People’s concerns/worries appeared only in connection with the contemporary ecumenism, which is believed to be organized by disguised institutions. It is obvious that these concerns are well-grounded: the political and economical globalization is such a sign. What’s next? A globalizing uniformity of the faiths comes? We don’t have too many reasons to expect an ecumenical peace.
As a consequence, the orthodox confessors are not afraid of the Church ecumenism, which is derived from the very holy commandments of the Messiah, but are afraid of the purpose of the present one, which seems to be organized by someone above the churches and straightened especially towards the understanding of the true church. Buddha, Mohammed, or other religion founders are not as contested as Jesus Christ is, and within Christianity, only the orthodoxy is pressured upon. A form of fighting against the true church of Jesus Christ is also the effort to globalize, to equal all the religions by human justifying, and not given by Christ.
A certain fear may overwhelm if you think that there exist, even now, the so-called “theologians” which teach us that Mussulmans and Hindustani have the same God. The confusion between the idea that God Almighty is only one and the affirmation that God is the same in all the religions and faiths is deliberate and its purpose is to manipulate us towards the unification even with the pagans, not only with the unorthodox Christians. But this does not mean that we must approve and support this against our will. Until then, our duty is to fight in order to defend the orthodoxy.
As a consequence, personally I do not agree with those who sustain that we should retreat from any ecumenical forum or manifestation. I don’t consider appropriate for the orthodoxy to turn its back in a proud/arrogant way and leave. By doing this we assert our superiority as human beings, when in fact, this is about the superiority of our faith, which is superior because it has been given by God Christ. We have no merit, we have only obligations/duties for being orthodox. And among our duties a main one is to confess our right faith with patience and love, no matter how difficult this might be and how blasphemed we could be for this. How would we fulfill this duty if we retreat from the place of debates? Should we wait for them to come to us? But the apostles had been sent in the middle of the unfaithful to preach. We need to stay there until they throw us out if they don’t want to hear and follow the right/straight faith. But our presence there must be as active as possible, without accepting any compromise; we are not allowed to cease repeating our orthodox learning, with the sacrifice of the holy fathers/saint parents. Should this be considered a martyrization? St.Vasile (Basil) the Great succeeded in converting some Donatists and Arians to orthodoxy, but he didn’t accept any compromise, he neither mixed the truths of faith with their heretical learnings, nor performed a Mass in common with them because otherwise he could have let the confusion that the true faith is the same for the orthodox as well as for Donatists and Arians.
If we take part in the ecumenical meetings, one thing is the dialogue through which we confess our orthodox faith “one holy, sobornices/synodal and apostolic” and a completely different thing is to pray in common with the heterodox, because if we do that, the above-mentioned confusion occurs. This is the supreme way to prove the Christian love towards people, through both actions and truth. We are not allowed to have a false love, to let them remain in their heretical lost, admitting it in this way and making it legitimate by praying in common with them. I don’t think we should close or hide ourselves or keep the orthodoxy like a hidden treasure, only for us (this would be a selfish vanity).
The prayer that we have to say for all humans, from inside and outside church is, of course, the supreme form of ecumenism which has always been present. We haven’t been requested and we are still not requested to be as one with them through faith. It is enough to know that we are as one through human nature and to feel ourselves as one through sins. We are not allowed to accept any compromise regarding faith. What we got, had been given in order to be kept in custody, not to be negotiated. It is not something that belongs to us, that we can do anything we want with.
At the Second Council from Vatican, it was declared that the Church of Christ subsisted in the catholic church. However, Pope John Paul the 2nd, with all the praise brought to the orthodoxy (the letter” Orientale lumen” ), with all the good-will visits, apologies for all the abuses from the past, declared that the catholic church” is” the same with the Church of Christ, even if the catholic learning reduces Christ to the quality of simple instrument of Father, through which the church is founded on Saint Apostle Peter. In the encyclical letter entitled “Ut unum sint”, Pope John Paul the 2nd was referring to the orthodox church only in plural, recognizing it in this way only as local churches lacking the juridical unity that only papality can offer (this is the way he proceeded with the unified churches instead of the universal dimensions in Christ , offering them the status of simple local churches which had their unity under the jurisdiction of papality), because in the catholic ecclesiology, the local church is no longer a manifestation of the universal church but only a small part of it.
The recent interest shown in the values of the orthodoxy is confessed to be motivated by the fact that “venerable and antique Tradition of oriental churches represents a constitutive part of the Christ Church’s patrimony which is the catholic church.The attack is meant to be done through our oriental catholic brothers, but this tradition was constituted in the first millennium when only the orthodox church existed. He refers to the local churches of orthodoxy as to those which “aren’t united yet with us in a complete communion”. At least, they expressed clearly the intention of a new strategy of praising the values of the orthodoxy. I would also mention that in 1075, Pope Gregory the 7th , through his “Dictatus papae” replaced the formulation us with me, eliminating the synodal structure, giving the western Church an absolutist structure, to gain power in relation with the state, which allowed the papality to face arrogantly the orthodox church and its own local churches.
The present papality insisted that the primate of jurisdiction should not be seen as one of power but of serving, but exactly the fact that they try to assume exclusive rights to a serving primate, appears as an act of power.As it actually intended to bring all in Rome’s stable, the papality maintains only an observer statute at the ecumenical meetings.When he is assured a leader role there too, when he thinks that everything is ready to be included under his roof, he will probably integrate himself in the ecumenical movement.
A problem that I want you to pay attention to is the alternative service with the Greco-catholics in the parishes where the church building is a litigation between the two parts, orthodox and Greco-catholic.This problem represents a continuous anxiety and a big dissatisfaction of the respective priests, but also of the majority of the priests who care about the orthodoxy. Why do the Greco-catholic confessors want alternative serving? Why do they show their “good-will”in performing even Masses/ceremonies in common, even some hierurgies with us, orthodox people. They do know why, because they see in the alternative serving and in common serving of some hierurgies a means of proselytism among orthodox Christians. The trials brought in actions by the leaders/heads of the Greco-catholic Church against some orthodox parishes, instead of diminishing, or at least holding on, are increasing. What should the poor Christians understand when they see an orthodox ecclesiastic serving alternatively with a catholic one in the same church building? What should they understand when they see an orthodox ecclesiastic and a catholic one serving together , in common a Mass or a hierurgy?The orthodox Christian and the Greco-catholic one remain with the confusion that the right faith is both orthodox and Greco-catholic, that he can change his orthodox faith with the Greco-catholic one, that this thing hasn’t even the slightest importance.
The orthodox church is not stiffened in canons because its canonical rules are not meant to do that, but it shows a lot of discernment regarding any action which would bring a prejudice on pastoral level. You cannot willingly give your orthodox Christians to the Greco-catholic cult by confusing them with alternative or common servings. If an orthodox ecclesiastic serves with a Greco-catholic one a funeral or another hierurgy, the consequences on pastoral level can be harmful. The Christians will say:”it doesn’t matter whether you are an orthodox or a catholic because the priest from a certain village prayed together with a catholic one”. I do not agree with ceremonies served in common or with the so-called ecumenical prayers because by doing this, we bring a disadvantage to the orthodox mission, giving free way to the syncretism and I consider it a means of leveling the beliefs in the mentality of the Christians who know little about the theological problems.It is convenient for the Greco-catholics to serve alternatively, to make some common ceremonies with the orthodox, because for them, who are in minority, this is a means of subtle proselytism, a refined aggressivity in which they perseveringly remain like a plush glove which covers an iron dagger, used to hit and win some pastoral ground.
The canons of the church were given to us, being inspired by the Holy Ghost. The canons which stop the prayer in common with the heterodox were given especially to eliminate any confusion which would attempt to the identity, unity and the dogmatic uniqueness of the church. It is true that some disciplinatory canons can be seen with eiconomia, but the dogmatic canons and those which have dogmatic involvements cannot be seen with eiconomia because otherwise we tend to become superficial relativizing the the Church learning. The Bible is very clear concerning the prayer of the orthodox in common with the heterodox, of those who share the right faith with those who share the wrong faith (see Mt 18,16-17, Tit. 3, 10, Gal. 1, 8-9, II John 1, 9-11, Judas v 12-23). In this sense, the Saint Apostles decided at the Synod from Jerusalim in the year 50 that “Any bishop or priest or deacon should be cursed even if he had only prayed together with the hereticals, and if he allowed them to do something as clergymen, to serve like faithful priests, he should be excommunicated.”(Canon 45 Apostolic). Filioque, purgatory, immaculate conception, papal infalliability are also heresies.
The prayer in common is a form of communion and that’s why we cannot pray with the clergy of other confessions of faith because they preach another faith learning. We don’t have for this any canonic, patristic and scripturistic fundation.
The panorthodox conference from Tesalonic, in 1998, came to the conclusion that it is better to stop the prayers in common with the heterodox especially to avoid creating a confusion between the faithful, orthodox or heterodox, that the true faith is the same both for us and for them.
I would finish with some words said by father priest D. Staniloaie:”If the ecumenical movement tends to re-establish the unity of the church, it has to tend towards the most intimate presence of Jesus Christ, and this is in Orthodox Church”.
Fabian Seiche, theologian
Lucian Pantea, engineer
(this is also signed by a group of priests and faithful from Bihor county).
“Judas is wondering undisturbed though society, through the human history, but also through christianity. His most important deed is that made more churches out of a single Church, and from many churches he made a multitude, and he continues to do this through his particular features: greed,envy, pride. He gets easily accustomed to anything, he refined his methods. He works at night light and communicates through Hertzian waves. He is a skillful importer of religion, offering it competitively on the free market. In this way, he is a convinced/real ecumenist. When he is not working in secret, he invites you to a friendly dialogue. If you refuse him or if you defend yourself, you are considered as intolerant, conservative, fundamentalist, retrograde. He knows The Bible/The Holy Writ very well, has a university education, speaks several foreign languages. He knows that the Iscariot was one of those twelve who listened to and memorized Jesus’learnings. If he had been pure and gifted he could have written another Gospel, as consistent as as the one of Mathew. It was written posthumous, in the key of the perverse kiss. Judas is an excellent theologian, as well as his master from Qarantania, who offered Jesus quotations from The Scripture. All the forms of the religious syncretism that are proposed to us, starting with the New Age and ending with all kinds of combinations between different neo-protestant sects, which are gathered in <
