Ecumenism is a religion. Ecumenism in the Orthodox Church: Heresy, Religion or a Path of Development? Testimonies of the Word of God about the punishment of false prophets

You will learn about this from our article.

ecumenism

The topic of our conversation today is ecumenism and its place in modern world. What does the very word “ecumenism” mean?

– The concept of “ecumenism” comes from the Greek word “ecumene”, which means “inhabited universe”. After its emergence, Christianity, thanks to its extraordinary spiritual beauty and truth, and most importantly, God's help, managed to defeat paganism and conquer the greatest Roman Empire. This Empire can, perhaps, be compared with the modern United States - the same huge and overwhelming. The preaching of the apostles turned out to be stronger than pagan culture, ideology, and religion. Shortly after its inception, Christianity became in the full sense of the word "ecumenical", that is, a universal, universal religion, far beyond the borders of the Empire. Today Christianity is spread all over the globe, but, unfortunately, it is far from being the only religion in the world.

But we know about ecumenism in its other meaning: as a liberal dialogue of religions, as a relative recognition of the truth and other spiritual paths and beliefs besides the Christian one. The Church encountered such ecumenism already in the first days of its existence. In fact, the entire religious life of the Roman Empire was ecumenical.

Yes, indeed, the ancient Christians, the first martyrs, were offered ecumenism just in our current, modern sense. In the torture chambers, they were most often required not to renounce Christ, but to recognize that all religions are more or less equal. Indeed, in the view of a Roman citizen, the Empire stands above any private interests, it unites not only peoples and their cultures, but also the faiths of all its peoples. And Christianity was offered to enter alongside - and on equal terms - with pagan religions. For Christians, this was completely out of the question, because, as the Holy Scripture says, “all gods are the tongue of demons” (Psalm 95: 5), that is, all the gods of pagan peoples are demons. The ideas of the Empire about the Deity were distorted, they are distorted in our time to such an extent that they lead their adherents to very serious spiritual consequences. In many religions now, as in ancient times, bloody and even human sacrifices are performed. In many religions, even now such terrible sacrifices are made. Everyone remembers the recent martyrdom of the three monks of Optina Hermitage: they were just sacrificed. The blade that struck them was engraved with the number six hundred and sixty-six. This is not at all accidental ... And although they are trying to convince us that the killer was a loner, this is simply not serious.

– When Christians say that they can oppose all this pressure and intensity of evil with their teaching – as the absolute Truth, which is Christ – they are accused of being undemocratic, illiberal, and out of date. They are accused of narrowing their view of the world too much, persisting in their “cave” savagery, and generally hopelessly lagging behind life. And it is precisely this “narrow” truth of theirs that ecumenism is opposed to… How, after all, is ecumenism to be characterized in its modern meaning?

– Firstly, about “non-democratic”. The word "democracy" (from the Greek "demos" - the people and "krateo" - I hold in my power, rule) means the power of the people. In ancient times, a democratic form of government was not conceived without genuine, ardent patriotism; the defense of the Motherland was considered a glorious and honorable deed. Today, the word "democracy" is most often used in the opposite sense. For today's Russian democrats, being a patriot is retrograde. However, in its true meaning, the word "democracy" cannot be used in relation to a society that opposes patriotism. Therefore, the society in which we live should be called pseudo-democratic, like many modern pseudo-democracies in Europe and the world. “Who here is so vile that he does not want to love his fatherland? If there is such a person, let him speak - I insulted him. I'm waiting for an answer, ”Shakespeare denounced those who put material gain, their selfish interests above such ideals as love and loyalty to the Motherland through the mouth of one of his heroes. Now about ecumenism itself. He is very far from those ideals that Christianity preaches. Modern civilization - and ecumenism is one of its characteristic manifestations - has declared the convenience of life an unconditional value. I would say that modern society is deeply religious. It worships a god whose name is "comfort". For the sake of this comfort, today one can commit crimes, make deals with one’s conscience, one can fence oneself off from real life a wall of indifference - if only it was comfortable. All moral boundaries are being erased, culture is degrading, because real culture is not only a desire for beauty, not only certain ideals, but also a very strict set of prohibitions. The culture has always included certain “taboos”: it is impossible because it is impossible!

Such prohibitions are developed on the basis of the historical experience of hundreds of generations and the achievements of the best people. Many of the ancient ancient heroes and Christian ascetics did not cross these moral prohibitions even at the cost of their own lives: let them kill me, execute me, but I still will not do what is imposed on me. And modern civilization, including ecumenism, erodes all prohibitions. If it is convenient and customary for some savages to perform their pagan rituals with human sacrifices, then our pseudo-democratic civilization simply turns a blind eye to this cruelty. Ecumenism proceeds from the fact that all faiths are equal in rights. I am, they say, a free person, and a resident of the country where such cults are practiced is also a free person. I have the right to believe one way, and he another. My faith is no better than his faith. What right do I have to impose my faith on him, because it is undemocratic ... But then the same can be said about the criminal: what right do I have to impose my style of behavior on him - if he wants to kill, then let him kill. After all, he is a free man in a free country... And in such a movement, which consciously seeks to blur all sorts of moral boundaries, they are trying to involve Orthodox Christians as well. Our faith includes a lot of firm Divine prohibitions. “Thou shalt not kill”, “do not commit adultery”… But the “modern” view of these moral prohibitions is different, and most often the opposite…

– However, not only moral boundaries are blurred, but also the boundaries of religious belief. The boundaries of the doctrine about WHOM we believe are blurred…

– Yes, modern democracy is being transferred to the celestial sphere. Why is this god worse than that god? Why is Perun better than Thor or worse? Or why Christ is better than Buddha? They are all on an equal footing. And here Christianity is very firm, despite ridicule and accusations of retrogradeness, backwardness, narrow-mindedness and lack of democracy, stands on the confession of its fundamental exclusivity. Because there is a Revelation, preserved by the Orthodox Church, that the living God really came to Earth and became a man in order to save humanity, heal human nature stricken with sin, in order to show the world an example of perfection, an example of spiritual beauty, holiness. This pattern is infinitely perfect because God Himself is infinite. And every person is called to this infinite ideal. He must strive for this incomprehensible Divine beauty, and this is precisely what Christianity shows. The Orthodox Church cannot refuse this highest calling: otherwise she will inevitably renounce God, from herself.

– Here another question arises: who do the representatives of other religions revere? It is often said that God lives in the heart, that in different religions God appears in different images and shapes, but that He is nonetheless the same for all beliefs. In this regard, how can the Orthodox Church respond, for example, to such statements that the Buddha, they say, is just another image of the Holy Trinity or that Jesus Christ is the same as Krishna ...

When it is said that God appears in His different forms, in different incarnations in all religions, the Hindu philosophy is accepted. Here, it is not the Christian doctrine that is taken into service, but the pagan religion, which is terrible in its spiritual essence. If we affirm that God is One, then we confess the truth on which Christianity stands: we believe in the One God. But if we say: God is one in all religions, then this second part of the phrase will overthrow the first. Because what kind of unity can we, Orthodox Christians, have with those religions in which, for example, ritual fornication is committed - in the so-called phallic cults? What about ritual murders? Or when, in order to get into an excited spiritual state, drugs, psychotropic, albeit natural, substances are used? When a person who comes into such a frenzied state begins to broadcast something, and those present at the same time think that they are hearing the revelation of some deity? What? Probably the one the Bible says about (I'll say it again): "bozi the tongue of demons." Sometime in the mid-nineties, I saw several preachers on the street with a loudspeaker dancing and clapping their hands to the rhythm of modern rhythmic music, chanting: “Where the Spirit of God is, there is freedom.” These words belong to the Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 3:17) and reflect the spiritual reality: where the Spirit of God is, there is freedom. People gathered around, looked, someone also began to dance and clap. And I stopped and thought: so it is, but is the Spirit of God present here? Obviously not.

A) ORTHODOX OBJECTIONS TO ECUMENISM

Patriarch Nicholas VI of Alexandria (1968-1986), in an interview with the Athens newspaper "Orthodoxos Typos" (1972, No. 170), spoke out very sharply against the ecumenical movement: "I condemn. We are well aware of the anti-Christian forces that govern ecumenism behind the scenes... Ecumenism is directed against Orthodoxy. It represents the greatest danger today, along with the unbelief of our age, 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 the Local Orthodox Churches are participating in the WCC, the spirit of the zealots of Orthodoxy is strengthened by such courageous words of the Primate of Alexandria: “I greet and bless all the clergy and laity who are fighting against ecumenism!” 419 . The Patriarch also sent a wish to the Holy Synod of the Greek Church to withdraw from the WCC 420 . It should be addressed to all the Local Orthodox Churches, because without taking this decisive step now, there are still Orthodox-minded hierarchs

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

Fortunately, such a proposal in our days was made by the Mother of the Churches - the Holy Patriarchate of Jerusalem, in the person of her worthy Primate - His Beatitude Patriarch Diodorus of Jerusalem, who, together with the Holy Synod, decided to stop the participation of the Jerusalem Church 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 the Churches”, should set an example of imitation in matters of faith and keep the faith intact, as she received it from our Lord Jesus Christ, who founded her with His precious Blood. Therefore, today, when the whole world is going through hard times and is faced with the efforts of modern propaganda to revise moral values ​​and traditions, the Church of Jerusalem is obliged to raise her voice in order to protect her flock from alien influences and fight for the preservation of the Orthodox faith... Our Orthodox Church unshakably believes that it contains the fullness of the 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 Holy Scripture are contained in all purity and salvation. The participation of the Orthodox Church in dialogues is harmful and dangerous. Non-Orthodox use theological dialogues to the detriment of our Orthodox Church.”

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

Ecumenism and the WCC are seriously criticized by other local Orthodox Churches. For example, in 1973, the Synod of the Autocephalous Orthodox Church in America published an extensive District Address on Christian Unity and Ecumenism (Bulletin of the Russian Western European Patriarchal Exarchate, 1973, No. 83-84, pp. 163-181, 239-256). The epistle contains beautiful thoughts about the unity of the Church as unity in Truth, love and holiness, and it is weightily emphasized that "the Orthodox Church is the true Church." It is "the one Church of Christ", since since the time of the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles the Orthodox Church

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

The epistle correctly outlines the danger of relativism, i.e. the danger of transforming the dogmatic truths of faith into something relative through ecumenism, and the danger of secularism, i.e. the secularization of the Church through ecumenical efforts "to unite people on the basis of worldly ideology" 423 . The epistle also denounces the erroneous ecumenical conviction that the structure of the Church - dogma and moral ideals are relative and can be changed for a practical purpose, that "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." American Orthodox Bishops courageously declared: “We consider it our sacred duty to reject all false methods of uniting 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 resolutely rejected as a means of achieving Christian unity, for "outside the unity of faith in the One Church of Christ, which cannot be divided, neither sacramental communion nor liturgical concelebration can exist." The hierarchs of the American Autocephalous Orthodox Church also condemned "an 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 epistle was published and when ecumenism had not yet shown its anti-Orthodoxy, the American Autocephalous Orthodox Church, for ideological reasons, did not belong to the WCC and strongly criticized the vicious tendencies in ecumenism. It could be expected that such a critically negative attitude would continue and deepen after the 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,

becoming a member of the WCC, she took part in this assembly, joining the previously condemned ecumenical deeds of darkness, about which St. app. Paul writes, "Do not participate in the fruitless works of darkness, but reprove them!" (Eph. 5:11).

The Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad is acting much more consistently, which in August 1983, immediately after the Vancouver Assembly, issued an anathema against ecumenism. Here is the literal 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 the way of life, or that the Church did not exist visibly, but supposedly in the future, when all the "branches", or parts, or confessions, and even all religions, will unite into one body. Anathema - also 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 the anathema - to those who consciously communicate with the above-mentioned heretics or defend, spread and intercede for their newly appeared heresy of ecumenism under the pretext of supposedly brotherly love or the supposed union of divided Christians! 427. The text of the anathema, though brief, is clear enough to require no commentary, and is the only officially uttered anathema against the modern ecumenical heresy so far!

It must be said that at one time the Moscow Patriarchate also opposed it, convening in July 1948 a Conference of Autocephalous Orthodox Churches in order to officially reject the invitation 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 about the dangers of ecumenism. In particular, the report of the Russian Archbishop from Bulgaria Seraphim (Sobolev) stood out, who considered ecumenism as a heresy against the dogma of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church set out 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" that unites all heretics along with Orthodox Christians. “Orthodox ecumenists,” he wrote, “distort the ninth article 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 to such an extent that, being members of the Orthodox Church, at the same time they are members of the ecumenical Church, more precisely , some universal heretical society with its countless heresies. They should always remember the words of Christ: “If the Church also disobeys, be to you like a pagan and a tax collector” (Matt. 18:17). The report of the archbishop Seraphim ended with the words of the psalm: "Blessed is the man who does not go to the advice of the wicked!" (77p. 1, 1), which answered the question in the title of the report: “Should the Russian Orthodox Church participate in the ecumenical movement?” 428 .

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

Not even ten years had passed since the Moscow Conference, when 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” for the first time outlined the “new” attitude of the Moscow Patriarchate towards ecumenism. Recalling the District Epistle of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of 1920, which allegedly “determined 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 allegedly contributed to overcoming these difficulties, and therefore "significant changes have occurred in the ecumenical movement over the past ten years, indicating its evolution towards churchliness." In conclusion, “endorsing the Declaration of the Orthodox Participants of the Evanston Assembly” 1 , the ROC declared its consent to a meeting with the leaders of the WCC, but so far with the sole purpose of “mutual acquaintance with views on the expediency and forms of further relations” 432 .

Then official meetings with ecumenical representatives of the WCC became frequent, and three years later, in December 1961, they led to the official admission of the ROC as a member of the WCC at the Third General Assembly in Delhi. As is known, this process took place under the pressure of the Soviet authorities, on the instructions of which the Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate decided to join the WCC as early as March 30, 1961, and immediately sent an application 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 post factum. On June 14, 1961, a month before the Council of Bishops, the All-Christian Conference for the Defense of Peace, which was held in Prague, sent a greeting message to the WCC, which stated: “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 repeatedly expressed its dissatisfaction and disagreement with the line of the WCC. After the Bangkok Conference on the topic “Salvation Today” (Dan 1973), the Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate, headed by Patriarch Pimen, sent a message to the All-Russian Church, stating in it: “First of all, it causes bewilderment and great regret that the there is no extremely important, primarily from the pastoral point of view, mention of that side of the process of salvation, without which the very concept of salvation loses its essential meaning. It is silent about the ultimate goal of salvation, that is, about eternal life in God, and there is not enough clear indication of moral correction and perfection as necessary condition to achieve it."

Further, protesting against the almost exclusive emphasis on “horizontalism” in the matter of Christian salvation, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church writes: “There was no place here for the main “vertical” dimension, which would indicate that salvation to the fight against 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". who cherish the sacred traditions of the Ancient Church, it may give the impression that in modern ecumenism a new temptation of shame is being born regarding the gospel of Christ Crucified and Risen - God's power and wisdom (1 Cor. I, 23-24), as a result of which the very essence of His Gospels out of a false fear of appearing out of date and losing popularity.

Just as accusatory was the message of the Synod after the Fifth Assembly of the WCC in Nairobi in December 1975. It criticizes the artificial hushing up of confessional differences before the outside world, emphasizes the danger of the WCC turning into some kind of "super-church", resolutely rejects the ecumenical proposal to allow a female "priesthood" . Finally, the Orthodox delegates expressed their unpleasant surprise at the “exclusion from external design Assemblies 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 from a non-Christian gathering, the synodal message suddenly draws a 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. That is why, 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 all connection with the Orthodox position of the Moscow Conference of 1948, which refused to participate in the said assembly for reasons of principle that the Russian Orthodox Church should have been guided by, especially after Nairobi. The question is why loud protests were needed in the WCC, if everything ended with a return to the ecumenical swamp (2 Pet. 2, 22)?

The question of joining the WCC was decided simultaneously and in parallel with the question of removing the clergy from the administration of parishes. At the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in June 1988, this action was declared illegal, and the leading position of the priest in the church parish was restored 440 . It is also logical and natural to expect a revision of the issue of the entry of the Russian Orthodox Church into the WCC in 1961, as dictated by the same "difficulties of the situation in which the Russian Church found itself in the late 1950s and early 1960s" 441 .

Ecumenism was subjected to fundamental criticism in the report "On Some Principles of the Orthodox Understanding of Ecumenism" by Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy Alexei Osipov, read at the Second 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”, moreover, “unity not in any church, but in the true Church, i.e. 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 ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15)** 2 . Further, it is emphasized that ecumenism sets the main goal of the external secular (secularized) unity of Christians, forgetting about main goal Christianity - the eternal salvation of the soul. Criticizing the synodal message on the Bangkok conference, Osipov rightly asks: “What can Christians and churches participating in the ecumenical movement lead to if this emphasis on “horizontalism” quite often found in various ecumenical documents and discussions?” - and answers: “Not to mention the undoubted, in this case, the loss of churchness and even religiosity by the ecumenical movement, it can turn out to be a tool for the ideological preparation of many,“ if possible, even the elect “(Mt. 24, 24), to accept the ideal, directly opposite 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 false gospel of Antichrist (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 quotation from the message of the Patriarchate regarding the Fifth Assembly of the WCC: “At the Assembly, in moments of ... public prayers, 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 purely ecclesiastical grounds and only in the Church.

In the second part, the ecumenical “theory of branches” is criticized by contrasting it with the Gospel comparison of the Church with the vine and branches (John 15:1-6): “Just as no branch of the vine, according to the word of Christ, can bear fruit unless in the vine, so there can be no other alternative for the churches in division than to seek the true Church and return to her” 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 other Christian churches to this, then this cannot be regarded as some kind of narrow confessionalism or egocentrism. The Orthodox call not to themselves as to a denomination, but to unity with the one Truth that it has and to which anyone who seeks this Truth can join ... 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 Church's divine-human organism.

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 ​​polysemy and lead to their complete depreciation" 449 - the author strictly separates the Orthodox term "catholicity" (sobornost ) of the Church from its ecumenical substitution by purely secular concepts of “conciliary community” assimilated by the Fifth Assembly of the WCC, and concludes: “Catholicity, or catholicity, 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 Lord's Chalice" 450 .

Speaking so boldly about ecumenical abuses of the Orthodox concept of the Church and other Orthodox concepts, Prof. Osipov could have ended his report perfectly on this, but suddenly, at the very end, he makes, unfortunately, an ecumenical pirouette, which devalues ​​everything that has been said so far. Fearing, apparently, ecumenical attacks on the expressed truths, he concludes by quoting the above-mentioned article by Prof. arch. L. Voronova "Confessionalism and ecumenism": "The belief that the Orthodox Church is" the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church from the ecumenical 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 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 eventually lead to the Antichrist (2 Thess. 2, 3). There are two periods in this process.

1. In the first period, the beginning of “a step-by-step retreat from the One True Church, which continued to live in its original truth indestructibly”, is laid, which has been observed in the Church since apostolic antiquity until recent times in the form of falling away from the Church of Christ heretical societies that reject or distort individual dogmatic truths. . “Here logically” there was only one way to restore religious communion: a common return to the original bosom of the Church. No “modalities” can be imagined here.

Church does not have - outside; repentant return to it, at whatever stage of apostasy he stands.

2. The second period of apostasy is taking place in our days and “is characterized by a desire for unity - but not on the basis of the return of those who have fallen away to the One True Church, which they have abandoned, but on the basis of the search for a common language, common actions, common, even prayerful communion ... between all the participants in a certain collective whole, which can only conditionally be called "Christian" and in any case can in no way be considered the "Body of Christ" as it is in the One True Church" 452 .

So, “the emergence of a universal desire for unity along some indefinite horizontal, to the abolition of the very thought of a repentant return to the bosom of true Orthodoxy along the vertical of a ladder (step) retreat - this is what determines the essence of a new phase in the life of world Christianity. Until that time, there was a process of gradual removal from the True Church... but the presence of Christians on separate steps of the ladder of "apostasy" did not abolish the Faith... Now, this living feeling of communion with the Living God is dying away... Now spiritually it is not drawn to the Living God - an empty soul, but to mutual communication in a dreamy craving for something sought. The inner gaze is not already turned to one’s own God, finding everything in one’s faith, but a bewildered gaze runs around, looking for something new... , in the abolition of each church's own intimate life. Something extremely terrible, testifying to the elimination of the very source of spiritual life - the Church. This is "apostasy" in its concrete sense, as St. app. Paul in the Second Letter to the Thessalonians (2, 3) ... He means by “apostasy” (with the article in front of this word) not a long process that we have experienced, but precisely its final completion, into which we have now entered. This is already a real preparation for the reception of the Antichrist.

The author describes in detail the impact that apostasy has on individual denominations. In Protestantism, “the dream of ecumenism replaced the reality of the Church, which had been revealed to the Protestant consciousness,” especially after the First World War, when, in the face of the Russian emigration rushing to the West, Protestantism came into close contact with Orthodoxy. Here “a direct mass meeting of a European 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 here, in the blink of an eye, the seemingly spiritually mature -correct solution of 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 so-called Russian modernism played a fatal role here ... - that theological trend that dominated in our fatherland, which turned its Western school to an appropriate interpretation of Orthodoxy and, naturally, found a common language with the Western striving for Orthodoxy, opening there an easy opportunity for the West to assimilate Orthodoxy not genuine, but “adapted” already for Western consciousness ... To what extent is the Western and ecumenical attitude consciousness is a hint of modern Russian theological thought, can be found in the introductory article by Prot. Sergiy Bulgakov to the collection "Christian Reunification" - "The Ecumenical Problem in the Orthodox Consciousness". The subtitle of this article is already characteristic - "On the real unity of the divided church in faith, prayer and sacraments" ... It is easy to imagine what resonance such words must have found in the minds of Protestantism with the craving for the Church awakened in it! This craving finds real possibilities here allowing not to renounce their delusions, but to carry them into the common treasury of the church property.Thus, "Orthodox" pests, such as the heretic Bulgakov and other foreign Russian free philosophers-"theologians", rejected Protestantism, thirsting for churchliness, from its natural striving for Orthodoxy, directing him to the utopian idea of ​​"shimmering pan-Christianity, all shades of everything possible" 454 in the form of Protestant ecumenism!

Such an unheard-of defeat of “Orthodox” ecumenists in the West, which became the reason for the alienation of the heterodox from Orthodoxy, is the opposite of Catholic ecumenism, which seeks to subordinate everyone to papal power, 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 an intermediary, setting itself the goal of rapprochement and unification with both species 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 free-thinking, he states that because of it, Orthodoxy is gradually losing the idea of ​​​​an invaluable blessing, which was handed to it by succession, going 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. Separate churches are losing the consciousness that their existence is determined by their actual belonging to the One Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, indicated in the Creed.

Thus, “it turns out little by little that the Orthodox Local Churches, those pillars of Christ’s truth, which no forces of hell are able to overthrow, themselves, with complete carelessness and irrationality, embarked on 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 churchness and... losing respect for its past, which contains in its indestructible continuity only the truth and all the truth of Orthodox churchness; they turned from a single and inimitable pillar and affirmation of the truth into a kind of variant of Christianity - equivalent to many others” 457 . “All these ‘Christian’ variants still live each their own historical life, which they must live out, uniting into a kind of collective Whole, which for the undamaged Orthodox consciousness personified the ripening apostasy, for the Orthodox consciousness clouded by this apostasy, becomes the only true ‘church. The picture is pathetic! It leads to disastrous results in the rapprochement on the platform of ecumenism with heterodoxy... This is what we designate as “Orthodox ecumenism”!” 458

So, “Orthodoxy, throwing off the priceless burden of its holy past, which lives in it and makes it the property of blessed Eternity, is carried away by the assimilation of the 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 the infallibility of the Church and its immutability... kills the very Body of the Church, in its historical uniqueness, turning all Orthodox church formations, completely independent of their objective church quality, into elements of a certain collective multitude, freely self-organizing - into a "denomination 11!" 459 .

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

The famous fighter against the ecumenical heresy of our time is the Serbian archimandrite Justin Popovich (d. 1979); professor of dogma 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 analyzes the Orthodox teaching about the Church (ecclesiology), dwelling 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 graceful influence of which are the “Holy Virtues”. The general idea that unites these considerations is “everything that exists in the Church is God-human, since it comes from the God-man” 461 .

In the second part of the book, the divine-human 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 God-human society.

4. Humanistic and God-human enlightenment.

In the penultimate chapter “Man and the God-man”, the humanistic principle “man is the measure of everything” is opposed to the God-man Christ, who became “once for all the highest omnipotence and the main measure for the human race” 462.

In the last chapter, "Humanistic Ecumenism," the author sums up: "Ecumenism is common name false Christianity, false churches of the West. All European humanism is concentrated in it, headed by papism. These false Christianity and false churches are nothing but 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, the Lord Jesus, and these heresies generally eliminate the God-man and put man in His place. There is no essential difference between papism, Protestantism, ecumenism and other heresies whose name is "legion" (cf. Lk. 8:30)" sh.

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 the Lord Jesus Christ and His historical God-human creation - the Church, of which He is the eternal Head, and which is His eternal body! 464

Ecumenism is sharply criticized by many Orthodox Greeks, above all, Archimandrite Haralampos Vasilopoulos (d. 1982), long-term chairman of the All-Hellenic Orthodox Union and editor of its official organ, the Orthodox Tipos, which we often quote. Let us dwell on his interesting book "Ecumenism without a Mask", which was published in the second edition in 1972 in Athens.

Already in the preface to the question "What is ecumenism today?" the author answers: “This is a movement to unite the heretical Western confessions, first with Orthodoxy, and then, at the next stage, all religions into one monstrous all-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 a 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 Freemasons (YMCA, YWCA, Scouting, etc.) and ending with the preparatory ecumenical commissions: “Life and Work” and “Faith and Organization”, from which the World Council of Churches grew in 1948. In the 2nd and 3rd chapters, the goals and plans of ecumenism for the decomposition of Christian states and the destruction of the Church are revealed.

yesterday and what is the Russian Church doing today?”, which describes the evolution of the relationship of the Moscow Patriarchate to ecumenism - from condemning it in 1948 to joining the WCC in 1961.

In the 5th chapter "Means used by ecumenism", the author specifically dwells on the so-called. "Pan-Orthodox meetings", 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 Chrysostomos of Philippi, who in the following year, 1962, was elected Archbishop of Athens under the name of Chrysostomos II (1962-1967). When in 1968 the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras convened a second meeting and insisted in every way on the participation of the Greek Church, Archbishop Chrysostomos II, knowing well the ecumenical plans 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 deed of Archbishop Chrysostomos. He dwells in detail on the preparation of the VIII Ecumenical Council, then called the "Great and Holy Council", cites statements about him by another modern fighter against ecumenism - the Greek Metropolitan Augustine of Florin, who bluntly stated. “Let a Council be convened, but one that would condemn the greatest and terrible heresy, the heresy of heresies - ecumenism!” 466 .

The 6th chapter shows the mediators used by ecumenism: heretics, secular authorities, corrupt church hierarchies, etc.

In the second part of "Rod against the gouges!" the treacherous work of the Jews against Christians is revealed, and on the basis of the text of the ancient historian Ammianus Marcellinus (History, book 23, ch. 1), they are reminded of their unsuccessful attempt, with the help of the emperor Julian the Apostate, to restore the Old Testament Temple in Jerusalem, destroyed by the Romans in 70: “From the surviving the foundation of the temple, terrible fiery tongues escaped and scorched the workers.

In the same first chapter, it is revealed and substantiated that "Islam is a creation of Judaism", created by the Jews to undermine Christianity, which, however, providentially turned against them. In the second chapter, terrible facts and cruel scenes of the bloody persecutions perpetrated by the papists on the Orthodox in Serbia during the last world war, the victims of which were 800,000 people, as well as the persecution of Orthodoxy in 1968 in Czechoslovakia, are published, documented by photographs.

In the final third chapter, the conclusion is drawn: Orthodox Christians "are obliged to prevent the defilement of Orthodoxy by accursed ecumenism!"

Among Greek theologians, a great opponent of ecumenism is Konstantin Muratidis, 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 he pointed out three dangers ecumenism poses to Orthodoxy: a) destruction of the Orthodox feeling; b) violation of the religious unity of the Greek people; c) the pernicious influence of the WCC, subordinate to the Protestant pan-heresy 468 .

Concerning the last point of Prof. Muratidis said: “It is very disturbing that, under the influence of ecumenical theology, some Orthodox theologians, without hesitation, make proposals that are detrimental to the dogma 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, the heresies and pan-heresy of ecumenism" and the epigraph " The ultimate fall is the fall of the soul.”

An epigraph taken from St. Gregory of Nyssa 470 , the author refers to heresy and remarks: "The acceptance of heresy is really an extreme fall of the soul" 471 . “The pan-heresy of ecumenism is the greatest evil on earth, for it fights against the greatest good, which is the Orthodox Christian faith. Struggling with the Orthodox faith, ecumenism opposes the revealed truth, which is our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Ecumenism has a Christ-fighting and God-fighting character... Speaking against God, ecumenism also 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 ages!” 474 .

This work is divided into four sections: the first section deals with 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, on modern theology.

The first two sections lead to the main theme, which is revealed in the third, which consists of two parts: “The first part deals with the origin and development of the ecumenical heresy among heretics, and the second describes the pernicious behavior of many Orthodox in relation to the ecumenical movement 475 and the participation of “Orthodox” ecumenists in assemblies WCC.

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

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

word”, which exposes rationalistic criticism to what God Himself was pleased to reveal to us through the Divinely revealed teaching, 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 to Orthodoxy and despising heresy. Because of sympathy for heresy they are not able to properly teach the word of God's truth and are not capable of being champions of the Orthodox Church.

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

The Greek physician Alexander Kalomiros wrote a whole book “Against the Supporters of False Unity” (Athens, 1964), in which, on the basis of the revelation of God and the absoluteness of the Orthodox truth, he mercilessly denounces the so-called. "Orthodox" ecumenists as traitors to Orthodoxy for the sake of earthly benefits and pseudo-humanistic goals. It shows the anti-Christian nature of the views of people striving 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. Further, Kalomiros writes: “If the Church is divided, and it is divided, since it needs to be united, then everything that Christ promised turns out to be a lie. But let's not say such blasphemy! The Church lives and will live until the end of the world, inseparable and invulnerable, according to the promise of Christ the Lord (Matthew 12:25; 16:18). And those who talk about “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", but the world... "All these movements for the unification of states and churches, all these compromises, all this monotony of mankind organized by the pressure of technical culture is preparation for the coming of the Antichrist" 483 .

For true believers, the Church is the new saving Noah's ark. “But when the time of the Antichrist draws near, the ark of the Church will become difficult to distinguish. 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 Luciferian cunning she will keep the majority external signs churches. And only in some places small groups of believers with individual clergymen will still keep the true Tradition alive.”

The world cannot love true Christians who disagree with its general course. About them, Kalomiros writes: “Once upon a time, idolaters hated Christians with such hatred as the “Christian” world hates them now ... But it is precisely this hatred that is a sign by which we can understand whether we are true Christians: that I hated you before" (John 15, 18), the Lord warns us. In the antichrist world kingdom, united by lies, true Christians will be the only dissonance in the devil's "harmony." These days will be days of great sorrow for them (Matt. 24, 21). That will be a new period of martyrdom - more spiritual than bodily. In this world kingdom, Orthodox Christians will become slandered members of society. "But "Christians do not live for this world. They do not recognize this world of exile as their fatherland and do not want it decorate as if they will live forever in it. They live on this earth as wanderers, with some longing for the lost homeland - paradise. "" The kingdom, intended for the friends of God, has nothing to do with this world. It is not made by hands and is eternal!” Kalomiros sums up his reflections.

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 at all costs to unite - even at the expense of Divine truths - all believers and unbelievers. He has a purely earthly and political task - to establish links with world religions and with world movements. In its Charter, the WCC officially states: "Cooperation with representatives of other religions is necessary."

Proceeding from this, is it possible to justify the behavior of some "Orthodox" ecumenists who talk about "reasonable ecumenism" 484 or "healthy ecumenism", as the Athenian Archbishop Jerome put it! 485 These euphemisms and decorative notions are used to justify the participation of the Orthodox Church in the ecumenical movement. But after what has been said above, is it really possible to call ecumenism "reasonable" if in words and deeds it contradicts the infallible inherent in St. Church of Christ to the Divine mind, which was acquired by St. apostles and about which one of them, on behalf of all, declared: “But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2, 16). Ecumenism is neither wise nor healthy, for it not only does not spread "sound doctrine" (Tit. 1:9) and does not follow "the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Tim. 6:3), but, on the contrary, seeks to

to breed with dogmatic unbelief and canonical treachery the little flock of Christ (Luke 12:32), which has so far remained healthy on earth. Reasonable and healthy is only the ecumenism of the dogmatically pure and canonically immaculate St. Christ's Orthodox Church!

Nowadays, many want to make a career through ecumenism, calling our era "ecumenical". Standing aside from ecumenical turmoil can seem strange and even risky. The Orthodox Christian understands this well and knows that, opposing the ecumenical spirit, he can bring upon himself many unpleasant epithets, such as: “retrograde”, “foolish”, “narrow-minded fanatic”, “schismatic”, and even be subjected to obvious persecution, according to the word St. app. 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 a firmly chosen and perfect line of conduct, for he:

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

2) in doing so, he is guided not only by his Orthodox feeling, but also by Orthodox reason, which strengthens him on this path;

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

What, in essence, do today's ecumenists strive for? They preach that all believers of all religions should stretch out their hands to each other 486 . Thus, they create a new pantheon, where there would be a place for every religious belief. All kinds of faiths are tolerated in this ecumenical pantheon, all of them are recognized as "good". Orthodoxy is also accepted into this pantheon on a common basis, provided that 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 being right and exclusive, then it will be persecuted by "tolerant" ecumenism.

In one of the writings of the French historian ancient rome Gaston Boissier said about the Church of Christ during the times of pagan persecution: “Only two cults were excluded from the general agreement of all cults - 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 agreement, 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 aroused great surprise, and then the furious anger of the Greco-Roman world ... Furious hatred relented towards the Jews only when they united with the pagans in the common persecution of Christianity.

Then the hatred of the pagans turned to the Christians. “Subsequently, attempts were made to fit the God of the Christians to other gods. The oracle of Apollo even began to pretend to 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, ch. 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 home gods every morning. But this approach terrified true Christians. To the exhortations sent to them by pagan philosophers and priests, they answered with the following firm words from their sacred books: “He who sacrifices to the gods, except for the Lord alone, be destroyed” (Ex. 22, 20). This the pagans could not understand in any way (see Tertullian, Apologetics, ch. 277), and this aroused intolerance and anger in them. No one accused the Christians of introducing a new god into Rome: that was a common occurrence in the last two centuries. But the pagans were surprised and indignant that their God did not want to fit with other gods in a 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 were so sympathetic to other religions! 488 .

History repeats itself. According to the aforementioned Orthodox zealot Metropolitan Augustine of Florin: “Ecumenism is a return to an ancient trend - syncretism, thanks to which the ancient peoples, doubting the truth of their religions, tried to quench their metaphysical thirst, since streams of many and different beliefs flowed and merged into this trend” 489. The current syncretic pantheon of ecumenism - the WCC - is invited to include not only all Christian denominations, but also all religions. This idea is becoming more and more popular among the masses. People strive for peace and earthly blessings, and for this they are ready for religious compromise and agree to any religious syncretism. That this is not pleasing to God, is forbidden by the Bible, sacred dogmas and church canons, they care little! For them, one thing is important - at all costs to remove religious disagreements, even if at the cost of compromises, and achieve earthly peace, earthly truth, even if this creates 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 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 non-Orthodox faith!

B) RETRACTION FROM HOLY ORTHODOXY OF SOME PRIMARY HIERARCH

This statement sounds strange, but here are the words spoken by Patriarch Nicholas VI of Alexandria when the Bulgarian Patriarch Maxim visited Alexandria in May 1973: “And now Orthodoxy can bring blood and martyrdom, persecution and sorrow. But along with this, one can point to the betrayal and trampling of the Traditions on the part of his firstborn. In the same speech, Patriarch Nicholas VI urged “to fight against all currents 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 Heite (1967, No. 19, p. 21) we read the following: “Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople instructed the rector of the Orthodox center in Taizé (France), Archimandrite Damaskinus, to initiate theological negotiations with representatives of the Catholic and Evangelical denominations about communion at ecumenical services." Some French newspapers reported in early 1970 that the same Patriarch told a 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 was guilty against Orthodoxy on many counts. He believed that clerics could marry even after their ordination, that is, monastics could marry without losing their rank, and married priests could enter into a second marriage! Patriarch Athenagoras also spoke out against priestly attire. In his opinion, “the 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 Sisan, Augustine of Florin, Pavel Metimsky, Ambrose of Eleutheropolis, and others) stopped commemorating him and stood firm to the end, although this threatened them with defrocking! 49*

Indignation at the ecumenical innovations of Patriarch Athenagoras, in particular, his rapprochement with Rome and the unauthorized removal (December 7, 1965) of the anathema of 1054 from the pope, embraced the monks of Athos and his jurisdiction, who ceased to commemorate Athenagoras at St. liturgy. Subsequently, when, after punitive measures by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the Athos monasteries had to commemorate him, Esfigmenu Monastery hung out a black banner with the inscription: “Orthodoxy or death!” and remained true to this motto to this day!

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

“A group of Athos 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 a 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 (the picture of admission to the Freemasons was placed in the "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 there are no obstacles to this, and the existing discrepancies are constantly diminishing? 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 deeds imputed to "merits"; about the "super-due" deeds of the saints and, accordingly, about indulgences; about purgatory; the “dogma” on the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, adopted by Pope Pius IX without a conciliar decision, and especially the “dogmas” on the primacy and infallibility of the pope, proclaimed the obligatory “truths” of the faith at the First Vatican Council in 1870 under pressure from the same Pius IX. After so many wrong innovations in Catholic dogma, made precisely after 1054, how can it be argued that after 1054 “no important obstacles (to Eucharistic communion)” appeared?! Until the Catholic Church renounces her erroneous dogmas, the Orthodox clergy and laity have no right to enter into intercommunion with her. Otherwise, they will sin against the purity of the Orthodox faith and canons, which is tantamount to internal falling away from Orthodoxy (cf. Tit. 3:11).

In the "Church Herald" (1971, No. 4, p. 16) one can read that "the Benedictine Fr. Daniel Chelsea visited the Romanian Patriarch Justinian, who elevated him to the honorary degree of the protosingel of his Church, handing him the patriarchal cross - for his services to Orthodoxy (!) and performing ordination over him. The meaning of this ordination (laying on of hands) is not mentioned. But the very fact that an Orthodox Patriarch performs the laying on of hands over a Catholic clergyman without his renunciation of incorrect teachings and dogmas speaks of a gross violation of dogmas and canons and a separation from Orthodox Tradition, reflected in the Great Rib Book in various rites for the acceptance of the heterodox into the Orthodox Church through renunciation of their respective delusions. According to the belief of St. It is unacceptable for the Orthodox Church, for an Orthodox bishop to perform the laying on of hands over a non-Orthodox believer. Violation would mean the gradual recognition of the ordination of all non-Orthodox denominations, because it is in this "mutual recognition of the hierarchy" that, in essence, lies 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 this is often done through high-ranking hierarchs of the Church who have been 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 God-established sacrament of Penance (John 20:23). This 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 still adheres to, being an exception among the Local Orthodox Churches. Undoubtedly, under the influence of Patriarch Athena Gora, the Finnish Archbishop Pavel in 1971 declared that he allowed to receive St. Communion without prior confession, "if the confessors do not object." The Swiss ecumenical journal Internationale Kirchhenzeitsrift wrote about this (1971, No. 3, p. 128).

The question is: what caused the deviation from the age-old church practice, which requires mandatory confession before St. Communion (1 Cor. 11:28)? Not for the sake of, of course, Orthodox Christians, for they are rendered a bad “favor” at the cost of violating canonical decrees (52nd Apostolic Canon, 102nd Canon of the VI Ecumenical Council). Accept St. Communion without a test of conscience and confession means accepting one's condemnation, according to St. app. Paul (1 Cor. 11, 27-29), and there is a dangerous weakening of church-repentant discipline that corrupts 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 (Matthew 18:18; John 20:23). Rebuffing such a retreat in the following year, 1972, Patriarch Pimen of Moscow and All Rus', at a meeting with teachers of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary, said: “It is necessary to more often clarify the issue of confession, penance, the issue of imposing penance, which not everyone and not always knows and speak correctly! (ZHMP, 1972, No. 2, p. 15).

We are sure that this digression was made under the influence of Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople in the Finnish Church subordinate to him, 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 the Orthodox Church would have to confess and, possibly, repent during confession and renounce its wrong Catholic beliefs, as it always did, and 2) so that confession would not be an obstacle to Orthodox communion of Protestants and sectarians, who, as you know, do not recognize at all sacraments of confession. This is how the Orthodox sacraments are profaned for the sake of ecumenism!

The ecumenical machine is so cunning and crafty 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 strikes at the canons, often using political circumstances and the absence 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 destructive work in individual Local Churches, the so-called. The “Great Pan-Orthodox Council”, which will “legitimize” these iniquities and affirm the deviations made in individual Local Churches as an obligatory ecumenical line!

The planned "Pan-Christian Ecumenical Council" which will no doubt be organized under the pressure of Freemasonry is to capture the retreats. It is significant that the Protestants, who previously did not recognize any Ecumenical Councils, suddenly started talking about "convening an ecumenical council of all Christian confessions" (the proposal of the Lutheran theologian Pannenberg) or about convening an ecumenical general Christian council (the proposal of the Reformers) 494 .

Holy Orthodoxy is the salt of the Christian world (Matthew 5:13). "Orthodox" ecumenists now want to desalt the Orthodox confession in order to unite it with other confessions. Under the influence of new ecumenical trends, the Local Orthodox Churches are wavering and carried away by the winds of ecumenism (cf. Ephesians 4:14). They stagger 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 intercommunion set by Masonic ecumenism. And they achieve success among the weak-hearted "Orthodox" laity and even among theologically educated clergy, to whom the suggestions of ecumenism and the WCC are dearer than the dictates of the Mother Church.

Speaking about the apostasy of individual Local Orthodox Churches, we do not at all blame them on the Holy Orthodox Church as a Divine-human unity. Local

Churches can err, even in the person of their highest representatives, and fall away from the truth. The Apocalypse (Ch. 2 and 3) reproaches the Local Churches of Asia Minor in the person of their "angels", i.e. bishops, for their shortcomings, heavy guilt and unacceptable vices (with the exception of the Philadelphia 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.

Speaking of the infallibility of Christ's Church, we have in mind the Orthodox Church as such, and not its local parts. The Ecumenical Orthodox Church has more than once in the past been shaken by waves of evil faith, but it has always remained unshakable on the rock of the confession entrusted to it, according to the commandment of St. app. Paul: "Let us hold fast to 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, in the years of the Monophysite infection, and during the iconoclastic plague .. Let it be in a small remnant (Luke 12:32), but St. The Orthodox Church, like a fertile leaven penetrating everything (Luke 13:21), remained invincible and invulnerable before the storms of the ages. It exists now and will exist in the time of Antichrist, invisibly strengthened by Christ the Savior (Matt. 28:20). In it were saved, are being saved and will be saved until the end of the world, all the faithful children of God in Christ, shining in quiet and secret martyrdom for Christ's truth and God's righteousness!

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 grace-filled view expressed by St. Bishop Theophan the Recluse in his letters to his spiritual children, who yearn for salvation: “One cannot distort the truth of God. It is not ours - it is given to us. It is our duty to confess it and pass it on to everyone pure, as it descended to us from the mouth of God. Live, we live badly; even if we preach the truth of God without admixture, and that is good!” 495 .

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

Letter from Archpriest Vladimir Malchenko, Dean of the Eastern Canadian Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, about the meeting of the Patriarch with the Pope and about ecumenism.

The unexpected meeting of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill with the Pope of Rome at the airport in Cuba on February 12, 2016, on the day when our Church celebrates the Council of the Three Hierarchs, caused and still causes great embarrassment and pain in the hearts of the majority of clergy and laity of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. This picture of the meeting of the Patriarch with the pope made us remember those photographs and video transmissions of the meetings of the patriarchs of Constantinople with the popes, first on January 5-6, 1964 in Jerusalem, then twice in 1967, and also in November 1979 in Rome, where both sat in vestments in front of the throne of the Cathedral of the Apostle Peter; in 1987, 1995, 2002, 2004, 2005 in Rome; in 2006 in Constantinople, on October 21, 2007 in Naples, in 2008 in the Vatican, in 2011 in Italy, in 2012 and 2013. in Rome and in May 2014 in Jerusalem. I remember how these meetings greatly upset us in the Church Abroad, because at these meetings all sorts of documents and statements unacceptable to our Orthodox Church were signed, leading to a rapprochement between the Orthodox Church and the Catholics. In these photographs, we saw how the Pope and the Orthodox Patriarch stood together in vestments, performed joint services, and all this was unacceptable to us and, frankly, disgusting. Therefore, seeing such a picture in the news on February 12, 2016, this time with our patriarch and the new pope, caused us great pain.

Our late Canadian bishop, Archbishop Vitaly (Ustinov), later the 4th Metropolitan of the Russian Church Abroad, in the 1960s sternly warned the entire flock about the great threat of ecumenism and called it "the heresy of heresies." The result of such meetings between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Pope of Rome was a major schism in the Greek Church, when many Old Calendarist Greeks began to open their parishes under the omophorion of the Russian Church Abroad. There were two such Old Calendarist Greek parishes in Toronto, and as we visited these temples, we saw many photographs of such meetings on their bulletin boards. Every parishioner of the Church Abroad knew the word "ecumenism" and what it meant. That's how we were raised.

As far back as the 1960s, the Synod of the Church Abroad closely followed the rapidly developing ecumenism. In 1967 Vladyka Vitaly (Ustinov) wrote a report to the Council of Bishops, in which he described the entire history of ecumenism from the very beginning of its existence. Archbishop Vitaly's report is now forgotten by many, and right now it must be distributed everywhere in order to understand where ecumenism is leading and how ecumenists achieve their goal. As Bishop Vitaly correctly taught: “When St. The Fathers teach us their teaching, they do it out of the fullness of their lives, imbued with prayer. All their sayings were obtained by them, so to speak, in prayer and contemplation, and not from the intellectual syllogisms of the analytical mind. In the purely speculative study of dogma, practiced in all our seminaries and academies, there is hidden a subtle pride intertwined with a thin stream of blasphemy.

Metropolitan Vitaly wrote little in his life, but he was spiritually strong through his prayer, asceticism, and fidelity to the holy Russian Orthodox Church. To this day, we remember his fiery sermons and what he called us to.

The third First Hierarch of the Church Abroad, Metropolitan Filaret (Voznesensky), understood his responsibility for preserving the Church Abroad and the entire Church as a whole from the anti-Orthodox actions of the Ecumenical Patriarch. Metropolitan Filaret is the author of three sorrowful epistles to His Holiness and Beatitude Heads of the Orthodox Churches in 1969, 1972 and 1975, in which he exposes in detail the treacherous path of many Orthodox hierarchs and clerics.

In his first mournful epistle, the metropolitan taught: “If temptation appears only in one of the Orthodox Churches, then correction can be found within the same limit. But when some evil penetrates almost all of our Churches, then it becomes a matter that concerns every bishop. Can any of us be inactive if he sees how many of his brethren are simultaneously on the path leading them and their flock to a disastrous abyss through the loss of Orthodoxy they do not notice?

In his second mournful epistle, Metropolitan Filaret wrote: “The Roman Catholic Church with which Patriarch Athenagoras wants to have liturgical communion and with which the Moscow Patriarchate has entered into communion through Metropolitan Nikodim of Leningrad and others is not even the one with which St. Mark of Ephesus and after him the whole Orthodox Church. It is even further away from Orthodoxy than it was in those days, since it introduced still new dogmas and now more and more assimilates the principles of the Reformation, ecumenism and modernism. A number of definitions of the Orthodox Church recognized the Latins as heretics. If at times they were received into communion in the same order as the Arians, then for a number of centuries and even to this day, the Greek Churches received them through baptism. If in the first centuries after 1054 the Latins were received differently in the Greek and Russian Churches, either through baptism or chrismation, this is because everyone regarded them as heretics, but did not have a generally established practice of their acceptance into the Orthodox Church . So, for example, at the very beginning of the XIV century, the Serbian prince, the father of Stefan Nemanja, was forced to baptize his son with Latin baptism, but then he baptized him in Orthodoxy when he returned to Rasa. Prof. E. Golubinsky, in his fundamental work “History of the Russian Church”, making an outline of the attitude of Russians to Latinism, cites many facts indicating that with different ways the reception of the Latins into the bosom of the Orthodox Church at different times, i.e. performing either their baptism or chrismation, both the Greek and Russian Churches proceeded from the recognition of them as heretics. Therefore, the assertion that during these centuries “unity in the communion of the sacraments and in particular the Eucharist has undoubtedly been preserved” between the Orthodox Church and Rome is completely untrue. There was and is a division between us and Rome, and, moreover, it is real, not illusory.

In the same second mournful message, Metropolitan Philaret reports what was a revelation for me: “Before even Patriarch Athenagoras, the representative of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Nikodim, on December 14, 1970, communed Catholic clerics in Rome itself, in the Cathedral of St. Peter. There, during the celebration of the Liturgy, the choir of students of the Pontifical College sang, and the Roman Catholic clergy received communion from the hands of Metropolitan Nikodim. But behind such a practical implementation of the so-called. Ecumenism also sees broader goals aimed at the complete abolition of the Orthodox Church.

In these three sorrowful epistles of Metropolitan Philaret, the third First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad, one can find a detailed and complete description of the entire history of ecumenism, how it developed in the Orthodox Church and in the Russian Church in particular, and this valuable information will let everyone understand what is happening now in our Church.

The meeting of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill with the Pope of Rome caused great indignation among me and many of our parishioners, and the first questions addressed to me were: “How, without the knowledge of his 300 bishops, did His Holiness make such a meeting with the head of the Roman Church? How, without the knowledge of his own bishops, His Holiness Patriarch Kirill signed some document that was drawn up by the Vatican and one bishop? If the document was drawn up and signed in this way, is the signature of His Holiness the Patriarch on behalf of the fullness of the Russian Church valid? To my great joy and consolation, I felt almost complete solidarity with my reflections in my parish. This means that we still think and live in the Orthodox way. To my great joy and consolation, I read and listen on the Internet to many truly Orthodox people in Russia, Ukraine, Greece, Moldavia, Bulgaria and Mount Athos, who asked the same questions that I asked myself, and each act in his own way to illuminate and to explain these questions for myself personally and for all our believing people. I am very grateful to Father Deacon Vladimir Vasilik, a cleric from St. Petersburg, for his detailed interpretation of the document that was signed in Cuba, calling this document purely ecumenical, in which every theological point is ambiguous. For me, an archpriest of the Church Abroad with a simple seminary education at our Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville, it was important to get the right answer from a theologian, historian and philologist in the person of Father Vladimir Vasilik to the question: “What should I do?” In this situation, we must earnestly pray for His Holiness Patriarch Kirill, remain in the Russian Orthodox Church, but at the same time decisively and clearly inform our hierarchy that we do not agree with these texts.

Often His Holiness the Patriarch in his speeches says that the people of God also have a voice in solving church issues, and let this small letter be my humble voice of the people of God. Great article about. Vladimir Vasilik, we immediately printed in Russian and English for all our parishioners and handed out in their parish. We are also pleased that theological conferences were held in both Moscow and St. Petersburg on the topics of the meeting in Cuba and the Pan-Orthodox Council, which is planned to be held on Trinity, and that the people in Russia are worried and concerned about the fate of the Church.

It was sad to listen to the speeches of prominent metropolitan clerics who expressed their complete delight at the meeting in Cuba and said that no one in their parishes was disturbed by this meeting. I personally heard how a well-known Moscow cleric invited his Catholic friend to speak before the parish after the pulpit service, so that the parishioners would see a good Catholic man. If I did this in Toronto, my parishioners would kick me out for being so tempted. This enthusiasm of the metropolitan clergy is probably due to the fact that they have a completely different perception of ecumenism than in the Church Abroad. We absolutely do not accept it and will not accept it, while in Russia, in the Russian Church, since 1961, ecumenism has developed and is developing at a great speed. Unfortunately, in the Russian Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, ecumenical thinking and education have long since entered the church organism. And how can we be? After all, we are one Church and have a completely different perception of the topic and activity of ecumenism. Lord, give us patience, love and faith to survive all this!

I highly recommend finding on the Internet the report of Metropolitan Vitaly (Ustinov) “Ecumenism. Report to the ROCOR Council of Bishops”, as well as “Sorrowful Messages” by Metropolitan Philaret (Voznesensky). Everyone should read these reports, then you will understand us, your brothers and sisters abroad.

Mitred Archpriest Vladimir Malchenko,

Rector of the Holy Trinity Cathedral in Toronto,

Dean of the Eastern District of the Canadian Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.

Source: http://www.blagogon.ru/news/429/print

Ecumenism refers to the movement of Christian churches against the disunited and hostile relations between ecclesiastical forces. Ecumenism is a striving for the cohesion of religious communities on a global scale. The first references to the ecumenical movement appeared at the beginning of the 20th century. Thanks to Protestant churches USA and Western Europe, in the next half century, ecumenism spread and received recognition from the World Assembly of Churches. This organization supported ecumenical sentiments in every possible way, which in the 1950s led to the creation of the World Council of Churches, a body responsible for uniting and coordinating activities carried out by ecumenical church organizations. With the help of the material presented below, having received and analyzed the information from it, you will be able to form your position regarding this movement and independently complete the sentence "Ecumenism is ...".

Definition of ecumenism

The word "ecumenism" comes from the Greek oikoumene, which in translation into Russian means "the promised world, the Universe." The meaning of the name of the worldview fully justifies its policy aimed at creating a universal Christian belief capable of uniting all categories of the population.

The main Divine message, the Bible, calls us to unity. (17, 21) speaks of the commandment "Let all be one." has striven for interfaith unity of activity throughout its existence, and ecumenism is a way of embodying boundless hopes for religious integration.

The basic, doctrinal foundation of ecumenism lies in faith in the Triune God. “Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior,” is the unanimous dogmatic minimum of the ecumenical worldview.

Chronicles: the history of ecumenism

Despite the fact that the emergence of ecumenism dates back only to 1910, at the beginning of two thousand years, institutions preaching this religion were called ecumenical councils, and the Patriarch of Constantinople awarded the heroes with the “ecumenical” title. Nevertheless, the desire for universal unity constantly competed with religious fragmentation, which ultimately led to the emergence of such new formations as schisms, sects and branches of Christianity. So, ecumenism is a religion with a history.

The church began looking for a solution to the problem in 10th century, when the Edinburgh Missionary Conference was held. The meeting discussed the importance and priority of interdenominational interaction despite any confessional boundaries.

The foreseeable history of ecumenism continued in 1925. At one of the General Christian Conferences, the question of the general Christian position and the ways of its social, political or economic propaganda was raised.

Three years later, Lausanne (a city in Switzerland) received the guests of the first World Conference "Faith and Church Order". Its theme was devoted to the foundation of basic Christian unities.

With slogans about Christian unity, the subsequent meetings of 1937-1938 were held in England and the Netherlands, respectively. During these years, the World Council of Churches was created, whose meeting, due to the outbreak of the Second World War, was held only after 10 years.

The holding of bilateral meetings and theological dialogues of Churches with different traditions and confessions can be considered the main achievement of ecumenism.

Does ecumenism support world Christianity?

Ecumenism was strengthened in 1961, after the entry of the Russian Orthodox Church into the World Council of Churches.

Catholic Christianity is characterized by an ambiguous attitude towards the ecumenical movement: despite the fact that representatives of the Roman Catholic faith did not declare a complete denial of ecumenism, they are not part of it. Although, the Second Vatican Council of the Roman Catholic Church, which seemed to take a position reminiscent of a movement against ecumenism, emphasized the unnaturalness of division. “The schisms are at odds with the will of Christ,” declared the 1964 decree “On Ecumenism.” In addition, it is worth noting that the figures of this branch of Christianity take part in the activities of the commission "Faith and Church Order".

Interpretations of ecumenism

Ecumenists do not position themselves and their moods as a creed, an ideology, or a church-political movement. No, ecumenism is an idea, a desire to fight against the schism between those who pray to Jesus Christ.

Throughout the world, the meaning of ecumenism is perceived differently, which, in turn, affects the problem of creating the final formulation of the definition of this movement. At the moment, the term "ecumenism" is divided into three semantic currents.

Interpretation No. 1. The goal of ecumenism is the communion of Christian denominations

The problem of ideological and traditional disagreements, dogmatic differences in religious ramifications led to the lack of dialogue between them. The ecumenical movement seeks to contribute to the development of Orthodox-Catholic relations. To deepen mutual understanding, to coordinate and unite the efforts of Christian organizations in the non-Christian world in order to protect religious sentiments and feelings of the public, to resolve social problems - these are the tasks of "public" ecumenism.

Interpretation No. 2. Liberalism in ecumenism

Ecumenism calls for common Christian unification. The liberalism of the current consists in the desire, according to the Orthodox Church, to create artificially a new belief that will contradict the existing one. Bad influence ecumenism with a liberal bent has a bearing on apostolic succession and dogmatic teachings. The Orthodox Church hopes to see a pro-Orthodox ecumenical movement, which, based on recent events in the world of ecumenists, is impossible.

Interpretation No. 3. Unification of religions on a global scale as a task for ecumenism

Esoteric writers see ecumenism as a method of solving the problem of sectarian wars and misunderstandings. Ideas about a world dominated by a single religion are also characteristic of neo-pagans, admirers of the worldview new era(new age). Such an ideology is a utopia not only for logical reasons: for example, such ecumenism is not supported in the Orthodox Church. And the position on the issue is expressed in the complete denial of the false doctrine of the creation of a "universal" religion.

Orthodox ecumenism: good or evil?

In the above three main interpretations of ecumenism, the common features of certain goals of the ecumenical movement were considered. However, for sure, in order to form a complete opinion about this teaching, one should get acquainted with the position of the Patriarch of All Rus' Kirill.

According to representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church, the impossibility of its participation in movements with ecumenical sentiments in the 70-80s of the last century was caused by:

• a radical divergence of ecumenical statements from the teachings of the Orthodox Church (the perception of the main goals of faith in Christ is too strikingly different);
• the denial of the possibility of uniting Churches that are different in dogmatic and doctrinal aspects thanks to the ecumenical movement;
• the closeness and affinity of ecumenism with those denied by the Russian Orthodox Church, politically minded or secret creeds;
• complete discrepancy between the goals of the ecumenical worldview and the tasks of the Orthodox Church.

Acquaintance with ecumenism and its study in the 20th century was accompanied by the appeal of the Russian Orthodox Church with the following content: “Christians of the whole world must not betray Christ and deviate from the true path to the Kingdom of God. Do not waste your mental and physical strength, time on creating alternatives to the righteous Church of Christ. The mirage temptation of the ecumenical church will not allow solving the difficulties of the unity of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches!”

The position of the Orthodox Church regarding ecumenism

At the moment, Cyril prefers to speak about ecumenism laconicly and accurately: this movement in the modern religious world is gaining momentum, but the Orthodox Church has not formed a distinct attitude towards ecumenical activity. So, are ecumenism and Patriarch Kirill compatible concepts?

The Patriarch in his interview says that, following ecumenism, we do not betray Orthodoxy, as many people believe.

“Before you make unfounded accusations, you should carefully understand the situation, right? With the slogans preceding the anti-ecumenical movement: "Down with the heresy of ecumenism!", "We are against the traitors of the Orthodox world!" - it is very easy to make people think that ecumenism is part of the world revolution. In order to direct the efforts made by ecumenists in the right direction, it is necessary, first of all, to conduct a serious intelligent dialogue at the theological level. Noisy debates will not help in solving the problem of rejection of this movement,” such is Cyril’s ecumenism.

It is too early to talk about full-fledged Eucharistic communion, because real church-wide reconciliation as such has not happened. Churches declare the non-existence of doctrinal differences and assert their readiness to make contact, but in the end... Ecumenism occurs in the modern religious world: the Orthodox give communion to the Armenians, the Catholics to the Orthodox, if there is a need for it.

Is ecumenism resurgent? Meeting of the Patriarch and the Pope

In light of recent events, Kirill's support for ecumenism seems to be gaining more and more prominence. The significant meeting “Patriarch-Pope-Ecumenism”, which took place on February 12, 2016, became, according to some journalists and political scientists, With the conclusion of the declaration, the religious world turned upside down, and it is not known what forces will be able to return it to its original position.

What happened there at the meeting?

The meeting of representatives of two such relatives, but such religious denominations so far from each other, Patriarch Kirill and Francis, stirred up all mankind.

The heads of the two churches managed to discuss many issues regarding the direction of development of Orthodox-Catholic relations. Ultimately, after the conversation, a declaration was concluded and signed on drawing the attention of mankind to the problem of Christians who are in poverty in the Middle East region. “Stop the war and immediately begin to conduct operations for a peaceful settlement,” the text of the document calls.

The conclusion of the declaration and the phenomenal beginning of a dialogue between the Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches is the first step towards a flourishing inter-religious movement. When meetings of this level take place, the future becomes brighter, with them opening doors leading to full-scale interfaith and interreligious cooperation. The latter will contribute to the solution of global economic and social problems of civilization. The generation of mankind, in whose heart there is a place for God, also has hope for peaceful coexistence, without aggression, pain and suffering.

They want to force us to believe not in the Truth, in Christ in the Orthodox confession, but in the fact that no matter what temple on earth you go to (whether Orthodox, a Muslim mosque or a pagan temple), you will still come to God (Antichrist). May it not be so with us. It is in Orthodoxy that the fullness of Truth is. In our church, the apostolic teaching has been preserved in purity, as commanded by Christ Himself. This is the Holy Fire coming down to the Orthodox Patriarch, it is our myrrh streaming, bleeding, icons are being renewed, this is on our Orthodox faith persecution has not stopped for almost two thousand years. If we have the Truth, then what is our hierarchy looking for in other religions? Why doesn't Orthodoxy suit them? If they say that they communicate with heretics in order to testify to them about the Truth, then it is forbidden to do so. In the world council of churches it is forbidden to impose one's doctrine. Moreover, participation in this council requires recognition of the fact that no religion has the fullness of truth. How can we participate there? Why are we being pulled there if we already have everything we need to save ourselves, and we cannot help others there (forbidden). If we are already with Christ, and they lead us to someone else, then to whom, if not to the Antichrist?

Archimandrite Ambrose (Fontrier). About Faith and Salvation. Questions and answers

At the beginning of the 20th century, the so-called ecumenical movement began (Greek "oecumene" - "universe"), i.e. movement for the creation of a single universal Church. Many people think: what's wrong with that, the Lord Himself says: "Let them all be one" (John 17:21)? The Lord calls everyone, but under His protection, to the House of the Lord - the Church. Ecumenists are calling for something else - for a mixture of all Christian and pagan confessions; not to unity in Christ, but in a "deity" that will unite in itself both the "god" of the pagans, and the "god" of the Jews, and the "god" of the Muslims... Is it possible for Jews who do not recognize Jesus Christ to unite with Christians? Christians with pagans, shamans? What kind of "god" can worship all this multilingual crowd? Is it true? Or perhaps the one whose name is Antichrist? Our Orthodox Church has been praying for the unity of all people for two thousand years, but with a prayer for unity in an Orthodox church, so that everyone joins the Church founded by the Lord Himself! Here is a complete mixture of faiths, religions, statutes, services, customs. Ecumenists strive to get one of all religions, so that the spirit in it is one, only that spirit is not Christ's. The Jerusalem Church does not take part in the ecumenical movement. Our Russia has been in chains for several decades - on the Cross. Therefore, many heretics have entered the Orthodox Church, they want to unite the pagans and Protestants with the Orthodox; to impress upon us that ecumenism is from God. How to find out: the ecumenical meetings of the Second Congresses are from God or from the evil one? It is easy to find out - if the apostolic commandments are supported there, then it is from God. When Christ came, He did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. And since at these congresses they go against the apostolic rules, they are not from God. The ecumenical church is the church of the last times, in this church the head is the Antichrist. And Satan himself will control it ...
(https://lib.eparhia-saratov.ru/books/01a/amvrosii/amvrosii1/19.html)

The ecumenical movement takes as its guiding principle the Protestant vision of the Church. Protestants believe that there is no single truth and a single Church, but each of the numerous Christian denominations has a particle of truth, thanks to which these relative truths can, through dialogue, be brought to a single truth and a single Church. One of the ways to achieve this unity, in the understanding of the ideologists of the ecumenical movement, is to hold joint prayers and services in order to eventually achieve communion from a single cup (intercommunion).

Orthodoxy cannot accept such an ecclesiology in any way, for it believes and testifies that it does not need to collect particles of truth, for it is precisely the Orthodox Church that is the guardian of the fullness of the Truth given to Her on the day of Holy Pentecost.

The Orthodox Church, however, does not forbid praying for those who are out of communion with Her. Through the prayers of St. Right. John of Kronstadt and Blessed Archbishop John (Maximovich) were healed by both Catholics and Protestants, Jews and Muslims, and even pagans. But, acting according to their faith and request, these and our other righteous at the same time taught them that the saving Truth is only in Orthodoxy.

For the Orthodox, joint prayer and communion at the Liturgy are an expression of the already existing unity within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. St. Irenaeus of Lyon (2nd century) succinctly put it this way: "Our faith is in harmony with the Eucharist and the Eucharist confirms our faith." The Holy Fathers of the Church teach that members of the Church build the Church - the Body of Christ - by the fact that in the Eucharist they partake of the Body and Blood of Christ. Outside of the Eucharist and Communion there is no Church. Joint communion would be a recognition that all those who partake belong to the One Apostolic Church, while the realities of Christian history and our time, unfortunately, point to a deep doctrinal and ecclesiological division of the Christian world.

Representatives of the modern ecumenical movement not only do not promote unity, but exacerbate the division of the Christian world. They call to go not the narrow path of salvation in the confession of the one truth, but the broad path of union with those who profess various delusions, about which St. Ap. Peter said that "through them the way of truth will be reproached" (2 Pet. 2:2-2).

Until recently, the largely Protestant World Council of Churches called for the unity of Christians throughout the world. Now this organization calls for unity with the pagans. In this sense, the World Council of Churches is increasingly approaching the positions of religious syncretism. This position leads to the erasure of differences between religious confessions in order to create a single universal world religion that would contain something from each religion. A universal world religion also implies a universal world state with a single economic order and a single world nation - a mixture of all existing nations, with a single leader. If this happens, then the ground will really be prepared for the accession of the Antichrist.

Let us recall the infamous ecumenical prayer meeting organized a few years ago by the Pope in Assisi, in which non-Christians participated. To what deity did the religious figures gathered at that time pray? At this meeting, the Pope told non-Christians that "they believe in the true God." The true God is the Lord Jesus Christ, worshiped in the Triune Trinity. Do non-Christians believe in the Holy Trinity? Can Christians pray to an unspecified deity? According to Orthodox teaching, such a prayer is heresy. In the words of the outstanding Orthodox theologian, Archimandrite Justin Popovich, "all-heresy."

Orthodox members of the ecumenical movement claim that by their formal membership in the World Council of Churches they testify to the truth that lives in the Orthodox Church. But the open violation of the canonical rules testifies not to the confession of the Truth, but to the trampling of the Holy Tradition of the Church.

How would the pillars of Orthodoxy, the Church Fathers Sts. Athanasius the Great, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, Mark of Ephesus and others? Let us turn to hoary antiquity, to the life of St. Maximus the Confessor. It shows how an Orthodox Christian should behave in the face of apostasy, a general deviation from the Truth of Christ.

Why don't you enter into communion with the Throne of Constantinople?- the patrician Troilus and Sergius Euphrates, the head of the royal meal, asked St. Maximus the Confessor.

- No the saint replied.

- Why? they asked.

- Because,- answered the saint, - that the primates of this Church rejected the decisions of the four councils .... many times they excommunicated themselves from the Church and exposed themselves in unreasonableness.

- So you alone will be saved- objected to him - and everyone else will die? The saint replied:

- When all people in Babylon worshiped the golden idol, the three holy youths did not condemn anyone to death. They did not care about what others did, but only about themselves, so as not to fall away from true piety. In the same way, Daniel, thrown into the pit, did not condemn any of those who, fulfilling the law of Darius, did not want to pray to God, but had in mind their duty, and wished it was better to die than to sin and be executed before their conscience for the transgression of the Law of God. . And God forbid me to condemn anyone, or to say that I alone will be saved. However, I will agree to die rather than, having deviated from the right faith in any way, to endure the pangs of conscience.

- But what will you do the messengers said to him, When will the Romans unite with the Byzantines? Yesterday, after all, two Apocrysaries came from Rome, and tomorrow, on Sunday, they will commune with the Patriarch of the Most Pure Mysteries. The Reverend replied:

- If the whole universe begins to commune with the patriarch, I will not commune with him. For I know from the writings of the holy apostle Paul that the Holy Spirit anathematizes even angels if they began to preach differently, introducing something new.
(https://theorthodox.org/ecumenismwhatRU.htm)

Even before, Orthodox patriarchs fell into heresy and it is not our business to judge them, but after a while the Lord overthrew them and cleansed the Holy Orthodox Church. The trouble of our time is that the retreat is massive. Few denounce heretics, and those who denounce are subjected to slander and repression. Such a time has come, but we must testify to the Truth, even if the heresy of ecumenism flourishes throughout the world.

God will judge the world, but we will testify to the truth, so that in the light of truth one can see a lie! Amen. Help God!