ECUMENISM

[The Holy Monastery of the Paraclete belongs to the Diocese of Attica of the Church of Greece. Its founder is Archimandrite Cherubim (Karambelas) (fl979), author of Contemporary Ascetics of Mount Athos (St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1992) and Recollections of Mount Athos (Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1987).—ed.]

{This article is very important to the many of our viewers and clergy alike of every true “Catholic” – Orthodox and Roman jurisdiction. Even though the article itself may be a bit ‘heady’ for some viewers, it is articulate in providing understanding as to what is happening in these times in North America and through out the world. Even so, this article is also important because it comes from an authentic ‘Orthodox’ mind-set of whose spirituality there is no question which bears certain hallmarks that is diametrically opposite of the majority of those whose spirituality adheres to a Romanistic-ness of the Catholic Church. Even those who may – or may not – have an inheritance from the Athonite Benedictine community that was once a part of Mt. Athos. A spirituality from Mt. Athos that was devoid of political action for image, power, glory, etc. A mind-set and spirituality that desired only true ‘Orthodox’ spirituality from the very roots of Christianity that has no geographical, ethnic or jurisdictional borders. A spirituality where ‘yea’ meant ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ meant no with no double-talk or deceit for an expediency that is nothing more than political intrigue. }

The Orthodox Church is, by its very nature, catholic and obviously ecumenical (universal). It welcomes with open arms all peoples, of all races and all times, and invites them all to come. Christ, who is the Head of the Church, addresses the world throughout all time, Come to Me all of you (Matt. 11:28), while at the same time sending out His apostles to teach the Gospel of salvation to all nations {Matt. 28:19}.

This component and inherent feature of the Church, ecumenicity or universality, is today being contested by two movements which express the spirit of the age: ecumenism and globalism.

Globalism is promoted by powerful sociopolitical forces and projects the model of a single united humanity, while ecumenism is active in the religious sector, attempting to realize the vision of a united Christianity and aiming ultimately at one universal religion, a "pan-religion."

In this paper, we will attempt to provide an outline of the Ecumenical Movement, of which the Orthodox Church is a participant, since the nature and work of this movement remain unknown to many people in the Church, and certain developments within ecumenical circles have raised fears and provoked concerns.

It may sound strange, but it is a fact that ecumenism today is threatening the "ecumenical nature" of our Church, as it falls more and more to compromising and syncretistic tactics which contradict the basic principles of our Orthodox faith. We must not forget that correct faith is the first and foremost prerequisite for the salvation of mankind, according to the divinely inspired Patristic declaration: "Whoever wishes to be saved is first of all obliged to keep the catholic* faith; if he does not keep this faith safe and unblemished, without hesitation, he will be eternally lost" (The Symbol of Faith of St. Athanasius the Great of Alexandria). {* Elder Cleopa of Romania (+1998) provides a succinct explanation of why the Orthodox faith is called "Catholic": "With the word 'Catholic' we say that the Church has it as her purpose to spread throughout the whole world, comprising Christians of every place, every age, and of all people.... Moreover, the Church is called Catholic since its entire teaching is the undistorted truth, which was given by Christ to the Apostles, and through them to the world; while, on the contrary, heresy possesses but a portion of the truth. Orthodoxy is not only the right faith but also the fullness of the faith—which is why it is also understood to be synodical." (Elder Cleopa of Romania, The Truth of Our Faith [ Thessaloniki: Uncut Mountain Press, 2000 ], p. 42.)—ed.}

Thus, if the salvific message of Orthodoxy is obscured and lost among the alluring messages of the heterodox and non-Christian religions for the sake of a Utopian, ecumenistic vision, then the hope of the world will also have been lost.

1. contemporary ecumenism

Ecumenism is a movement which declares that it has as its purpose the unity of the divided Christian world (Orthodox, Roman Catholics**, Protestants and others). The idea of unity stirs every sensitive Christian soul and corresponds to its innermost longing. This idea is also appropriated by ecumenism. However, ecumenism's unifying vision, a vision above all spiritual, is based mainly on human endeavors and not on the action of the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit alone Who can, upon encountering human repentance and humility, make this vision a reality.

** According to the true meaning of the word "Catholic" (see the note above), the term "Roman Catholic" is actually a misnomer. Because the Roman Catholic church, since its schism from the Orthodox Church, has included heresies among its dogmas (the Filioque, the Immaculate Conception, papal infallibility, etc.), its entire teaching is not the undistorted truth, and thus it cannot properly be considered Catholic.—ed

The roots of contemporary ecumenism are found in the Protestantism of the nineteenth century. At that time some Christian confessions, faced with an exodus of their members due to an increase in religious indifference and organized anti-religious movements, were compelled to rally together and cooperate.

Their unifying activity took on an organized form as the Ecumenical Movement in the twentieth century, and specifically in 1948, with the establishment in Amsterdam of the World Council of Churches, which has its headquarters in Geneva.

It is important to note that the World Council of Churches (WCC) would never have been able to assume an ecumenical character, but would have remained merely an inter-Protestant affair, had it not been for the participation of certain Local Orthodox Churches. The Roman Catholics, at first, refused to participate. Later, however, without becoming an organic member of the WCC, they also entered the Ecumenical Movement. With the relative decree at the Second Vatican Council (1964), they inaugurated their own particular version of ecumenism, which aims at the union of all Christians under the authority of the pope.

It must be acknowledged that the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople provided an important boost to the creation of the Ecumenical Movement. This was the case especially with the Proclamation of 1920, which, as it turned out, became the basis and "Great Charter" of Orthodox participation in the Ecumenical Movement.

This Proclamation was quite unprecedented in the history of the Church since, for the first time, an official Orthodox text characterized all heterodox communities of the West as "Churches," as "being a part of the household of Christ and fellow heirs, members of the same body and partakers of the promise of God in Christ" (Eph. 3:6). In this way it subverted and overthrew Orthodox ecclesiology. So as to avoid referring to earlier periods, it suffices to remember that only a few decades earlier (in 1895), in one of its encyclicals, the same Patriarchate placed Roman Catholicism outside the Church because it had introduced heretical teachings and innovations. Thus, it likewise called upon Western Christians to return to the One Church, that is, to Orthodoxy.

The Proclamation of 1920, having as its prototype the international "League of Nations," proposed the creation of an association and fellowship between the churches with the primary aims being (a) a re-examination of dogmatic differences with a mollifying character, (b) the acceptance of a uniform calendar (the partial application of which brought about, unfortunately, an inter-Orthodox calendar division), and (c) the convocation of pan-Christian conferences.

Except for the Ecumenical Patriarchate, nearly all of the Orthodox Churches gradually asked to be accepted, and eventually were accepted, as members of the WCC. Some, however, were later compelled to retreat and to withdraw since, on the one hand, they observed with disappointment the Ecumenical Movement's degeneration, and, on the other, they were pressured by intense anti-ecumenical reactions of their flock. One could very well ask: "How is it possible for Orthodoxy to be a 'member' of 'something,' at the same time that she is herself the 'whole,' the Body of Christ, and calls all to become Christ's members?"

In any case, the presence of Orthodox Churches at WCC gatherings was, due to the way in which they were assembled and functioned, always tenuous, ineffective, and decorative. The decisions of the WCC were molded exclusively by the overwhelming majority of the Protestant vote. Of course, until 1961, at the General Assemblies the Orthodox submitted separate statements—some of which constitute historic confessions of faith—as representatives of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

With regard to the ecumenistic overtures of Vatican II, the Orthodox response was positive, with the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras as chief spokesman. The Patriarch met Pope Paul VI in Jerusalem (1964), carried out together with him the mutual lifting of the anathemas from the Schism of 1054, and encouraged the "dialogue of love," thus promoting the aims of the Second Vatican Council.

Ecumenism, in order to realize its aims, is obliged to reconsider or even overlook certain basic principles of Orthodoxy. It promotes the idea of an "Extended" or "Broad Church," according to which the Church is one and consists of Christians of every confession from the moment in which they were baptized. In this way, all Christian confessions are among themselves "Sister Churches."

Within this same spirit is found the idea of the "Universal visible Church." That is, a Church which exists "invisibly" and consists of all Christians, and which, through the various mutual efforts toward unity, will appear in its visible dimension.

These views were shaped and influenced by the Protestant "branch theory," according to which the Church is a "tree" with its "branches" being all the Christian confessions, each one of which holds only a part of the truth.

We should also add the theory of the "two lungs" that was developed between Orthodox ecumenists and Roman Catholics. According to this theory, Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism are the two lungs with which the Church breathes. For the Church to start breathing again properly, the two lungs must synchronize their breathing.

Finally, among the methods which ecumenism uses for the rapprochement of Christians, there is included "dogmatic minimalism." This is an attempt to reduce the dogmas down to the most necessary, the bare minimum, in order to leap over the differences between the confessions. The result, however, is to overlook the dogmas, to downgrade and minimize their importance. "Let the Christians unite," they say, "and the theologians will discuss the dogmas later"! With this method of dogmatic minimalism it may indeed be quite easy for Christians to unite. Yet, can such "Christians" be Orthodox, that is, truly Christians?

According to Orthodox ecclesiology, Church and Orthodoxy are one and the same. The Church is undoubtedly Orthodox, and Orthodoxy is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, the Body of Christ. Because Christ is one, the Church is therefore also one. That is why division in the Church is inconceivable. There can be only a separation from the Church. That is, at specific historical moments, the heretics and the schismatics cut themselves off from the Church and thus cease being members of the Church.

The Church possesses the fullness of the truth, not merely an abstract truth, but a way of life which saves man from death and makes him "God by grace." On the contrary, a heresy is a whole or partial rejection of the truth, a tearing into pieces of truth, which then takes upon itself the character and pathology of an ideology. It separates man from the way of being that God imparted to His Church, and it kills him spiritually.

Furthermore, the dogmas which encapsulate the transcendent truths of our faith are not abstract ideas and intellectual ideas originating in the mind, nor even less are they a result of medieval obscurantism or theological scholasticism. They express, rather, the experience and life of the Church. Hence, when there exists a difference in dogma, there likewise definitely exists a difference in the way of life. Whoever, then, undervalues the akrivia (exactitude) of faith cannot live the fullness of life in Christ.

The Christian must accept all that Christ has revealed. Not a "minimum," but the whole. For, in the entirety and wholeness of the faith are preserved the Catholicity and the Orthodoxy of the Church.

This explains the struggles unto blood of the Holy Fathers to safeguard the faith of the Church, as well as their concern for the phrasing—under the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit — of the "terms" of the Oecumenical Councils. These "terms" are nothing other than the "termination points,"*** the borders of truth, so that the faithful can discern the Church, as Orthodox, from heresy. {***The noun term comes from the Middle English terme (boundary, end), which in turn derives from Old French and from the Latin terminus; it is likewise akin to the Greek term (boundary, end).}

The heterodox, by rejecting the fullness of the truth, separated themselves from the Church. This, then, is why they are heretics. They therefore lack the sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit, and their "Mysteries" are invalid. Consequently, the baptism they perform cannot admit them into the Church of Christ.

The 68th Canon of the Holy Apostles states: "Those who have been baptized or ordained by heretics cannot be either faithful Christians or clergymen."

One Orthodox hierarch has proclaimed that "the Holy Spirit is at work in every Christian baptism," and that the rebaptism by Orthodox of baptized heterodox Christians is inspired by "narrow-mindedness, fanaticism and bigotry... [It] is an injustice committed against Christian baptism, and eventually a blasphemy against God's Holy Spirit." {The Illuminator (Pittsburgh, Penn.), Summer 1995}

Another hierarch, speaking to the heterodox, stated: "We are all members of Christ, [the] one and only body, one and unique 'new creation,' given that our common baptism has freed us from death." {Enįокεψης, a magazine of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (Geneva), no. 370 (1987), p. 9 (in Greek).}

The ecumenist ecclesiology was likewise officially expressed thus: "We are obliged to be ready to search for and to recognize the presence of the Church outside our own canonical limits, with which we identify the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" {Enįокεψης magazine (Geneva), no. 260 (1981), pp. 13-14 (in Greek).}.

Yet, there are those who are even bolder, who envision the refounding of the Church through the unification of all Christians. One Orthodox hierarch maintains that "we have need of a new Christianity which will be based entirely upon new perceptions and terms. We cannot teach the type of religion which was handed down to us to the next generations." {Eοτία newspaper (Athens), May 10, 1967 (in Greek)}.

Ecumenism, in order to promote its plans, uses a variety of means. The most basic means is that of dialogue.

No one is ignorant of the fact that the Orthodox Church by its very nature is open to dialogue. God is always in dialogue with man, and the Saints of the Church never refused dialectical communication with the world.

The Saints, having self-awareness of their communion with God, have tried through dialogue to impart the experience of the truth they have lived. For the Saints, the truth was not an object of research. They did not negotiate it; they merely offered it. If the dialogue did not lead the heterodox to the rejection of their mistaken belief and acceptance of Orthodox faith, they did not continue it.

St. Mark of Ephesus dialogued with the Roman Catholics at the Council of Ferrara-Florence for two years (1438-1439). When, however, he saw their haughtiness, their intransigence and their persistence in error, he cut off all relations with them, to the point of exhorting the Orthodox faithful "to avoid the Papists as one avoids a snake."

A theological dialogue was also begun between the Ecumenical Patriarch Jeremiah II Tranos and the Protestant theologians of Tubingen (1579). When the Patriarch ascertained that the dialogue was fruitless, he ended it. He wrote: "Please release us from these cares. Therefore, going about your own ways, if you like, you may write to us, but no longer concerning dogmas."

Contemporary ecumenical dialogues differ radically from the dialogues of the Saints, because they are conducted on the basis of the principles of an extended Church and on dogmatic minimalism. For this reason they are un-Orthodox and fruitless. The proof of this is that, in the almost one hundred years that the talks have been held, they have not offered anything of value to the unity of the Christian world. On the contrary, they have succeeded in dividing the Orthodox!

In the dialogues certain Orthodox representatives do not express the unshakeable belief of the Orthodox Church, that it is, in fact, the one and only Church of Christ on earth. They, likewise, do not put forward the holy tradition and spiritual experience of Orthodoxy, which differ from the traditions and experiences of Western Christianity. Only such a confessing stance would be able to validate and make productive and fruitful the Orthodox presence at the dialogues. (Ed. Note: This includes the acceptance and support of all that the pillars of the Church Catholic hold true to which include the Seals of the Confessional, holding true to them even unto death of the clergyman which many today, in the West, only give lip service to but cannot and will not stand in support of them in spirit and truth!)

The lack of Orthodox witness, in combination with the demonstrated insincerity of the heterodox, makes the inter-Christian dialogue even more difficult and ineffective. On account of this, many times either mutual superficial compromises are made, or equivocal language and terminology are employed, so as to cover up the differences.

If, in the first place, the Roman Catholics were sincere, they would proclaim with frankness in ecumenical circles that which they emphasize to their own faithful—their non-negotiable attachment to the primacy of the pope and his infallibility. This of course would reveal clearly how they envision the unity of Christians: not as a unity of faith, but rather as a subjection of all under papal supremacy. In addition to this, the finding would be confirmed that the institution of the papacy on the one hand comprises the most tragic distortion of the Gospel and, on the other hand, uses dialogues purely for the sake of its own expansionist policies.

The chief expression of this insincerity of the Roman Catholics is found in their maintaining and strengthening of the Unia. {The Unia is a religious-political scheme invented by Roman Catholicism in order to bring the Orthodox Christians of Eastern Europe under papal authority while allowing them to retain their ecclesiastical customs (clerical dress, liturgical typicon, Slavonic services, etc.). Established at the Union of Brest in 1596, the Unia took advantage of the difficult historical circumstances faced by Orthodox Christians under Polish rule.}

This is a perfidious and subversive institution which Roman Catholicism used and continues to use as a unifying model, despite all the strong objections of the Orthodox and despite the fact that today it (the Unia) comprises the primary obstacle to the bilateral talks.

If, on the other hand, the multifarious Protestant groups were honest, they would state outright that they are not willing to compromise their fundamental Protestant principles and that (in fact) there are other reasons that force them into dialogue. This is, in any case, what is revealed by the deterioration of their "churches" (ordination of women, same-sex marriages, etc).

Because dishonesty and self-serving motives poisoned the dialogues, which were reduced to endless and fruitless theological debates, a turn of events was attempted. The dialogues were now called "dialogues of love," both for effect, and to sidestep the hurdle of dogmatic contentions. "Love comes first," they emphasize. "Love compels us to unite, even if there are dogmatic differences."

For this reason, the method in the dialogues of today is for there not to be any discussion of things that divide, but only of those things that unite, so as to facilitate a false sense of unity and shared faith. In the Oecumenical Councils of the past, however, the Fathers always discussed precisely that which divided. The same happens today in any dialogue between two parties with differences: They discuss the issues which separate them—that is, indeed, the whole point of the dialogue—and not those issues that unite.

For us Orthodox, Love and Truth are inseparable. A dialogue of love without truth is false and unnatural. Whereas, a dialogue of love "in truth" means: Conversing with the heterodox out of love, to point out their errors and how they can be led to the truth. If I truly love them, I must tell them the truth, however difficult or painful this might be.

Within the pathology of the dialogues there also belongs the deadening of Orthodox theological criteria. This has arisen due to the cultivation of an "ecumenical courtesy," of personal relationships and friendships among heterodox theologians. The faith is no longer considered the truth which saves, but the whole of a series of theoretical truths which allows for compromises.

The Orthodox ecumenists claim: "We are merely discussing, we are not changing our faith!" Of course dialogue, as a "loving approach" to the other, is pleasing to God. The ecumenist dialogue, however, as it is carried out today, is not a meeting in truth, but rather a "mutual recognition." This means that we recognize the heterodox communities as Churches; that we concede that their dogmatic differences comprise "legitimate expressions' of the same faith. By doing this, however, we fall into the trap of dogmatic syncretism: we place the truth on an equal footing with delusion; we equate light with darkness.

With the deadening of their theological criteria, it is quite natural that Orthodox ecumenists would participate, without reticence, in common shows of worship with the heterodox and in joint prayer, which take place regularly at inter-Christian meetings. They know that within this common ecumenical spirituality the right psychological climate is created for the promotion of union efforts.

However, the Holy Canons of the Church strictly forbid us to pray with the heterodox, for the heterodox do not share the Orthodox faith. They believe in a different, distorted Christ. On this account St. John Damascene calls them unbelievers: "Whoever does not believe according to the tradition of the Catholic [Whole] Church is an unbeliever."

Praying with the heterodox, then, is forbidden because it professes belief and participation in the faith of the other person praying and it gives the other the false impression that he is not in error or delusion and therefore has no need of turning to the truth.

If the Holy Canons forbid praying together with the heterodox, they even more strongly forbid our participation in the heterodox "Sacraments." Even on this point, however, we Orthodox have not been consistent.

The Second Vatican Council, within the framework of the ecumenistic "overtures" which it made, proposed intercommunion with the Orthodox: the Roman Catholics would be able to commune at Orthodox churches and the Orthodox at Roman Catholic churches. In this way, both the Roman Catholics and the Orthodox ecumenists believe that the union of Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy will gradually happen de facto, despite all of their dogmatic differences.

If, for the Roman Catholics, this position is justified from their perception of the Church and the Sacraments (created grace, etc.), for us Orthodox it is illogical and unacceptable. Our Church never regarded the Holy Eucharist as the means to accomplish unification, but always as its seal and crown.

Moreover, the common Chalice presupposes a common faith. This means, in other words, that if an Orthodox Christian communes in a Roman Catholic church, he accepts the Roman Catholic faith.

Another means for the achievement of the aims of ecumenism is inter-Christian cooperation in practical matters. Ecumenists maintain that the various contemporary problems (social, ethical, environmental, and others) oblige us to unite.

The Church, certainly, has shown and always shows great sensitivity toward all human problems. However, to work together with the heterodox in order to find a solution to these problems poses the following disadvantages:

a) The voice of Orthodoxy, when it is intermixed with other Christian voices, loses its lucidity and is unable to communicate to contemporary man its own unique way of life, which is theanthropo-centric (God-man centered) in contrast to the anthropocentric (man-centered) way of life of the heterodox. b) The Church succumbs to the temptation of secularization, using in its social welfare work the same worldly practices of the other confessions, at the expense of its message of salvation. What modern man has most need of, however, is not the improvement of life based on a worldly Christianity, even if this could expunge all social wounds, but rather his liberation from sin and his theosis (deification) within the true Body of Christ, the Orthodox Church.

c) The Orthodox faithful, seeing their own ecclesiastical shepherds cooperating with the heterodox, are given the mistaken impression that the heterodox also belong to the Church of Christ, despite their dogmatic differences.

It has become, over the last few years, ecumenistic policy for the various confessions to exchange official visits, and for these visits to be carried out by high-ranking clerics. They often include laudatory addresses, kisses, exchanges of gifts, dining together, praying together, joint announcements, and other gestures of friendliness.

In particular, from 1969 onward, mutual participation of Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics in the annual patronal feasts in Rome and Constantinople has become the rule. These gatherings, unfortunately, cannot be characterized as a mere formality or ceremonial gesture. The ecumenists themselves confess that, with these joint celebrations and their reciprocal recognition, a certain kind of ecclesiastical communion is experienced.

Our faithful flock, however, as it watches these visits via the media, experiences an unpleasant surprise. It is scandalized, embittered, dumbfounded and confused; it is given to doubt and questioning as, on the one hand, it hears its shepherds speak with a most Orthodox and Patristic tongue, and, on the other hand, it watches them move among the heterodox with the demeanor of a diplomat.

A deep crisis regarding a sense of direction appeared quite early in the Ecumenical Movement: a crisis which initially forced it to turn to addressing the sociopolitical problems of the people, abandoning theology as the road to union, and later led it to open itself up to non-Christian religions. In the Ecumenical Movement it is generally accepted that all religions comprise various paths to salvation, along with Christianity, and that the Holy Spirit is active and works in other religions also. Its slogan is the New Age axiom: "Believe what you want, only don't claim exclusivity regarding the truth and the path to salvation."

Therefore, the Ecumenical Movement convenes inter-religious meetings, which are not merely scientific conferences as their organizers contend, but assemblies confessing unity, with belief in the one God as their foundation. For this reason they often include joint displays of worship in which Orthodox, heterodox and non-Christians pray together. The Triune God of the Orthodox, the true and self-revealed God is not, however, the same as the "God" of the other religions, that is, some imagined "God" who was created and is perpetuated by the religious needs of fallen man.

Unfortunately, this inter-religious overture is also shared by Orthodox ecumenist hierarchs, who express opinions like the following:

"The Ecumenical Movement, although it does have a Christian beginning, must now become a movement of all religions.... All religions serve God and man. There is only one God..“

"Deep down, a church or a mosque aspires to the same spiritual dignification of man."

"Islam, in the Koran, talks of Christ, of the Panagia, and we should also talk about Muhammad with the same courage and boldness. We should look at its history and see what it has to offer; [we should look at] its preaching of the one God and the lives of its followers, who are followers of the one God.. . ."

"Roman Catholics and Orthodox, Protestants and Jews, Muslims and Hindus, Buddhists and Confucianists, the time has come to bring about, all of us together, the promotion of the spiritual principles of ecumenism.. . . We are all united in the spirit of the one God."

The main objective of the inter-religious meetings is the creation of contact points between religions so that a united resistance to social and international problems might be facilitated. This aim is at times exploited by powerful world leaders, who enlist the help of religions in order to promote their unlawful self-interests. This was clearly manifest after September 11, 2001, when a number of inter- religious assemblies were convened "on command."

In this way, however, our Church, instead of being the "judgment" and "check" of lawlessness, is transformed into its supporter and preserver. Our Church is confined within the earthbound outlook of the various religions and is relegated to the level of a worldly religion with a utilitarian and expedient character. At the same time, it is forced to disregard its apostolic-missionary commission, since its official representatives accept that all religions comprise "God-willed paths to salvation

Certain Orthodox ecumenists, likewise, reach the point of talking about peace, justice, freedom, love, and other ultimate spiritual qualities in a cold, impersonal, worldly idiom. They neglect to mention that these spiritual qualities constitute fruits of the Holy Spirit, that they are divine gifts which are distributed to those who engage in spiritual struggle "in Christ Jesus," and not at inter-religious gatherings.

It should be emphasized, however, that Orthodoxy is not a religion, not even the best of religions. It is the Church: the self- revelation and manifestation of God in history. Orthodoxy is conscious of its Oecumenicity (Universality) and of the Truth regarding Christ which it possesses, and this is why it is not afraid of its relationship with non-Christians. It knows, however, the limits of these relationships as these have been defined by the Patristic Tradition and by its own mysteriological experience. For example, St. Gregory Palamas, under the cruel conditions of captivity, debated with the Ottoman Turks. He did not hesitate, however — even at the risk of losing his own life — to tell the truth and to reproach their delusion and erroneous beliefs. Moreover, how did the Holy Martyrs confront the idol worshippers, and how did the New Martyrs confront the Muslims? Did they not confess the truth? Could we imagine them praying together with them? In that case we would not have any martyrs!

Our Church, then, refuses to sacrifice its uniqueness on the altar of expediency, and to accept the ecumenical slogan that "in all religions, under different names, the same God is worshipped." The Orthodox Church firmly believes that man is saved only through Christ, in accordance with the apostolic dictum: Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12).

After successive developments and the Ecumenical Movement's gradual departure from its original aims, the Orthodox faithful justifiably ask themselves: Does it not seem that the aim of ecumenism is not merely the unification of Christians, but the predominance of a syncretistic, worldwide religion, the leveling of everything and the transformation of the Church of Christ into a "club for religious people," in a worldly organization like the United Nations, desensitized and a-spiritual.

"Ecumenism, in the way the meaning of the word has prevailed, is of course a heresy because it means a renunciation of the basic principles of the Orthodox faith, as, for example, the acceptance of the so-called branch theory, that every church has a part of the truth and that all the churches should unite and put all the pieces of the truth on the table to form a whole. We believe that Orthodoxy is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. That's it. It's non-debatable; and subsequently, whoever professes the contrary can be called an ecumenist and therefore a heretic" (Archbishop Christodoulos of Athens, Interview on the Church Radio, May 24, 1998).

"Ecumenism is the collective name for pseudo-Christianities, for the pseudo-Churches of "Western Europe.... All of these pseudo-Christianities, all of these pseudo-Churches are nothing more than one heresy after another. Their common evangelical name is 'pan-heresy.' Why? Because through the course of history diverse heresies have negated or distorted certain characteristics of the Theanthropos, the Lord Jesus. These European heresies remove the God-man altogether and put European man in His place" (Archimandrite Justin Popovich).

Today in the Orthodox world, reactions against ecumenism and those who represent it are constantly on the rise. Many books, articles and critiques are seeing the light of publicity where, with much pain and anguish, the view is expressed that we are marching "according to plan" toward a Babylonian captivity of Orthodoxy within this heresy of many faces and many names.

There are not a few distinguished Orthodox clerics and theologians who propose the immediate withdrawal of Orthodoxy from the Ecumenical Movement and its conferences, because they believe that Orthodox participation in these is not just fruitless, but in many ways harmful.

Some Churches have already withdrawn from the World Council of Churches, while others have been caused to think long and hard about their own participation. This distress and uneasiness was likewise expressed at the Inter-Orthodox meeting held in Thessaloniki in 1998, where, among other things, it was confirmed that "after a whole century of Orthodox participation in the Ecumenical Movement, and half a century's presence in the World Council of Churches..., the chasm between the Orthodox and the Protestants has grown even larger."

We know that the criterion for Orthodoxy remains the faithful and pious people of God. No one — neither Patriarchs nor Synods — is capable of bypassing and silencing the conscience of the faithful. For this reason, "there should be no dialogue or decision made if this vigilant conscience of the Church (grace-filled clerics, laypeople, monastics) does not agree" (Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos).

Ecumenist dialogues as they are practiced are supported and sustained within the circles of academic theology, and by other ecclesiastical or non-institutional organizations, which aspire to certain benefits politically, financially, internationally and publicly. They do not constitute a request of the ecclesiastical body, but are imposed both from "outside" and "above". This fact highlights an unhealthy phenomenon: the autonomy of administrative institutions of the Orthodox Church today. In other words, in some cases the church administration is separate from the views, the concerns and the experience of the ecclesiastical pleroma.

Thus it is that the people of God do not participate actively in, nor are they informed objectively and responsibly about, these dialogues. Moreover, the decisions made during these dialogues do not always carry the seal of authentic conciliarity, are not genuinely synodical, but rather are usually made by particular "professionals" of ecumenism. One Orthodox hierarch has confessed characteristically: "The Orthodox faithful know nothing about the Ecumenical Movement . . . yet perhaps the Ecumenical Movement is fortunate that the Orthodox people know nothing of what goes on in Geneval!"

We are undoubtedly living in a period of cosmic change. Events, seemingly directed, race forward at a frantic pace. Ecumenism is evolving within the destructive, leveling viewpoint of globalism, which is being pushed by powerful economic-political organizations. No one any longer takes seriously the viewpoint that ecumenism can offer a visible and viable solution to the problem of Christian unity.

As Orthodox Christians, we should neither retreat to our ivory tower nor relax our vigilance. If we truly value and respect the life of people, if we truly have pain of heart for the people of the Western world who are tormented by dead-end religious traditions, as well as those in the Eastern world, who are caught up in demonic delusions, we have an obligation to remain devoted to our Holy Church. We must keep the traditional faith of our fathers pure and unadulterated, and to live it authentically within our daily struggle for our own personal holiness and theosis. The right faith and a strict and precise life will make us capable of witnessing to Orthodoxy, and to witness it—and why not?—unto martyrdom, if and when the times demand it.

Adherence to Orthodoxy, that is, to genuine life in Christ, and perseverance in the truth that frees and saves, is not egotism, fanaticism or intolerance. Rather, it expresses the ecumenical (universal) dimension, the love and philanthropy of the Orthodox Church. It constitutes the last possibility for a radical spiritual change in the West, and also for a way out for the East from its captivity to false gods.

FORTHCOMING BOOK: The Proceedings of the International Inter-Orthodox Conference: "Ecumenism—Origins, Expectations, Disenchantment," a selection of speeches given at the conference, will be published in Fall-Winter 2005 by Uncut Mountain Press. To order this book, go to the website: www.uncutmountain.com

Keep Up-To-Date by clicking on:

Quotes from Metropolitan Archbishop +Joseph Thaddeus, SSJt., Ph.D. Continuously updated

If You have a question that you wish to ask, please feel free to submit it. However, may it be suggested that you review all previous questions for the Month and also the Archive of questions previously asked for your question may have already been answered.

Click Here For Archive Quotes

Click Here for AOC HISTORY PAGES

Irvine Community Church (Canada)

Where the Faith of the People is a living faith

as given by the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, the Holy Apostles and Patristic Fathers.

Archbishop +David Francis (Wigley), OOFM

Liturgy: Tikhon Liturgy

An American Orthodox Church Mission to Canada and member of the Holy Synod of Bishops

of the

AMERICAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

(North American Orthodox Church, American Orthodox Catholic Church)

Our Newest Member to Apostle1.com

Western Orthodox Church in America (WOCA)

Where the Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ is bound up in His Love.

To Have the Love of Jesus Christ is to abide by His Life and Teachings.

There is no other way... The Church does not conform to the World,

The World must conform to the Church...