salvation." If sacramental life and continuity of judgment are preserved in these communities, they can be considered Churches.

The decree determined that everyone should take part in endeavors aimed at the reunification of Christians. These initiatives include: the elimination of everything - words, judgments, deeds that “in justice and truth” do not correspond to the position of “brothers separated from us” and complicate relationships with them; participation in dialogues with experienced theologians of other faiths outlining the foundations and characteristic features and views of Catholicism; participation in joint affairs “contributing to the common good, according to the requirements of every Christian conscience”; uniting "as far as possible, in unanimous prayer"; participation in the work of “renewal and correction” (“The Church in her pilgrimage is called by Christ to constant correction, which she constantly needs”). Particular attention is paid to unity in the reception of the sacraments - it is allowed, but in exceptional circumstances. However, in another Decree of the Council “On the Eastern Catholic Churches”, in § 27 it is stated: “... the sacraments of Penance, the Eucharist and the Blessing of Anointing can be taught to Eastern Christians who, in complete sincerity, are separated from the Catholic Church, if they themselves, in good faith, ask for it; Moreover, Catholics are also allowed the same sacraments from non-Catholic clergy whose Churches have valid sacraments, whenever need or genuine spiritual benefit requires it, and access to a Catholic priest is physically or morally impossible."

The attitude towards Protestantism in the Decree is characterized rather vaguely. On the one hand, it is noted that Protestant communities “due to the absence of the sacraments of the Priesthood have not preserved the true and integral essence of the Eucharistic mystery.” On the other hand, the Council indicates that certain Eucharistic elements are also present among Protestants, “since in the Holy Viachera they remember the death and resurrection of the Lord.”

The ecumenical movement in the Catholic Church intensified on the eve of the celebration of the 2000th anniversary of Christianity. In May 1995, Pope John Paul II solemnly declared: “Today, Pope of the Roman Church, on behalf of all Catholics I ask forgiveness for the injustices committed against Catholics throughout history.” On March 12, 2000, during a mass in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican, Pope John Paul II spoke words of repentance for all the mistakes and sins committed by the Catholic Church during its existence against non-believers and dissidents. Such an action is unprecedented in the history of Christianity.

Protestantism and E.

The ecumenical movement in Protestantism is viewed on two levels - as a desire for the unity of various Protestant “denominations” and as a unification of Christian denominations. A significant part of the Protenstan clergy and Protestants have a negative attitude towards the “non-Christian” E.

Protestants were the first among Christians to begin to show tolerance towards other Christian denominations and were the first to advocate Estonianism as the rapprochement and cooperation of all faiths based on recognition of the truth of their faith in God and respect for universal human values. According to the leader of the Church of England (see Anglicanism) Archbishop of Canterbury J. Kerry "Christian Churches are called upon to protect the religious freedom of all citizens. They have a special responsibility for the fate of minorities who need support and approval. And this is their responsibility before the Lord himself and his Good News." A similar opinion is expressed in various official documents of religious associations of Protestants in Europe and America. At the initiative of the Anglicans, a powerful prayer movement arose in 1908 - the January Week of Prayer for Christian Unity (annually from January 18 to 25). While spreading Christianity in pagan countries, Protestants especially acutely felt what a great obstacle to pagans entering the Church was the division of Christians. Protestants of various denominations were the initiators and creators of the World Council of Churches, which united Protestant ecumenical activities of a doctrinal and practical nature.

T. S. Protko

Definitions, meanings of words in other dictionaries:

Smirnov M.Yu. Reformation and Protestantism

ECUMENISM (from the Greek οίκουμένη - inhabited world, universe) - the ideology of pan-Christian unity. First of all, it is associated with the movement for the unification of Christian churches. This is an interfaith movement, although...

Share:

According to the testimony of spiritually experienced contemporary elders, we live in times of apostasy - mass retreat from the Truth, Its betrayal. One of the many manifestations of apostasy is the widespread spread in the minds of people, including Christians, of the opinion that all spiritual paths lead to God, that all religions are salvific in their own way. All this is a consequence of the fact that modern people are becoming indifferent to the Truth, superficial and frivolous in spiritual judgments,

who do not consider it necessary to recognize the fact of the existence of positive spirituality and spirituality with a negative sign,” that is, satanic.

Indeed, all the peoples of the Earth had and have religions, all peoples strive to know God, enter into unity with Him, and build a life according to His law. At the same time, the Orthodox Faith teaches that the human mind, due to its limitations and sinful corruption, is not capable of independently finding the way to the Divine Truth.

All human religions are the fruit of human creativity. In them, as in the search for God of philosophers, there are erroneous ideas - the fruits of fantasy, inspired by the bearers of the fallen spiritual world.

According to our faith, one religion is the true light of the world - the light kindled by God Jesus Christ Himself. This true light comes from Him, and not from people. And He "for our sake man and our sake for salvation" With his voluntary suffering he atones for original sin, and with his Resurrection he demonstrates victory over Hell and Death.

Thus, the Lord Jesus Christ leads man to the fulfillment of the goal for which man was created - to become like God by grace. And therefore only He could say the words: “Whoever comes to Me will never hunger, and whoever believes in Me will never thirst.” (John 6:35).

Today we see a real revolution in modern spiritual consciousness. If previously all spiritual life revolved around Christ, today the center of the world is becoming a certain amorphous, faceless divinity.

According to the Christian worldview, nothing spiritual is impersonal: either it is God’s or it is satanic. Those spiritual phenomena that are from God are characterized by completely clear and definite features: this is the teaching of repentance, true faith, humility, and eternal life. Where this does not exist, the spirit of demons, the spirit of flattery (lies), operates, no matter what name it covers itself with.

In today's spiritual world, the Son of God Jesus Christ turns with other prophets, teachers, cosmic avatars into just one of the possible spiritual planets. “There is one God, only the names differ. Some call him Allah, others God, some Brahman, some Kali, some Krishna, Jesus, Buddha,” said the Indian priest of the goddess of evil Kali - Ramakrishna (1836-1886). .).

Characterizing the relationship of Orthodoxy to Catholicism and various manifestations of Protestantism, Bishop Gury says that “the discrepancy between Orthodoxy and heterodoxy lies not in any particular omissions and inaccuracies, but, in principle, in the fact that they are opposite to each other.”

The Orthodox Faith is an ascetic faith and heavenly bliss promised by the Savior in the future life.

However, the Latins and Protestants do not want to put up with this for the simple reason, speaking frankly, that they have little faith in the afterlife. They care more about real life, which, on the contrary, the Holy Apostle calls "disappearing steam" (James 4:14). This is why the pseudo-Christian West does not want and cannot understand how to fight sin.

If we trace all the misconceptions of the West that are included in its creed, as well as those inherent in its morals, we will see that they are all rooted in a misunderstanding of Christianity as a constant feat for the improvement of a Christian. First of all, it should be noted that both Catholicism and Protestantism are heresies and are essentially directed against the Church and its teachings.

Orthodoxy is teaching and life with the eradication of passions, the assimilation of virtues in the presence of correct faith and grace-filled sacred acts, a life that has a single purpose: to heal human sinfulness and raise us to perfection.

This path to the perfection of love is impossible outside the experience of the Holy Fathers.

The fact is that they “are the most qualified guardians and interpreters of this truth by the holiness of their lives, by the deep knowledge of the Word of God and by the abundance of the grace of the Holy Spirit that dwelt in them.”

Today's ecumenism, as interpreted by the World Council of Churches, provides for the possibility of ignoring the Truth for the sake of bringing the Orthodox closer to the heterodox and even non-Christians on the basis of “universal moral values.” Ecumenism, as a unique and broad movement, is, in essence, a false attempt to unite “light with darkness” and “Christ with beliar.”

The spiritual pluralism of the ecumenical movement is limitless. A striking example can be given. “In the name of spiritual unity” is the name of the address of the meeting of shamans, which took place in Ulan-Ude. In it, addressing Buddhists and Orthodox Christians, the participants say: “What does a reasonable person care about fanatical adherence to the foundations of this or that religion. God does not require such a division from us, this is a terrible delusion.”

According to them, in the name of peace, unity and prosperity, we Orthodox Christians must unite in a single faith with Buddhists and shamans. But, as you know, Buddhism is a moral teaching, there is no God in it, and shamans are associated with communication not with the world of angels, but with the devil.

This is where the spirit of unity calls us in this case. And this is invariably preserved in all ecumenical manifestations, for ecumenism, in essence, is a heresy of heresies.

“Unholy” the Holy Fathers called all teachings that distorted true ideas about God, and therefore violated the living saving connection with Him. Proclaiming the idea that truth is everywhere, and therefore nowhere specifically, ecumenism as a teaching rebels against the words of the Savior: "I am the way, the truth and the life" (John 14:6) and “All who were before Me are thieves and robbers.”

"Truth" is always unique. The completeness and purity of Divine Revelation is contained and preserved today only by the Holy Orthodox Church. And Truth is supramundane and timeless. This is very important to realize now, when the whole world is increasingly plunging into the abyss of sin.

For example, in America and other countries that have adopted modern “culture,” the official abolition of marriage and the legalization of “free love” instead of marriage (the so-called “Family” and other sectarian groups) are being intensively promoted. Homosexuality has been legalized, to the point of establishing a special rite of “church” marriage for homosexuals, etc.

If the Church keeps up with the times, it will not be the Church, but “Sodom and Gomorrah,” which will not escape God’s punishment sooner or later. But in this sea of ​​sin, the Lord Himself preserves His Holy Church in purity and immaculateness. She still remains source of holiness, giving birth to new celestials. And that is why all the forces of hell turned against her.

It is natural that most totalitarian sects declare it as their only enemy. This is a sign that only the Orthodox Church today poses a real danger to the forces of darkness, representing a stronghold of light.

The entry of the Russian Orthodox Church into the ecumenical movement in 1961 was justified by the desire to testify to the Truth before pseudo-Christian movements. Today there is no need for this form of evidence. Why? The real situation today gives us an answer to this question: Protestants, Catholics and various sects use friendly contacts of the Russian Orthodox Church for missionary activities. Therefore, without a doubt, the Russian Orthodox Church today does not feel any need for an ecumenical movement.

Communication between an Orthodox Christian and a sectarian or a representative of heterodoxy can affect a person’s spiritual state. It leads to a weakening of church life and taste for Orthodoxy, leads to the erasure in the human mind of the boundaries and framework of what is permitted and what is not permitted. Thus, communication and contacts with heterodoxy lead to new opinions that are contrary to the teachings of the Church. Let us briefly list them:

1. The theory about the possibility of salvation outside the Orthodox Church, which contradicts all Holy Scripture and negates the entire meaning and significance of the redemptive feat of Christ.

2. Denial of the doctrine of original sin as inherited from Adam and Eve; responsibility for the sin of the first parents of every person who is born and therefore needs baptism from infancy, on which the decision of the Council of Carthage is based (the 124th rule on infant baptism). The goal is clear - to admit into human consciousness the idea of ​​salvation outside the body of Christ, that is, outside the Church.

3. Recognition of the grace of the sacraments among the heretics: Latins, Monophysites, Nestorians, as well as completely empty statements about the supposedly preserved apostolic succession among the heretics. Both ideas have no basis in the teaching of the Church. On the contrary, in the message of St. Basil the Great to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium, which was included in the compulsory collection of canonical rules for every Christian, we find their complete refutation and inadmissibility.

Today, more than ever, we must and must be aware of the times we live in, both in word and in deed. defend the truth from encroachers, blasphemers of faith, to understand that ecumenism will deprive the birthright, that is, Grace.

The earthly path of our Church is similar to the earthly path of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is filled with suffering, persecution and misunderstanding, for her kingdom is “not of this world.” This is the path of every Christian soul thirsting for salvation...

“The Orthodox Church is the true Church of Christ, which bears His wounds and does not compromise in matters of faith, does not seek power over the world and glory, but remains in simplicity and humility, like its Founder,” says the modern Athonite ascetic. But this sorrowful and narrow path is, according to the Lord Himself, the only saving one.

Therefore, at the entrance of one of the Athos monasteries the words: “Orthodoxy or death” are written.

We reject ecumenism as a heretical teaching not because of a lack of love for man, on the contrary, out of boundless love for him, becauseThere is no salvation outside the true Church .

This is what the Holy Fathers teach us. And in our morning prayer, turning to the Lord, we say the words: “Those who have departed from the Orthodox Faith and are blinded by destructive heresies, enlighten them with the light of Your knowledge and bring them closer to Your Holy Apostolic Catholic Church.”

About false prophets and false teachers “All of them, no matter how many of them came before Me, are thieves and robbers; but the sheep did not listen to them"

By thieves and robbers who came before the Lord, we must understand (as Blessed Jerome of Stridon teaches) false prophets, false teachers, and then heretics of all shades and times, who were not sent by the Lord (Rom. 10:15), but came of their own free will . True prophets and teachers were always sent by the Lord (Exodus 3:10-12; Jeremiah 1:5; John 20:21), but the Lord never sent false ones; they themselves went to prophesy and teach falsely in the name of God (Jer. 14, 14) and introduce destructive heresies (2 Pet. 2:1-2).

The Word of God shows the signs of false prophets and false teachers:

Is. 41, 22. Let them imagine and tell us what will happen; let them announce something before it happened, and we will delve into it with our minds and find out how it ended, or let them foretell to us about the future.

Jer. 28:9. If any prophet predicted peace, then only he was recognized as the prophet whom the Lord truly sent when the word of that prophet came true.

Mf. 24:24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. Mf. 24, 25. Behold, I told you in advance. Mf. 24, 26. So if they say to you, “Behold, He is in the wilderness,” do not go out; “Behold, He is in the secret chambers,” do not believe it;

Mf. 24, 27. For as lightning comes from the east and is visible even to the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

2 Pet. 2.1. There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and, denying the Lord who bought them, will bring upon themselves quick destruction. 2 Pet. 2, 2. And many will follow their corruption, and through them the way of truth will be reproached.

Mf. 7:20. Therefore by their fruits you will know them. They are ravenous wolves that must be guarded against:

Mf. 7:15. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. Wed: 1 John 4.1.

They dare to proclaim false visions in the name of God:

Jer. 14, 14. And the Lord said unto me, The prophets prophesy falsely in my name; I did not send them, nor command them, nor speak to them; they tell you false visions and fortune-telling, and empty things and the dreams of their hearts. Wed: Jer. 23, 26-27.

Testimonies of the Word of God about punishments for false prophets:

Jer. 23, 30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, says the Lord, who steal my words from one another.

Jer. 23, 32. Behold, I am against the prophets of false dreams, says the Lord, who tell them and lead my people astray with their deceptions and deceptions, although I did not send them or command them, and they bring no benefit to this people, says the Lord.

Acts 13:10. He said: O full of all deceit and all evil, son of the devil, enemy of all righteousness! will you stop turning aside from the straight paths of the Lord?

Acts 13, 11. And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you: you will be blind and will not see the sun for a time. And suddenly darkness and darkness fell upon him, and he, turning here and there, looked for a counselor.

Punishment for those who listen to false prophets:

Jer. 14, 16. And the people to whom they (the false prophets) prophesy will be scattered through the streets of Jerusalem from famine and sword, and there will be no one to bury them - they and their wives, and their sons, and their daughters; and I will pour out their evil upon them.

Ezek. 14:10. And they will bear the guilt of their iniquity: as is the guilt of the one who inquires, such will be the guilt of the prophet.

The Apostle warns believers to guard themselves against the deception of teaching: “Not many become teachers” (James 3:1). Why? Yes, because teachers in the Church are already appointed by God (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11). Because also, “how can we preach if they are not sent”? (Rom. 10:15). And who sends or sent the sectarian preachers who are now scattered everywhere? “God sends us,” they say. But where is the evidence of this messengership? For true preachers, evidence is their ordination, succession from the apostles (Acts 14:23; 1 Tim. 4:14; Tit. 1:5, etc.).

Jesus Christ himself pointed out the need for pastoral leadership in the Church when he said to Peter: “Feed the sheep...my lambs” (John 21:15-17). And we see from Scripture exactly who and how they used this power in the Church of Christ (2 Tim. 4:2; Tit. 1:13).

So, throw away the powerless deciders of your sins (false prophets and false teachers); they purely bind your conscience, turn to the divinely established order of shepherds of the Church of God, successively from the Holy Apostles having the power to bind and solve the sins (Matthew 18:18) of people, real power, not imaginary, not fictitious.

Blessing of the Church of the Intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary
Nikolsk-Ussuriysky
2003

A) ORTHODOX OBJECTIONS TO ECUMENISM

Patriarch of Alexandria Nicholas VI (1968-1986) in an interview with the Athens newspaper “Orthodoxos Tipos” (1972, No. 170) spoke out very sharply against the ecumenical movement: “I condemn. We are well aware of the anti-Christian forces that control ecumenism behind the scenes... Ecumenism is directed against Orthodoxy. It represents today the greatest danger, along with the unbelief of our era, which deifies material attachments and pleasures” 418.

Orthodox nun Marina Diba from Russia with a pagan amulet on her chest during the congress

in Vancouver in 1983

At a time when all Local Orthodox Churches participate in the WCC, the spirit of the zealots of Orthodoxy is strengthened by such courageous words of the Alexandrian High Hierarch: “I greet and bless all clergy and laity who are fighting ecumenism!” 419. The Patriarch also sent a wish to the Holy Synod of the Greek Church to withdraw from the WCC 420. It should have been addressed to all Local Orthodox Churches, because without taking this decisive step now, while there are still Orthodox-minded hierarchs

and lay people devoted to Orthodoxy, tomorrow - with an ecumenically re-educated new generation - it will be too late!

Fortunately, a similar proposal in our days was made by the Mother of Churches - the Holy Patriarchate of Jerusalem, in the person of its worthy Primate - His Beatitude Patriarch Diodorus of Jerusalem, who, together with the Holy Synod, decided to stop the participation of the Church of Jerusalem in dialogues with the heterodox and in the WCC. In his report to the Holy Synod, he directly stated: “The Church of Jerusalem, as the “Mother of Churches,” must set an example of imitation in matters of faith and preserve the faith intact, as it received it from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who founded it with His honest Blood. Therefore, today, when the whole world is going through difficult times and is faced with the efforts of modern propaganda to revise moral values ​​and traditions, the Jerusalem Church is obliged to raise its voice in order to protect its flock from alien influences and fight for the preservation of the Orthodox faith... Our Orthodox Church unshakably believes , that it contains the fullness of truth, that it is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and the Treasury of Grace and Truth... in which all the dogmas of our Faith and the Holy Scriptures are contained in all purity and salvation. The participation of the Orthodox Church in dialogues is harmful and dangerous. Non-Orthodox people use theological dialogues to the detriment of our Orthodox Church.”

Further pointing out the damage to the Orthodox flock from heterodox proselytism (especially in the Middle East), Patriarch Diodorus concludes: “Our desire to keep our Orthodox faith and traditions intact from the dangerous actions of the heterodox forced us to stop dialogues not only with the Anglicans, who have already introduced the ordination of women , but also dialogues with papists, non-Chalcedonians, Lutherans and Reformed confessions, in which from the very beginning the Jerusalem Church did not participate” 421.

Other local Orthodox Churches seriously criticize ecumenism and the WCC. For example, in 1973, the Synod of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church in America published an extensive District Epistle on issues of Christian unity and ecumenism (Bulletin of the Russian Western European Patriarchal Exarchate, 1973, No. 83-84, pp. 163-181, 239-256). The message contains wonderful thoughts about the unity of the Church as unity in Truth, love and holiness, and it is strongly emphasized that “the Orthodox Church is the true Church.” She is the “one Church of Christ,” since since the time of the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles the Orthodox Church

I did not accept any incorrect teachings and any false life ideals. The Orthodox Church is the one, indivisible Church of Christ, not because of human deeds, but because, by the grace of God, revealed in the blood of martyrs and in the testimony of saints, the Orthodox Church has preserved to this day the mission given to it by God - to be for the world “the Church that is His (Christ’s) body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all” (Eph. 1:23).

The message correctly identifies the danger of relativism, that is, the danger of turning the dogmatic truths of faith into something relative through ecumenism, and the danger of secularism, that is, the secularization of the Church through ecumenical efforts “to unite people on the basis of worldly ideology” 423. The message also exposes the erroneous ecumenical belief that the structure of the Church - doctrine and moral ideals are relative and can be changed for the sake of practical goals, as if “the sacramental, hierarchical Christian order of the Church, coming from apostolic times, is supposedly not essential for the Christian faith and the unity of the Church.” The American Orthodox bishops courageously declared: “We consider it our sacred duty to reject all false methods of unifying the Church and insistently affirm that all doctrinal, ethical and sacramental compromises that change the order of the Church ... will in no way lead to the unity of all people in Christ and will not be able to unite Christians in one church” 424. Following this logic, intercommunion is decisively rejected as a means of achieving Christian unity, for “outside the unity of faith in the One Church of Christ, which cannot be divided, there can be neither sacramental communion nor liturgical concelebration.” The bishops of the American Autocephalous Orthodox Church also condemned “the attempt to turn ecumenism into a kind of universal church,” that is, into a super-church opposed to the Orthodox Church.

In 1973, when this message was published and when ecumenism had not yet shown its anti-Orthodoxy, the American Autocephalous Orthodox Church, for ideological reasons, was not part of the WCC and strongly criticized the evil trends in ecumenism. One could have expected that such a critically negative attitude would continue and deepen after two assemblies of the WCC, especially after the Vancouver one, where the extreme anti-Orthodox innovations of ecumenism were revealed. However, this Church not only did not come out with a new protest, but, on the contrary,

Having become a member of the WCC, she took part in the said assembly, joining the previously condemned ecumenical deeds of darkness, about which St. ap. Paul writes: “Do not participate in the unfruitful works of darkness, but rebuke them!” (Eph. 5:11).

Much more consistent is the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, which in August 1983, immediately after the Vancouver Assembly, issued an anathema against ecumenism. Here is the verbatim text of this document: “Anathema to those who take up arms against the Church of Christ and teach that the Church of Christ was divided into so-called “branches,” which differ from each other in teaching and in their way of life, or that the Church did not exist visibly, but supposedly will be formed in the future, when all the “branches” or parts or confessions and even all religions will unite into one body. Anathema - and to those who do not distinguish the Priesthood and Sacraments of the Church from the “priesthood” and “sacraments” of heretics, but say as if the baptism and Eucharist of heretics are sufficient for salvation. Hence, anathema - and to those who consciously communicate with the said heretics or defend, spread and intercede for their newly-minted heresy of ecumenism under the pretext of supposed brotherly love or the supposed unification of divided Christians! 427. The text of the anathema, although short, is clear enough that it does not require commentary. This is the only officially pronounced anathema against modern ecumenical heresy!

It must be said that the Moscow Patriarchate also opposed it at one time, convening the Conference of Autocephalous Orthodox Churches in July 1948 with the goal of officially rejecting the invitation received to participate in the 1st General Assembly in August 1948 in Amsterdam, when the World Council of Churches was founded.

At this Moscow meeting many reports were read on the dangers of ecumenism. Particularly noteworthy was the report of the Russian Archbishop from Bulgaria Seraphim (Sobolev), who considered ecumenism as a heresy against the dogma of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church set forth in the 9th article of the Creed. Consistently examining these four properties of the Church, Archbishop. Seraphim showed how ecumenism distorts them in order to create its own ecumenical “church”, uniting all heretics along with Orthodox Christians. “Orthodox ecumenists,” he wrote, “distort the ninth member of the Creed beyond recognition. The result is some kind of unnatural confusion of truth with lies, Orthodoxy with heresies, which leads Orthodox ecumenists to an extreme distortion of the true concept of the Church, and so much so that they, being members of the Orthodox Church, are at the same time members of the ecumenical Church, or rather , some kind of universal heretical society with its countless heresies. They should always remember the words of Christ: “If the Church also disobeys, let you be like a pagan and a publican” (Matthew 18:17). Archbishop's report. Seraphim ended with the words of the psalm: “Blessed is the man who does not follow the advice of the wicked!” (77p. 1, 1), answering the question in the title of the report: “Does the Russian Orthodox Church need to participate in the ecumenical movement?” 428.

Despite this excellent report, the final resolution of the Conference on the issue of ecumenism, although directed against it, was not entirely satisfactory, since it was of an opportunistic nature: at the end it was emphasized that “the participants in this Conference are forced to refuse participation in the ecumenical movement, in its modern sense" 429. The last words concealed a loophole for the recognition of ecumenism in other circumstances.

Less than ten years after the Moscow meeting, in May 1958, at the celebrations on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the restoration of the Patriarchate, Metropolitan Nikolai Krutitsky, in his speech “Orthodoxy and Modernity,” first outlined the “new” attitude of the Moscow Patriarchate to ecumenism. Recalling the District Address of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of 1920, which allegedly “defined the position of the Orthodox Church towards the ecumenical movement” 430, he explained the refusal of the Moscow Conference of 1948 to participate in the Amsterdam Assembly by the fact that then in ecumenism socio-economic ideas dominated the task of dogmatic unity and earthly order stood above heavenly salvation, the Resolution of the Moscow Conference of 1948 supposedly contributed to overcoming these difficulties, and therefore “significant changes have occurred in the ecumenical movement over the past ten years, indicating its evolution towards churchism.” In conclusion, “endorsing the Declaration of the Orthodox Participants of the Evanston Assembly”” 1, the Russian Orthodox Church announced its consent to a meeting with the leaders of the WCC, but for now with the sole purpose of “mutual acquaintance with views on the feasibility and forms of further relations” 432.

Official meetings with ecumenical representatives of the WCC then became frequent, and three years later, in December 1961, they led to the official admission of the Russian Orthodox Church as a member of the WCC at the Third General Assembly in Delhi. As is known, this process took place under pressure from the Soviet government, on whose instructions the Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate decided to join the WCC on March 30, 1961 and immediately sent a statement to Geneva 433 . However, the synodal decision was subject to approval by the Council of Bishops, which was convened only on July 18, 1961 434 and approved it after the fact. On June 14, 1961, a month before the Council of Bishops, the All-Christian Conference for the Defense of Peace, held in Prague, sent a welcoming message to the WCC, which said: “We consider the already announced entry of the Russian Orthodox Church into the World Council of Churches as one of the most decisive events in the church history" 435.

Is it worth commenting on this extremely transparent statement?

But even under the ecumenical yoke, the Russian Orthodox Church has more than once expressed its dissatisfaction and disagreement with the line of the WCC. After the Bangkok Conference on the topic “Salvation Today” (Denary 1973), the Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate headed by Patriarch Pimen sent a message to the WCC, stating in it: “First of all, it is puzzling and very regrettable that the “Letter to the Churches” contains There is no extremely important, primarily from a pastoral point of view, mention of that side of the salvation process, without which the very concept of salvation loses its essential meaning. There is silence about the ultimate goal of salvation, that is, eternal life in God, and there is not enough clear indication of moral correction and improvement as a necessary condition for its achievement.”

Further, protesting against the almost exclusive emphasis on “horizontalism” in the matter of Christian salvation, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church writes: “Here there was no place for the main “vertical” dimension, which would indicate that salvation requires the improvement of the individual as a part of the social organism, called to fight sin in oneself and around oneself, for the sake of achieving the fullness of being in living communion with God both in earthly conditions and in eternity.” The synodal message conveyed the idea that “the almost exclusive emphasis on “horizontalism” in the matter of salvation affects many Christians to whom the sacred traditions of the Ancient Church are dear, may give the impression that in modern ecumenism a new temptation of modesty is emerging regarding the gospel of the Crucified and Risen Christ - God's power and God's wisdom (1 Cor. I, 23-24), as a result of which the very essence is kept silent His Gospels are out of a false fear of seeming out of date and losing popularity."

The message of the Synod after the V Assembly of the WCC in Nairobi in December 1975 was equally accusatory. It criticizes the artificial silencing of religious differences before the outside world, emphasizes the danger of turning the WCC into some kind of “super-church”, and decisively rejects the ecumenical proposal to allow a female “priesthood”. Finally, the unpleasant surprise of the Orthodox delegates is expressed at the “exclusion from the external design of the Assembly of common Christian symbols” 438, i.e., first of all, the Holy Cross!

Although all these unfortunate facts should have caused an immediate withdrawal from the WCC as a non-Christian gathering, the synodal message suddenly makes the completely opposite conclusion: “The Russian Orthodox Church, despite its disagreement with the negative aspects of the assembly, still values ​​​​its participation in this ecumenical fellowship of the World Council of Churches. Therefore, following the participants of the First General Assembly of the WCC in Amsterdam, we want to repeat, addressing our sisters and brothers in the World Council of Churches: “We have decided to stay together!” 439.

This illogical repetition, 28 years later, of the words of the participants in the Amsterdam Assembly decisively breaks any connection with the Orthodox position of the Moscow Conference of 1948, which refused to participate in the said assembly for reasons of principle that should have guided the Russian Orthodox Church, especially after Nairobi. The question arises: why were loud protests in the WCC necessary if it all ended in a return to the ecumenical swamp (2 Peter 2:22)?

The issue of joining the WCC was resolved simultaneously and in parallel with the issue of removing the clergy from the management of parishes. At the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in June 1988, this action was declared illegal, and the leadership position of the priest in the church parish was restored 440. It is also logical and natural to expect a reconsideration of the issue of the Russian Orthodox Church joining the WCC in 1961, as dictated by the same “complexities of the situation in which the Russian Church found itself in the late 50s and early 60s” 441.

Ecumenism was thoroughly criticized in the report “On some principles of the Orthodox understanding of ecumenism” by Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy Alexei Osipov, read at the II Congress of Orthodox Theologians in Athens in August 1976. Already in the introduction, the author emphasizes that, according to the Orthodox understanding, Christians should strive to achieve “not just unity, but unity in the Church,” and “unity not in any church, but in the true Church, that is, in the one which meets all the requirements of the Orthodox understanding of the Church as the body of Christ (Eph. 1:23), the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15)** 2. It is further emphasized that ecumenism sets the main goal of the external secularistic (secular) unity of Christians, forgetting about the main goal of Christianity - the eternal salvation of the soul. Criticizing the synodal message regarding the Bangkok Conference, Osipov rightly asks: “What can this emphasis on “horizontalism”, quite often found in various ecumenical documents and discussions, lead to Christians and churches participating in the ecumenical movement?” - and answers: “Not to mention the undoubted, in this case, loss of churchliness and even religiosity by the ecumenical movement, it may turn out to be an instrument for the ideological preparation of many, “if possible, even the elect” (Matthew 24:24), to accept the ideal, directly opposed to Christ” 4 “The last words, supported by Christ’s prophecy about the deception of the faithful before the end of the world, clearly indicate that the “ideal” opposite to Christ, to which ecumenism leads, is the anti-Christ false gospel (cf. Gal. 1, 6-7). ; 2 John 1, 7).

The author also condemns the extravagant modernist manifestations of unhealthy mysticism at ecumenical conferences, which he, in the spirit of Orthodox mysticism, defines as spiritual delusion, a state “tantamount to falling away from the Church” 444. Here is a quote from the message of the Patriarchate regarding the V Assembly of the WCC: “At the Assembly, in moments of... public prayer, an artificially created atmosphere of exaltation was revealed, which some are inclined to consider as the action of the Holy Spirit. From an Orthodox point of view, this can be qualified as a return to non-Christian religious mysticism” 445. At the end of the first critical part of the report, the author gives a summary: “Neither the secularist basis of the horizontal dimension nor spontaneous mysticism ... can be considered as positive signs of Christian unity. This can only be achieved on a purely ecclesiastical basis and only in the Church” 446.

In the second part, the ecumenical “theory of branches” is criticized by contrasting it with the Gospel comparison of the Church with a vine and branches (John 15: 1-6): “Just as not a single branch of the vine, according to the word of Christ, can bear fruit unless it on the vine, so for the divided churches there can be no other alternative but to seek the true Church and return to it” 447. Applying this principle to the Orthodox Church, the author draws the following conclusion: “If the modern Orthodox Church testifies to its devotion and fidelity to the Tradition of the Universal Church and calls on other Christian churches to do the same, then this cannot be regarded as some kind of narrow confessionalism or egocentrism. The Orthodox call not to themselves as a confession, but to unity with that one Truth that it has and to which anyone who seeks this Truth can join... The Truth can also be in a single church. And in this case, she is that One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, in communion with which all other Christian churches can find true unity. The Orthodox Church, as having preserved the Apostolic Tradition intact, is a real, visible expression of the Theanthropic organism of the Church” 448.

Warning that ecumenism often uses sacred Orthodox terms, giving them a meaning that is far from Orthodox content, and “can dissolve these sacred terms themselves in a sea of ​​ambiguity and lead to their complete devaluation” 449, the author strictly separates the Orthodox term “catholicity” (conciliarity ) of the Church from its ecumenical substitution of purely worldly concepts of “conciliary community”, adopted by the V Assembly of the WCC, and concludes: “Caphalicity, or conciliarity, is the integrity of the entire body of the Church, preserved by spiritual, doctrinal, sacramental, moralizing, institutional unity and receiving its fullness and finality in the unity of the Cup of the Lord" 450.

Having spoken so boldly about the ecumenical abuses of the Orthodox concept of the Church and other Orthodox concepts, Prof. Osipov could have wonderfully ended his report here, but suddenly at the very end he makes, unfortunately, an ecumenical pirouette that devalues ​​everything that has been presented so far. Apparently fearing ecumenical attacks on the truths expressed, he quotes in conclusion the above-mentioned article by Prof. prot. L. Voronova “Confessionalism and Ecumenism”: “The belief that the Orthodox Church is” the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church from the universal Creed... does not mean a fundamental denial of all other Christian churches or societies 451.

A valuable contribution to the study of the vicious psychology of ecumenism was made by Archimandrite Konstantin, a teacher of pastoral theology at the Russian Orthodox Seminary at the Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville (USA), which belongs to the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. In his course “Pastoral Theology,” the author explores the process of gradual apostasy (apostasy) from the faith, which will ultimately lead to the Antichrist (2 Thess. 2:3). There are two periods in this process.

1. The first period marks the beginning of a “stepwise retreat from the One True Church, which continued to live inviolably in its original truth,” which has been observed in the Church since apostolic antiquity until recently in the form of the falling away from the Church of Christ of heretical societies that reject or distort individual dogmatic truths . “Here, logically,” there was only one way to restore religious communion: a general return to the original bosom of the Church. Here, no “modalities” can be imagined. Truth is Truth, and those who have fallen away from the true faith have no other way of returning to the true

Has no church - outside; a repentant return to it, no matter what stage of retreat he stands at.”

2. The second period of apostasy from the faith occurs in our days and “is characterized by a craving for unity - but not on the basis of the return of those who have fallen away to the One True Church, which they abandoned, but on the basis of a search for a common language, common actions, common, even prayerful communication... between all participants of a certain collective whole, which can only conditionally be called “Christian” and in any case cannot be considered the “Body of Christ” as it is in the One True Church” 452.

So, “the emergence of a universal craving for unity along some indefinite horizontal line, in the abolition of the very thought of a repentant return to the bosom of true Orthodoxy along the vertical ladder (stepped) retreat - this is what determines the essence of the new phase of the life of world Christianity. Until this time, there was a process of step-by-step removal from the True Church... but the presence of Christians on individual steps of the ladder of “deviations” did not abolish the Faith... Nowadays, there is a withering away of this living sense of communion with the Living God... Nowadays, it is not the Living God who is spiritually drawn to - an empty soul, but to mutual communication in a dreamy craving for something sought. The inner gaze is no longer turned to one’s God, finding everything in one’s faith, but a confused gaze runs around, looking for something new... All the energy of church life is directed towards church-social manifestations... to the detriment, to impoverishment, to debilitation , in the abolition of each church’s own intimate life. Something extremely terrible, testifying to the extinction of the very source of spiritual life - the Church. This is “apostasy” in its concrete sense, as St. foretold it. ap. Paul in his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians (2, 3)... He means by “apostasy” (with an article before this word) not the long process that we have experienced, but precisely its final completion, which we have now entered. This is already a real preparation for the acceptance of the Antichrist” 453.

The author describes in detail the influence that apostasy has on individual religions. In Protestantism, “the dream of ecumenism replaced the reality of the Church, which was revealed to the Protestant consciousness,” especially after the First World War, when, in the form of Russian emigration pouring into the West, Protestantism came into close contact with Orthodoxy. Here “a direct mass meeting of Europeans with Orthodoxy arose. That was... a kind of “discovery” by the Christian West of our fatherland, in its Orthodox essence... now emerging in the Western consciousness as a kind of saving light of Christian Truth... But then, in the blink of an eye, a replacement of what seemed to be spiritually mature - the correct solution to the question - where to look for salvation? - its poisonous surrogate: “not in any of the churches, but only in the common church” (i.e., in the ecumenical church). The fatal role here was played by the so-called Russian modernism... - the theological direction that dominated in our fatherland, which turned its Western school to the corresponding interpretation of Orthodoxy and, naturally, found a common language with the Western aspirations for Orthodoxy, opening there an easy opportunity for the West to assimilate Orthodoxy, not genuine, but “adapted” for Western consciousness... To what extent is the Western and ecumenical attitude consciousness is a hint of Russian modernist theological thought, you can learn from the introductory article by Fr. Sergius Bulgakov to the collection “Christian Reunion” - “The Ecumenical Problem in the Orthodox Consciousness.” The subtitle of this article is already characteristic - “On the real unity of a divided church in faith, prayer and sacraments”... It is easy to imagine what resonance such words should have found in the consciousness of Protestantism with the awakening in it of a craving for the Church! This craving acquires real possibilities here , allowing them not to renounce their errors, but to carry them into the common treasury of church property. Thus, “Orthodox” saboteurs, such as the heretic Bulgakov and other foreign Russian free philosophers-“theologians,” diverted Protestantism, thirsting for churchliness, from its natural desire for Orthodoxy, directing him towards the utopian idea of ​​“an iridescent pan-Christianity that combined all the shades of everything possible” 454 in the form of Protestant ecumenism!

Such an unheard of defeat of the “Orthodox” ecumenists in the West, which became the reason for the alienation of non-Orthodox people from Orthodoxy, is the opposite of Catholic ecumenism, which seeks to subordinate everyone to papal authority, using for this purpose all possible means, one of which is the creation of the “Eastern rite”, to attract the Orthodox to papism 455.

Between two types of ecumenism - Protestant and papal, each of which seeks its own benefit, ecumenical "Orthodoxy" plays the humiliating role of a mediator, setting itself the goal of rapprochement and unification with both types alien to it at any cost, "with a complete lack of attention to its original Orthodox essence » 456.

The author dwells on the reason for this position of Orthodoxy in his 15th lecture. Emphasizing that the modern apostasy in the Orthodox Church is caused by the disastrous influence of Western freethinking, he states that because of it, Orthodoxy is gradually losing the idea of ​​​​the invaluable good that was entrusted to it by continuity that goes back to the very emergence of the New Testament Church. “Orthodoxy has ceased to perceive its historical significance as the Church Body, which occupies a specific place in time and space. Individual churches are losing the consciousness that their existence is determined by their actual belonging to the One Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, designated in the Creed.”

Thus, “it turns out little by little that the Orthodox Local Churches - these pillars of Christ’s truth, which no forces of hell are able to overthrow, themselves, with complete carelessness and recklessness, took the path of self-abolition... They slipped onto the common platform of the “Christian” the world in its misunderstanding of the essence of Christianity, thereby weakening its individually indisputable, historically given churchliness and... losing respect for its past, which contains in its inviolable continuity only the truth and all the truth of Orthodox churchliness; they were transformed from the one and only pillar and affirmation of the truth into a certain version of Christianity - equal to many others” 457. “All these “Christian” variants still live each their own historical life, which they must outlive, uniting into a certain collective Whole, which for the intact Orthodox consciousness personified the ripening apostasy, for the Orthodox consciousness clouded by this apostasy - becomes the only true “church.” The picture is pitiful! It leads to disastrous results in the rapprochement on the platform of ecumenism with heterodoxy... This is what we designate as “Orthodox ecumenism”! 458

Thus, “Orthodoxy, throwing off the priceless burden of its holy past, which lives in it and makes it the property of a blessed Eternity, is carried away by the assimilation of an ecumenical worldview - a certain final product of the Apostasy,” which “kills the teaching of Orthodoxy, dogma, fidelity to Scripture and Tradition, and the very idea infallibility of the Church and its immutability... kills the very Body of the Church, in its historical uniqueness, transforming all Orthodox church formations, completely independent of their objective church quality, into elements of a certain collective multitude, freely self-organizing - into “denominations 11!” 459.

As a result of the destructive activity of ecumenism, “ecumenical “Orthodoxy” comes to “self-destruction”, which, from its former indestructible stand in the Truth, literally leaves no stone unturned... A process of spiritual decay is observed, widespread, spontaneously capturing everyone and revealing the kinship of souls - on the basis of infection poison of Retreat! 460

A famous fighter against the ecumenical heresy of our time is the Serbian Archimandrite Justin Popović (d. 1979); Professor of Dogmatics at the Faculty of Theology at the University of Belgrade, author of many theological works, in particular the book “The Orthodox Church and Ecumenism,” translated and published in Greek in 1974 by his students in Thessaloniki.

The book is divided into two parts according to the title. In the first part, the author examines the Orthodox teaching about the Church (ecclesiology), focusing on the four main features of the Church - “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic”; and then on “Pentecost” and “Grace,” which was then given to the Church as God’s power acting in it, given in the “Holy Church Sacraments,” the fruit of the beneficial influence of which are the “Holy Virtues.” The general idea that unites these considerations is “everything that exists in the Church is Divine-human, since it comes from the God-man” 461.

In the second part of the book, the Theanthropic essence of the Church is contrasted with the human (humanistic) character of ecumenism in the following chapters:

1. Humanistic and Divine-human process.

2. Humanistic and Divine-human civilization.

3. Humanistic and Divine-human society.

4. Humanistic and Divine-human enlightenment.

In the penultimate chapter, “Man and the God-Man,” the humanistic principle “man is the measure of everything” is contrasted with the God-man Christ, Who became “once and for all the highest value and the main standard for the human race” 462.

In the last chapter, “Humanistic Ecumenism,” the author summarizes: “Ecumenism is the general name for false Christianity, the false churches of the West. All European humanism, led by papism, is concentrated in it. These false Christianity and false churches are nothing more than heresy upon heresy. Their common name is all-heresy. Why? Because throughout history, various heresies have denied or distorted certain qualities of the God-man Lord Jesus, and these heresies generally eliminate the God-man and put man in His place. There is no significant difference here between papism, Protestantism, ecumenism and other heresies, the name of which is “legion” (cf. Luke 8:30)” w.

In conclusion, entitled “The way out of hopelessness:”, Archimandrite Justin writes: “The way out of this hopelessness: humanistic, ecumenical, papist is the historical God-man Lord Jesus Christ and His historical theanthropic creation - the Church, of which He is the eternal Head, and which is His eternal Body! 464

Many Orthodox Greeks sharply criticize ecumenism, most notably Archimandrite Charalampios Vasilopoulos (d. 1982), long-time chairman of the Panhellenic Orthodox Union and editor of its official organ, Orthodoxos Typos, which we often quote. Let us dwell on his interesting book “Ecumenism without a Mask,” which was published in its second edition in 1972 in Athens.

Already in the preface to the question “What is current ecumenism?” the author answers: “This is a movement to unite heretical Western confessions, first with Orthodoxy, and then, at the next stage, of all religions into one monstrous pan-religion.

Finally, at the last stage of its dark plan, ecumenism aims to replace the service of the One God with the service of Satan! 465

The first chapter gives the history of Antichrist ecumenism (Catholic and Protestant), secretly led by Zionism and Freemasonry. The stages of the ecumenical movement are described, starting with the secular youth organizations of the Freemasons (YMCA, IVCA, Scoutism, etc.) and ending with the preparatory ecumenical commissions: “Life and Work” and “Faith and Order,” from which the World Council of Churches grew in 1948. Chapters 2 and 3 reveal the goals and plans of ecumenism for the disintegration of Christian states and the destruction of the Church.

la yesterday and what is the Russian Church doing today?”, which describes the evolution of the Moscow Patriarchate’s relationship to ecumenism - from its condemnation in 1948 to its entry into the WCC in 1961.

In Chapter 5, “Means Used by Ecumenism,” the author specifically dwells on the so-called. “Pan-Orthodox Conferences”, which were convened in 1961 and 1963 on the island of Rhodes. The chairman of the 1st meeting, at which plans for reforms in Orthodoxy were outlined, was the Greek Metropolitan of Philippi Chrysostomos, who the following year, 1962, was elected Archbishop of Athens under the name Chrysostomos II (1962-1967). When in 1968 the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras convened a second meeting and strongly insisted on the participation of the Greek Church, Archbishop Chrysostomos II, well aware of the ecumenical intentions of the first meeting, decisively refused this with the support of the entire Greek hierarchy. Archim. Charalampius very vividly describes these events as an eyewitness to the confessional feat of Archbishop Chrysostomos. He dwells in detail on the question of the preparation of the VIII Ecumenical Council, then called the “Great and Holy Council”, and cites statements about it by another modern fighter against ecumenism - the Greek Metropolitan Augustine of Florence, who directly stated... “Let a Council be convened, but one that would condemn the greatest and most terrible heresy, the heresy of heresies - ecumenism!” 466.

Chapter 6 shows the intermediaries used by ecumenism: heretics, secular government officials, corrupt church hierarchies, etc.

In the second part “Rod against the prick!” the treacherous work of the Jews against Christians is revealed, and based on the text of the ancient historian Ammianus Marcellinus (History, book 23, chapter 1), they are reminded of their unsuccessful attempt, with the help of Emperor Julian the Apostate, to restore the Old Testament Temple of Jerusalem, destroyed by the Romans in 70: “From what survived terrible tongues of fire burst out from the foundation of the temple and scorched the workers.”

In the same first chapter, it is revealed and justified that “Muslimism is a creation of Judaism,” created by Jews to undermine Christianity, which, however, providentially turned against them. In the second chapter, terrible facts and cruel scenes of the bloody persecution carried out by the papists against the Orthodox in Serbia during the last world war, which killed 800,000 people, were published, documented with photographs, as well as the persecution of Orthodoxy in 1968 in Czechoslovakia.

The final third chapter concludes: Orthodox Christians “are obliged to prevent the desecration of Orthodoxy by damned ecumenism!”

Among Greek theologians, the great opponent of ecumenism is Constantine Mouratidis, a professor at the Faculty of Theology at the University of Athens, who in a public lecture on October 21, 1970, characterized ecumenism as demonism, 467 and in a television interview on May 15, 1972, pointed out three dangers posed by ecumenism for Orthodoxy: a) destruction of Orthodox feeling; b) violation of the religious unity of the Greek people; c) the harmful influence of the WCC, subordinate to the Protestant pan-heresy 468.

Regarding the last point, Prof. Mouratidis said: “It is very alarming that, under the influence of ecumenical theology, some Orthodox theologians, without hesitation, make proposals that are destructive for the dogmatics and canonical structure of the Orthodox Church” 469.

As far as we know, the most significant theological work of recent times against ecumenism is the work of the Greek theologian A. D. Delibasi “The Heresy of Ecumenism” (Athens, 1972, 304 pp.), which has the subtitle “Salvation in Christ, heresies and pan-heresies of ecumenism” and the epigraph “ The extreme fall is the fall of the soul.”

Epigraph taken from St. Gregory of Nyssa 470, the author classifies it as a heresy and notes: “The acceptance of heresy is truly an extreme fall of the soul” 471. “The panheresy of ecumenism is the greatest evil on earth, for it fights against the greatest good, which is the Orthodox Christian faith. Fighting against the Orthodox faith, ecumenism opposes the Divinely revealed truth, which is our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Ecumenism has a Christ-fighting and God-fighting character... Speaking against God, ecumenism attacks the Orthodox Church, which is the “body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:27) and the treasury of God’s truth and grace. Ecumenism is the greatest anti-Christian, anti-human and inhuman heresy of all centuries!” 474.

This work consists of four sections: the first section talks about our salvation in Christ; in the second - about heresies as enemies of human salvation in Christ; in the third - about the modern heresy of ecumenism; in the fourth - about modern theology.

The first two sections lead to the main theme developed in the third, which consists of two parts: “The first part examines the origin and development of the ecumenical heresy among heretics, and the second describes the destructive behavior of many Orthodox regarding the ecumenical movement 475 and the participation of “Orthodox” ecumenists in assemblies WCC.

Finally, in the fourth section, entitled “Apostasy and Repentance,” the reasons are named “why many Orthodox Christians tolerate the heresy of ecumenism and even unite with it, becoming its pitiful but also dangerous guides” 476 . The author sees the main reason in the “turn of Eastern theology to the “scientific” theology of the heretical West,” which is why “the new Orthodox theology is not original, but introduced,” that is, it is no longer patristic as it was before. “Ignorance of the Holy Fathers, but knowledge of heterodox authors is characteristic of this “new” theology. But the saddest thing is that Orthodox theologians in most cases learn about the “views” of the Holy Fathers through non-Orthodox ones,” admits with regret the prominent Orthodox dogmatist Prof. P. Trembelas 477. “By learning from foreign teachers, Orthodox Christians learn not what they what the Holy Fathers teach in reality, but what the heretics say about the Holy Fathers and their teaching!” 478.

As is known, heretical “theology” is not essentially theology, but human theology, since “the theology of the heterodox is based not on the Word of God, but on human

word”, which subjects to rationalistic criticism what God Himself deigned to reveal to us through the revealed teaching of God, graciously interpreted by the Holy Fathers. “After all this,” the author concludes, “is it any wonder that theologians, filled with “theology” borrowed from heretics, act in support of the heresy of ecumenism and to the detriment of the Orthodox Church, showing hostility towards Orthodoxy and descending towards heresy. Because of sympathies for heresy they are not able to correctly teach the word of God’s truth and are not able to be champions of the Orthodox Church” 480.

The author ends his work with a call to true Orthodox Christians to be “faithful even to death” (Rev. 2:10) in the fight against the pan-heresy of ecumenism as “the extreme fall of the soul” and inspires them with the liturgical exclamation: “Let us become kind, let us become fearful!” 481

The Greek physician Alexander Kalomiros wrote an entire book “Against the Supporters of False Unification” (Athens, 1964), in which, on the basis of the revelation of God and the absoluteness of the Orthodox truth, he mercilessly denounces so and so. “Orthodox” ecumenists as traitors to Orthodoxy for the sake of earthly benefits and pseudo-humane goals. It shows the anti-Christian nature of the views of people who seek to unite “churches,” because for them there is no One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, but there are many “churches” that disagree with each other. Kalomiros further writes: “If the Church is divided - and it is divided - since it needs unification, then everything that Christ promised turns out to be a lie. But let us not say such blasphemy! The Church lives and will live until the end of the world, indivisible and invulnerable, according to the promise of Christ the Lord (Matthew 12:25; 16:18). And those who talk about the “unification of churches” simply deny Christ and His Church!” 482.

Protesting against compromises in faith, the author writes: “It is not Christ who desires the so-called. “unification of churches”, and the world”... “All these movements for the unification of states and churches, all these compromises, all this monotony of humanity organized by the pressure of technical culture is preparation for the coming of the Antichrist” 483.

For true believers, the Church is a new saving Noah's Ark. “But when the time of the Antichrist approaches, the ark of the Church will become difficult to discern. Then many will say: “Here is Christ” and “There is Christ” (Matthew 24:23). But these will be false prophets (24, 23)... The official church, gradually betraying the treasures of faith, will look like something completely amorphous. With Lucifer's cunning, she will retain most of the external signs of the church. And only here and there small groups of believers with individual clergy will still keep the true Tradition alive.”

The world cannot love true Christians who disagree with its general trend. Kalomiros writes about them: “Once upon a time, idolaters hated Christians with such hatred as the “Christian” world now hates them... But precisely this hatred is a sign by which one can understand whether we are true Christians: “If the world hates you, know “that he hated Me before you” (John 15:18), the Lord warns us. In the Antichrist world kingdom, united by lies, true Christians will be the only dissonance in the devilish “harmony”. These days will be days of great tribulation for them (Matt. 24, 21). This will be a new period of martyrdom - more spiritual than physical. In this world-wide kingdom, Orthodox Christians will become slandered members of society. But “Christians do not live for this world of exile, they do not recognize it as their fatherland.” decorate as if they will live in it forever. They live on this earth as pilgrims, with some longing for the lost fatherland - paradise. "The kingdom intended for the friends of God has nothing in common with this world. It is not made by hands and is eternal!” Kalomiros sums up his thoughts.

As already mentioned, ecumenism is not interested in the eternal Heavenly Kingdom of God, but is focused on the organization of earthly life and the creation of earthly pleasures, which is why it strives to unite at all costs - even at the expense of Divine truths - all believers and non-believers. He has a purely earthly and political task - to establish connections with world faiths and with world movements. In its Charter, the WCC officially states: “Cooperation with representatives of other religions is necessary.”

Based on this, how can one justify the behavior of some “Orthodox” ecumenists who talk about “reasonable ecumenism” 484 or “healthy ecumenism,” as the Athenian Archbishop Jerome put it! 485 With these euphemisms and decorative concepts they try to justify the participation of the Orthodox Church in the ecumenical movement. But is it really possible, after the above, to call ecumenism “reasonable” if in words and in deeds it contradicts the infallibility inherent in St. Christ's Church to the Divine Mind, which the saints acquired. the apostles and about which one of them declared on behalf of all: “But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16). Ecumenism is neither reasonable nor healthy, for it not only does not spread “sound teaching” (Tit. 1:9) and does not follow “the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Tim. 6:3), but, on the contrary, strives to infect

to destroy with dogmatic unbelief and canonical treason the little flock of Christ (Luke 12:32), which remains healthy on earth for now. Only the ecumenism of the pure dogmatically and canonically immaculate St. is reasonable and healthy. Christ's Orthodox Church!

Nowadays, many want to make a career through ecumenism, calling our era “ecumenical.” Standing apart from the ecumenical ferment may seem strange and even risky. An Orthodox Christian understands this well and knows that by opposing the ecumenical spirit, he can incur many unpleasant epithets, such as: “retrograde”, “poor-minded”, “narrow fanatic”, “schismatic”, and even be subjected to obvious persecution, according to the word St. ap. Paul: “All who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim. 3:12). But nothing can deviate an Orthodox Christian from his firmly chosen and perfect line of behavior, for he:

1) firmly believes in the unique salvation of the Orthodox faith and is afraid to change it under pain of eternal death;

2) is guided not only by his Orthodox feeling, but also by Orthodox reason, which strengthens him along this path;

3) draws from the history of the Church many examples that inspire him in his unswerving adherence to the holy and dear Orthodoxy, which is now so unceremoniously neglected by both his own and others!

What do today's ecumenists actually achieve? They preach that all believers of all religions should stretch out their hands to each other 486. In this way they create a new pantheon in which there would be a place for every religious belief. In this ecumenical pantheon, all kinds of faiths are tolerated, all of them are recognized as “good.” Orthodoxy is also accepted into this pantheon on a common basis, as long as it renounces its claims that it alone teaches the right faith in God. In this case, a universal peace is promised, built on the basis of syncretism, that is, on the basis of the equivalence of all faiths. If Orthodoxy insists on its righteousness and exclusivity, then it will be persecuted by “tolerant” ecumenism.

In one of the works of the French specialist in the history of Ancient Rome, Gaston Boissier, about the Church of Christ during the times of pagan persecution, it is said: “From the general agreement of all cults, only two cults were excluded - Judaism and Christianity... All other religions managed to achieve recognition through concessions. Only Jews and Christians, by the nature of their faith, could not accept such a compromise. Being outside the general consensus, they could not count on religious tolerance... Their firmness in rejecting other people's beliefs and in protecting their own without any admixture, as the only true ones, first caused great surprise, and then the furious anger of the Greco-Roman world... Fierce hatred softened towards the Jews only when they united with the pagans in the common persecution of Christianity" 487 .

Then the hatred of the pagans turned to Christians. “Subsequently, attempts were made to fit the God of Christians to other gods. The oracle of Apollo even began to falsely praise Him, and the philosopher Porphyry, although a zealous pagan, did not refuse to recognize the Divinity of Christ (see Blessed Augustine, “On the City of God,” book 19, chapter 23). It is known that Emperor Alexander Severus placed His image next to the images of Orpheus and Apollonius of Tyana in his home chapel, where he prayed to his household gods every morning. But this approach caused horror among true Christians. They responded to the admonitions sent to them by pagan philosophers and priests with the following firm words from their sacred books: “Whoever sacrifices to the gods, except the Lord alone, let him be destroyed” (Ex. 22:20). The pagans could not understand this (see Tertulian, Apologetics, ch. 277), and this aroused intolerance and anger in them. No one accused Christians of introducing a new god into Rome: this was a common occurrence in the last two centuries. But what surprised and outraged the pagans was that their God did not want to fit with other gods in the rich pantheon where all the gods were gathered. This resistance of Christians, who fled from the rest of the world and kept their faith pure from any alien influence, can only explain the cruelty of the persecution to which they were subjected for three centuries from a people who treated other religions so favorably!” 488.

History repeats itself. According to the remark of the aforementioned Orthodox zealot, Metropolitan Augustine of Florence: “Ecumenism is a return to the ancient current - syncretism, thanks to which the ancient peoples, doubting the truth of their religions, tried to quench their metaphysical thirst, since streams of many different beliefs flowed and merged into this current” 489. Not only all Christian confessions, but also all religions are invited to join the current syncretic pantheon of ecumenism - the WCC. This idea is becoming increasingly popular among the masses. People strive for peace and earthly goods, and for this they are ready for religious compromise and agree to any religious syncretism. That this is displeasing to God, is prohibited by the Bible, sacred dogmas and church canons, they care little! One thing is important for them - to remove religious disagreements at all costs, even at the cost of compromises, and to achieve earthly peace, earthly truth, even if this gives rise to a conflict with God and His truth! As the Russian religious philosopher Konstantin Leontiev perspicaciously said in the last century: “Before human truth, people will forget the Divine truth.”

An Orthodox Christian cannot, for the sake of opportunistic human truth, which opposes God's absolute truth and truth, enter into compromises with a heterodox faith!

B) DEVIATION FROM THE HOLY ORTHODOXY OF SOME HIGH HIERARCHES

This statement sounds strange, but here are the words spoken by the Patriarch of Alexandria Nicholas VI during a visit to Alexandria by the Bulgarian Patriarch Maxim in May 1973: “And now Orthodoxy can show blood and martyr’s crowns, persecution and sorrow. But along with this, one can point out the betrayal and trampling of Traditions on the part of his firstborn.” In the same speech, Patriarch Nicholas VI called for “to fight against all the trends of our time that are trying to push the ship of Orthodoxy into the abyss of chaos and disorder!” 491.

In the German Orthodox magazine “Orthodoxy Hoite” (1967, no. 19, p. 21) we read the following: “Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople instructed the rector of the Orthodox center in Taizé (France), Archimandrite Damascus, to begin theological negotiations with representatives of the Catholic and evangelical faiths on communion at ecumenical services." Some French newspapers reported at the beginning of 1970 that the same Patriarch told one Protestant pastor, a monk from Taizé, who visited him in Vienna: “You are a priest. I could confess to you,” adding: “We should have concelebrated!” (Protestants, by the way, do not recognize the sacrament of Confession at all).

Patriarch Athenagoras committed offenses against Orthodoxy on many counts. He believed that clergy could get married even after their ordination, that is, monastics could get married without losing their rank, and marriage priests could enter into a second marriage! Patriarch Athenagoras also spoke out against priestly attire. In his opinion, “a dialogue of love* is more important than theological disputes, that is, the search for truth. Because of his ecumenical innovations, some Greek metropolitans (Polycarp of Sisania, Augustine of Florinus, Paul of Methym, Ambrose of Eleutheropolis, etc.) stopped commemorating him and stood firm to the end, although this threatened them with deprivation of their rank! 49*

Outrage at the ecumenical innovations of Patriarch Athenagoras, in particular his rapprochement with Rome and the unauthorized lifting (12/7/1965) of the 1054 anathema from the pope, also gripped the Athonite monks and his jurisdiction, who stopped commemorating Athenagoras on St. liturgy. Subsequently, when, after punitive measures by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the Athonite monasteries had to commemorate him, the Esphigmenou monastery hung a black banner with the inscription: “Orthodoxy or death!” and has remained true to this motto to this day!

In an open letter to Patriarch Afigagoras dated February 14, 1966, Greek Archpriest N. D. Karabelas wrote: “Ten years ago, when I was in the USA, I visited the Orthodox Christians of Rapid City. They told me that they receive communion in the Episcopal Church and that Patriarch Athenagoras, being the Archbishop in America, allowed them to receive communion from local Protestants,” that is, already in America Athenagoras resolved in a completely non-Orthodox spirit the question of intercommunication with non-Orthodox people.

“A group of Athonite abbots, hieromonks and monks addressed a lengthy message to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, in which they express their dissatisfaction with its silence in 1967-1970. regarding the facts and actions in which betrayal of the Orthodox Faith and Tradition was committed. They list 11 cases of treason, especially blaming Patriarch Athenagoras" 493 - the ill-fated "first hierarch" of the Orthodox Church, who is documented to be a 33rd degree Freemason (a photograph of his admission to the Freemasons was placed in "Orthodoxos Typos"),

The Catholic magazine “Irenikon” (1971, No. 2, pp. 220-221) published a statement by the Patriarchate of Constantinople about the message of Pope Paul VI to Patriarch Athenagoras, which ends with the words: “Why not automatically return to the common Chalice, since after 1054 there are no important no obstacles to this have appeared, and the existing differences are constantly being diminished?” In this statement, the Patriarchate completely ignores the dogmatic differences between the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches that appeared just after 1054.

Here they are: the dogma of the Council of Trent (XVI century) on original sin, understood in a softened Pelagian spirit; about justification by works imputed to “merits”; about the “super-duty” deeds of saints and, accordingly, about indulgences; about purgatory; the “dogma” of the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, adopted by Pope Pius IX without a conciliar decision, and especially the “dogmas” of the primacy and infallibility of the pope, proclaimed as mandatory “truths” of the faith at the First Vatican Council in 1870 under the pressure of the same Pius IX. How, after so many incorrect innovations in Catholic dogma, made precisely after 1054, can one claim that after 1054 “no important obstacles (to Eucharistic communion)” appeared?! Until the Catholic Church renounces its erroneous dogmas, the Orthodox clergy and laity have no right to enter into intercommunication with it. Otherwise, they will sin against the purity of the Orthodox faith and canons, which is tantamount to an internal falling away from Orthodoxy (cf. Tit. 3:11).

In the “Church Bulletin” (1971, no. 4, p. 16) you can read that “Benedictine Fr. Daniel Chelsea visited the Romanian Patriarch Justinian, who elevated him to the honorary degree of protosingel of his Church, presenting him with the patriarchal cross - for services to Orthodoxy (!) and performing consecration on him.” The meaning of this consecration (laying on of hands) is not said. But the very fact that the Orthodox Patriarch lays hands on a Catholic cleric without his renunciation of incorrect teachings and dogmas speaks of a gross violation of dogmas and canons and of a break from the Orthodox Tradition, reflected in the Great Trebnik in the various rites of accepting non-Orthodox people into the Orthodox Church through the renunciation of their respective misconceptions. According to the creed of St. It is unacceptable for the Orthodox Church and an Orthodox bishop to lay hands on a non-Orthodox believer. A violation would mean the gradual recognition of the ordination of all heterodox faiths, since it is precisely this “mutual recognition of hierarchy” that is, in essence, the goal of the ecumenical document of the CES.

Ecumenism has set itself the goal of distorting and discrediting all the sacraments of the Orthodox Church, and often this is done through high-ranking hierarchs of the Church, corrupted by the ecumenical spirit of the times.

The time is approaching when, under the influence of ecumenism, the Orthodox sacrament of Confession will be completely forgotten, and clergy and laity will allow themselves to receive communion without first cleansing the soul from sins through the Divinely established sacrament of Repentance (John 20:23). A similar thing has already happened in the Finnish Autonomous Church, which is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. After the ill-fated Constantinople Conference of 1923, which introduced the “new calendar style,” the Finnish Church also adopted the Gregorian “Easter,” which it adheres to to this day, being an exception among the Local Orthodox Churches. Undoubtedly, under the influence of Patriarch Athens, Archbishop Paul of Finland announced in 1971 that he would allow the reception of St. Communion without prior confession, “if the confessors do not object.” The Swiss ecumenical journal Internationale Kirchenzeitschrift wrote about this (1971, No. 3, p. 128).

The question arises: what caused the deviation from centuries-old church practice, which requires mandatory confession before St. Communion (1 Cor. 11:28)? Not for the sake, of course, of Orthodox Christians, for they are being rendered a bad “service” at the cost of violating canonical decrees (52nd Apostolic Canon, 102nd Canon of the VI Ecumenical Council). Receive St. Communion without examination of conscience and confession means accepting one’s condemnation, according to St. ap. Paul (1 Cor. 11:27-29), and there is a dangerous weakening of church-penitential discipline, corrupting the laity and priests. It makes it impossible to cleanse the heart from sins and impose penances, beneficial means of healing a repentant sinner. Such a disastrous retreat destroys one of the divinely established sacraments of St. Orthodox Church - St. Confession (Matt. 18:18; John 20:23). Rebuffing such a retreat the following year, 1972, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Pimen, at a meeting with teachers of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary, stated: “It is necessary to clarify more often the issue of confession, penance, the issue of imposing penance, which not everyone and does not always know about and they reason correctly!” (JMP, 1972, No. 2, p. 15).

We are confident that this deviation was made under the influence of the Patriarch of Constantinople Athenagoras in the Finnish Church under his jurisdiction, for he gave permission to receive communion without prior confession, pursuing the following ecumenical goals: 1) to facilitate the participation in the intercommunion of those Roman Catholics who, if they wish to receive communion, the Orthodox Church would have to confess and, perhaps, repent in confession and renounce its incorrect Catholic beliefs, as has always happened, and 2) so that confession would not be an obstacle to Orthodox communion for Protestants and sectarians, who, as is known, do not recognize sacraments of Confession. This is how the Orthodox sacraments are profaned for the sake of ecumenism!

The ecumenical machine is structured so cunningly and craftily that it has a mercilessly destructive effect on the purity of Orthodoxy. In one Local Church it undermines the dogma of Orthodoxy, in another it attacks the canons, often using political circumstances and the lack of inter-Orthodox contacts based on the interests of Orthodoxy, and not on ecumenical pressure. In this way, ecumenism gradually weakens the strength of Orthodoxy from within.

After the destructive work in individual Local Churches, the so-called. The “Great Pan-Orthodox Council”, which will “legitimize” these iniquities and the deviations made in individual Local Churches, will approve them as a mandatory ecumenical line!

The planned “General Christian Ecumenical Council,” which will undoubtedly be organized under the pressure of Freemasonry, will document the retreat. It is significant that Protestants, who previously did not recognize any Ecumenical Councils, suddenly started talking about “convening an ecumenical council of all Christian denominations” (proposal of the Lutheran theologian Pannenberg) or convening an ecumenical all-Christian council (proposal of the Reformers) 494 .

Holy Orthodoxy is the salt of the Christian world (Matt. 5:13). “Orthodox” ecumenists now want to de-salt the Orthodox confession in order to unite it with other confessions. Under the influence of new ecumenical trends, Local Orthodox Churches are wavering and carried away by the winds of ecumenism (cf. Eph. 4:14). They are unsteady in their dogmatic and canonical foundations, succumbing to the temptations of time. Their official “representatives” - ecumenical figures - are feverishly working to achieve the task of intercommunism set for them by Masonic ecumenism. And they achieve success among weak-hearted “Orthodox” laity and even among theologically educated clergy, for whom the teachings of ecumenism and the WCC are more valuable than the dictates of the Mother Church.

Speaking about the retreat of individual Local Orthodox Churches, we do not at all blame the Holy Orthodox Church as a Theanthropic unity for them. Local

Churches can sin, even in the person of their highest representatives, and fall away from the truth. The Apocalypse (chap. 2 and 3) addresses reproaches to the Local Churches of Asia Minor in the person of their “angels,” i.e., bishops, for their shortcomings, grave guilt and unacceptable vices (with the exception of the Philadelphian Church, which preserved the Word of God and did not renounce name of God - see 3, 8). But this does not mean at all that the entire Church of Christ, which remains forever “holy and blameless” (Eph. 5:27), has been guilty before the Lord.

When speaking about the infallibility of the Church of Christ, we mean the Orthodox Church as such, and not its local parts. The Ecumenical Orthodox Church has been shaken more than once in the past by the waves of evil, but has always remained unshakable on the rock of the confession entrusted to it, according to the commandment of St. ap. Paul: “Let us hold fast our confession” (Heb. 4:14). Often she had to hide in catacombs and deserts, and sometimes in caves and abysses of the earth (cf. Heb. 11:38), but she always existed - both in the era of Arian dominance, during the years of the Monophysite infection, and during the iconoclastic plague.. Let it be a small remnant (Luke 12:32), but St. The Orthodox Church, like a fertile leaven that permeates everything (Luke 13:21), remained invincible and invulnerable before the storms of the centuries. It exists now and will exist in the time of the Antichrist, invisibly strengthened by Christ the Savior (Matthew 28:20). In it all the faithful children of God, shining in quiet and secret martyrdom for Christ’s truth and God’s truth, were saved, are being saved, and will be saved until the end of the world!

These true Orthodox children of God do not consider themselves righteous at all. They deeply feel their sinfulness before God, constantly repent of it and are guided by the gracious look expressed by St. Bishop Theophan the Recluse in letters to his spiritual children thirsting for salvation: “The truth of God cannot be distorted. It is not ours - it was given to us. It is our duty to confess it and pass it on to everyone as pure as it came to us from the mouth of God. We live, we live poorly; at least we will preach God’s truth without any mixture, and that’s good!” 495.

The great champion of Orthodoxy, St. Mark, Metropolitan of Ephesus: “Let us confess until our last breath with great boldness that good pledge of the holy fathers - the Confession known to us from childhood, which we first pronounced and with which, in the end, we will leave here, taking with us... at least Orthodoxy ! 496.

One of the interesting and unusual Christian phenomena is ecumenism. What is it, sin and heresy or a new church movement that can cover all differences and create one religion?

What is ecumenism

This concept comes from the Greek language and its literal translation means inhabited world or universe. The etymology of the word implies this meaning of the word - a single universe where Jesus Christ rules.

In the modern world, the term is interpreted in three different ways:

If the first concept is fully accepted by the Orthodox Church (hereinafter referred to as the Orthodox Church), then the second is completely rejected, since it presupposes the rejection of the already existing united church with apostolic succession. The third concept is considered by the PC to be completely heretical. Thus, within the framework of the LC, only one interpretation of the term ecumenism is possible - this is a dialogue with other religions and movements for peacemaking actions.

It is also acceptable to interpret the term as rapprochement and dialogue, but only between Christian denominations that have a common understanding of the teachings of Christ.

History of ecumenism

Later, with the recognition of Christianity as the official religion in the Roman Empire, the persecution and destruction of manifestations of other religions began - temples and idols were destroyed, libraries were burned. This has been observed throughout the history of Christianity. Even the baptism of Rus' by Prince Vladimir is violence against people and a manifestation of intolerance.

Today there is no such obvious aggression towards representatives of other faiths, at least no open clashes and acts of vandalism. However, a dismissive and aggressive attitude is still present, as it was many centuries ago. This comes from many different denominations, each of which is convinced that its faith in Christ is the most faithful and it is the bearer of Christ's grace, as well as salvation.

Important! Moving to another church is considered a falling away from the true teaching, therefore, as such, there is no real ecumenism in the world today.

What is ecumenism from the point of view of Orthodoxy

The Orthodox Church today is the most conservative branch of Christianity, since all new trends in the Orthodox Church are perceived with suspicion and rejected by the majority of Christians (the most striking example is the refusal to switch to a different calendar). Nevertheless, the Orthodox Church is ready for interfaith dialogue, despite the statement in the “Basic principles of the attitude of the Russian Orthodox Church to heterodoxy” that only Orthodoxy has full Divine grace. This statement leads to the idea that Catholics and Protestants should repent and return to the bosom of the true church.

Ecumenism is expressed in holding interfaith congresses and conferences, joint prayers and worship services

Thus, ecumenism is a harmful and, most likely, unnecessary phenomenon for Orthodoxy. If we cooperate with other religions, then only on the basis of Orthodoxy. Many Orthodox theologians believe that ecumenism not only does not provide any benefit, but is impoverishing due to its mechanicalness and depersonalization. Only the Lord can unite.

Read about the Orthodox Church:

Attitude of church leaders

The opinions of Orthodox leaders regarding this issue vary; for example, Deacon Andrei Kuraev claims that ecumenism is not a heresy. And although most Orthodox leaders do not agree with him, he argues that this movement is just an interfaith dialogue and exchange of theological experience. Therefore, Kuraev views it as a positive and necessary phenomenon.

Patriarch Kirill is also close to recognizing it as a positive phenomenon, since he often spoke about the need for dialogue with other faiths and personally participated in such meetings (meeting with the Pope, for example). Although he understands that in the Orthodox world there is strong opposition and rejection of this movement. Because of this, as well as the extreme isolation of Orthodoxy, Patriarch Kirill often withstands harsh criticism of himself, especially after his words in defense of ecumenism.

Ecumenism and other religions

Despite the fact that Catholics are not members of the WCC, they took a step towards rapprochement after the Second Vatican Council and declared their respect for other religions in a number of documents. In general, they show greater openness to ecumenism than the Orthodox. For example, Poland, being Catholic for the most part, is quite open to other religions and there is no hostility towards them.

Protestants are firmly convinced of the benefits of the movement and its necessity. Confirming this, they openly invite everyone who recognizes the Holy Trinity to participate with them in communion. You can often hear their open prayers for the heads of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

Important! The ideal of ecumenism is real equality and relationships between all religions.

However, this ideal is unattainable. The reason for this is the presence of serious and numerous contradictions. But for the successful evangelization of the whole world (which is the common goal of all religions), interfaith dialogue is simply necessary. It is necessary not only to reduce contradictions, but also for the joint influence of the Christian world on the corrupt world community.

What is ecumenism?