.jpg)
This document may be found here: http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/7/5/1.aspx
This document has been declared as "binding" on the Church, unalterable (in 2016), and was ordered, by the "MP" Synod of Nov.-Dec. 2017, to be published for the "edification" of the Church.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we offer some excerpts from the document along with brief comments. Please do forgive the brevity of these comments. The purpose of this post is to provide basic awareness of this Pseudo-Orthodoxy which has been embraced by the "MP". It is not to offer a full examination.
Excerpt 1: "...communities which have fallen away from orthodoxy have never been viewed as fully deprived of the grace of God. Any break from communion with the Church inevitably leads to an erosion of her grace-filled life, but not always to its complete loss in these separated communities. This is why the orthodox Church does not receive those coming to her from non-orthodox communities only through the sacrament of baptism."
Comment: So, according to the "MP" heretics and schismatics have "never been viewed as fully deprived of the grace of God" and that is why everyone is not baptized upon joining the Church.
Now, of course, grace may be active among persons who have yet to become Orthodox in order to lead them into the Church - but this would have no bearing on their form of reception. So, sadly, the "MP" is not referring to this "inviting grace" but rather a different type of grace is now acknowledged by them as being present outside of the Church - a grace which allows some non-Orthodox to be received without baptism - by this the "MP", in a veiled manner, acknowledges grace in the "baptisms" of the heretics.
Also, an entire army of Church Fathers and Councils have unequivocally declared that heretics and schismatics are without grace. How then does the "MP" dare to declare that these communities "have NEVER been viewed as fully deprived of the grace of God" - is this an open LIE or utter ignorance?
Excerpt 2: "As a result, the Assyrian Church of the East and the non-Chalcedonian Churches, including the Coptic, Armenian, Syrian Jacobite, Ethiopian and Malabar Churches, are separated even today. In the second millennium, the separation of the Roman Church was followed by internal divisions in Western Christianity, brought about by the Reformation, which resulted in the continual formation of different Christian denominations..."
Comment: As we know from the Orthodox who opposed the "Relation" document of the "synod" of Crete (2016) - the word "Church" cannot be used to refer to the communities of the non-Orthodox in a dogmatic, binding, and Synodally accepted text for this grants the heretics an ecclesial status which they, in reality, do not possess.
Comment: One is either in the Church or not. There is no "Church outside of the Orthodox Church" and thus no non-Orthodox community possesses an "ecclesial status". This statement of the "MP" reflects the heretical ecclesiology of Vatican II in a veiled form. Also, there is no "divided Christendom" for, as St. Hilarion Troitsky revealed "there is no Christianity outside of the Church".
Excerpt 4: "The essential goal of relations between the Orthodox Church and other Christian confessions is the restoration of that unity among Christians which is required of us by God."
Excerpt 5: "The Orthodox Church has always sought to draw the different Christian Churches and confessions into a joint search for the lost unity of Christians, so that all might reach the unity of faith..."
Comment on excerpts 4 and 5: The unity of Christians exists in the Orthodox Church. It does not have to be restored for it was never lost. Those heretics and schismatics who have fallen away from the saving unity of the Orthodox Church can choose to enter into such whenever they please.
 |
| St. John Chrysostom |
St. John Chrysostom clearly reveals the ever-existent reality of this unity as follows: "For all who believe through the Apostles are one, though some from among them [heretics and schismatics] were torn away." - so there is no "lost unity" of true Christians.
Excerpt 6: "The Russian Orthodox Church maintains co-operation with various Christian denominations and international Christian organizations in the task of common witness before secular society. The Russian Orthodox Church maintains working relations on the level of membership or co-operation with a wide variety of international Christian organizations, as well as with regional and national Councils of Churches and Christian agencies specializing in diakonia, youth work and peacemaking."
Excerpt 7: "...the Orthodox Church works with other traditional confessions in order to co-ordinate social work, promote social harmony and put an end to proselytism..."
Comment on excerpts 7 and 8: the mission given us by Christ is to convert the non-Orthodox that they might be saved in the Church. Christ or the Saints never taught that the Orthodox and heretics should work together for the sake of "social work" and "social harmony". This is an expression of the social-gospel heresy and it marginalizes and perverts the salvific mission of the Church.
Also "proselytism" is defined as "the policy of attempting to convert people's religious beliefs" - how could any Orthodox Christian dare to put an end to this? We want the non-Orthodox to join the Church so they can be saved. We actively seek this. We dare not end, or even put this mission "on the back-burner" for the sake of "peace" and "social-harmony".
Excerpt 8: "...causing offense to non-Orthodox Christians is inadmissible."
Comment: Christ caused offense to the non-Orthodox, as did many of our Saints, and our Councils, and we hear much offending the non-Orthodox in our divine services. Were they wrong and the "MP" now has come to correct Him and them?
 |
| St. Theodosius of the Kiev Caves |
For example, in the Life of St. Theodosius of Kiev we read that the Saint "had the custom of getting up at night ... and going out to the Jews to argue with them about Christ, reproaching and reviling them, and calling them rebellious and lawless..."
Excerpt 9: "During Orthodox participation of many decades in the ecumenical movement, Orthodoxy has never been betrayed by any representative of a Local Orthodox Church. On the contrary, these representatives have always been completely faithful and obedient to their respective Church authorities, and acted in complete agreement with the canonical rules, the Teaching of the Ecumenical Councils, the Church Fathers and the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church.”
Comment: this is a LIE and a complete justification of the pan-heresy of Ecumenism in its every historical manifestation. The Holy Spirit speaks through a true Council and these are not the words of the Spirit but those of demons.
Excerpt 10: "The Church condemns those who, by using inauthentic information, deliberately distort the task of the Orthodox Church in her witness before the non-Orthodox world and consciously slander the Church authorities, accusing them of the “betrayal” of Orthodoxy. These people, who sow seeds of temptation among ordinary believers, should be subject to canonical sanctions."
Comment: In excerpt 9 we read that there is, and never was, any problem with Ecumenism - all Ecumenists, without exception, according to this document were always faithful and blameless.
Thus, this "MP" manifestly considers any and all criticism of Ecumenism to be based upon "inauthentic information" and declares that those who "slander", based on such "false" information, the "Church authorities" accusing them of "betraying Orthodoxy" should be punished.
In short: if all Ecumenists throughout all of history were utterly blameless - then ALL criticism of "Orthodox" Ecumenism would simply be a slandering of the blameless. Our anti-Ecumenist Saints were certainly not slanderers!
How ironic it is that this Council, which glorified some of the New-Martyrs after decades of persecuting them, should now turn their warfare from the Martyrs to those Orthodox who dare to oppose the heresy of Ecumenism. So we ask: was this act of glorifying the New-Martyrs an act of repentance and a positive sign? Or did the "MP" just pick a new Orthodox enemy - in the persons of our anti-Ecumenist Saints, Elders, and faithful - to slander and persecute?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a related note of interest: somehow a number of ROCOR "lights" (before the 2007 union) publicly put forward this very "Attitude" document as "proof" that the "MP" supposedly condemned Ecumenism, while declaring that therefore the ROCOR should, and must, join the MP.
They did this, by cherry-picking excerpts from this "Attitude" document - and by failing to discern the double-talk, present in it, which is typical of nearly all "Ecumenist" texts. Or to be charitable, perhaps, they didn't read the whole document? or they don't know how to discern Orthodoxy from heresy? or perhaps they just LIED for the "good" of the Church? - which is a true Sergian tactic indeed.
.jpg) |
| When ROCOR-L joined the "MP" |
But in any case, the "MP" synodally embraced heresy and the majority of the ROCOR, looked upon their heretical documents and declared: "now we must join them - they are proclaiming Orthodoxy too". Well, the heresy-preachers are their new masters now.
And finally, one wonders: where was/is the opposition to this Council and document? Did a single Bishop of the MP, UOC-MP, or ROCOR ever publicly oppose them? I have never seen any such opposition except from Metropolitan Vitaly of blessed memory. But why such a silence? How can the largest ecclesial organization in the Orthodox world publicly proclaim heresy at the Synodal level and everyone is silent? Are ORTHODOX Bishops silent in the face of heresy?
It is an utter shame that the critique offered here, by an Orthodox layperson, is, to the best of our knowledge, the first public critique of this heretical text offered in the English language (sadly and apparently such critiques are not to be found in the Russian or Greek languages either). Since 2000, 23 years have passed and no one cared to say anything against this heresy-preaching text or heresy-confirming "Council".
 |
| St. Maximus the Confessor |
When the Monothelite heresy was Synodally embraced by the Patriarchate of Constantinople St. Maximus the Confessor broke communion with that entire Church and went and preached everywhere against the heresy - suffering greatly for the Truth! Conversely, when the "MP" Synodally embraces the heresy of Ecumenism - nearly everyone (especially among the Bishops and clergy) either accepts it as being an expression of Orthodoxy, is utterly silent, or is ignorant of such a tragedy. How can this be? The example of St. Maximus reveals what a serious issue this is!
We urge anyone who is interested in these matters to research FOR THEMSELVES in order to ascertain if these matters are as we presented them here - we are utterly convinced that they are.
May God help us!