"Just leave the icy water and go warm yourself in the bathhouse", was said to each of the martyrs of Sebastia. Nothing more was necessary: neither idolatrous sacrifices, nor renunciation, nor blasphemy. Thus, the one of the forty sufferers, who did give in to the temptation, succeed in committing nothing of the kind, yet the Church, in the canon to the saints, employs precisely such terms in proclaiming his eternal perdition.

"In abasement he entreated them to delete his name (Victor) from the list of prisoners suffering for Christ, moreover he promised to give him (the official) a certain estate… At night they let him out of the prison. But Victor, having left the prison, soon died. Having learned of this, the martyr Hieron began to weep: 'Alas, Victor! What have you done? Oh, for how great a price did you ransom yourself! Why did you of your own accord surrender yourself into the hands of the enemy?… Oh, how were you troubled by the sufferings of short duration from insignificant wounds, which are nothing before the eternal torments which await you by the judgment of God!'" (Life of Saint Hieron, the Martyr, commemorated on November 7).

Just say that World Council of Churches is our common home, or that "the WCC is the cradle of the future, one church" (from the speech of Metropolitan Kyrill Gundyaev at the General Assembly of the WCC in Canberra, 1987), and then, having returned home, boldly castigate all attempts at founding a syncretistic religion, all the "excesses" of Ecumenism.

Just commemorate the name of the Patriarch at the services -- stifling in your heart the memory of his speeches full of humiliating compromises before the rabbis, mullahs, popes, and dalai-lamas, forgetting how "Orthodox" hierarchs grew sooty amidst the smoke of "sacred" fires of pagan initiation, how they, pulling on a rope, raised skyward ancestral totem poles -- and then you can write even a dozen volumes both against abstract ecumenists-heretics, and on the spiritual life, and concerning prayer, and on correct and incorrect obedience, and with impunity you can even dash off something "against" the Patriarch himself, criticizing him with filial affection. The Patriarch, who should be the very incarnation of the concept of a guardian of the traditions of the fathers, your bishop, has more than once openly asserted before the entire nation, that there are no essential dogmatic differences between us and the Roman Catholics, that the "Oriental Orthodox" Churches have accepted all seven Ecumenical Councils and have become Orthodox. Incidentally, "Oriental Orthodox" is itself a contrived and deceptive term, under cover of which he and his kind wish to insinuate the ancient Monophysites. Thus, through communion with him [the Patriarch] in prayers and the Mysteries, i.e., the very essence of ecclesiastical communion, you yourself become a partaker of all his errors, and through that, a participant in all the related religious falsehood with which your bishop is united. For, according to the teaching of the Church, what is a bishop, and what is his bond with the local Church? He, and all those found with him in liturgical communion, are one indivisible body; what is more, the bishop is found in a certain mystical marriage with his church, which upon the repose of the bishop is so referred to as a "widowed church".

By remaining in mystical communion with a Patriarch who gives the Body and Blood of the Lord to heretics, and who justifies it by some sort of non-existent economia and lawless resolutions, which, moreover, have been accepted by the other Local Churches, with a Patriarch who secretly and openly persecutes those who have exposed his lawlessness, with a Patriarch who orally and in writing, in the spirit of extreme Ecumenism, destroys all the boundaries of Orthodoxy, mingling it together with various heresies, calling them (the heretics) "brothers in Christ", and "praying for their churches, and for their ecclesiastical establishment and prosperity", with a Patriarch who is indifferent to the piety of his fathers, or who at the very least, confesses Christ and His teaching other than as the Church has confessed it in all ages -- by being found thus in communion with him we inflict fatal wounds upon our immortal souls. For it is precisely because of their rejection of such a ruinous union that Orthodox Christians have shed their blood. Shall we perhaps enumerate their names? So whom then should we follow, with whom should we be of one mind? With such Patriarchs, or with the martyrs? With whom should we be in communion in this present, fleeting age and in the future abiding one? That is the question! It must be stated bluntly, that these philosophizing mighty ones are headed for perdition, and we do not wish to accompany them. Behold, hear what one of them says: "The Prophet Mohammed is an apostle. He is a man of God, who strove for the sake of the Kingdom of God, and established Islam, a religion to which billions of people belong… Our God is the Father of all people, even of the Moslems and Buddhists. I believe that God loves the Moslems and Buddhists… When I speak against Islam or Buddhism, then I am not in agreement with God"!!! (Public speech of Patriarch Parthenius of Alexandria) Such examples are legion.

The religious conscience of a Christian who is found in such a union gradually dies, and his Church consciousness becomes illusory, dreamy, and egoistic. He begins to think that he alone is left, and that the other members of the Church around him are ill, and that the whole Church is ill, and he alone, having called the Church sinful and ill, only he shall be saved. This then is the end of his righteous notions concerning the Church and concerning salvation in her. This is the path to isolation and death. For such a one is cultivating his spiritual life not on the grainfield of the divine commandments, but on the field of human and mental concepts, which bind him most firmly to this corruptible world. The reason for this is that communion with apostates from the faith is essentially participation in the altering of the Law of God. An altering of the Law of God is a sin against the Faith -- heresy. And what follows upon that is spiritual death!

Many say that we have not yet crossed the last boundary. But then, what is this border, where is this final line of demarcation, what makes the present limit only the penultimate one, and some future limit the ultimate one? Such a limit will never occur. Because for those who speak thus, all boundaries and limits were passed long ago. Unfortunately, we too were among those who had overstepped this ultimate limit. Perhaps it was out of ignorance or unawareness, perhaps out of human fear, which has many faces?

At present much is being said concerning the Church, concerning ecclesiastical harmony, concerning unity in the Church, etc. But it would make more sense to first determine what is the True Church, the habitation of the Living God, and then orient oneself accordingly: whether or not, after all that has been said above, we are found within her. Then, and only then, can one seek and preserve ecclesiastical harmony. Peace in conjunction with the Church is the only firm basis for any other kind of peace, including peace with ones own conscience. "The Church has not been, nor could she be, changed or obscured, nor could she have fallen away, for then she would have been deprived of the spirit of Truth. It is impossible that there should have been a time when she could have received error into her bosom… The man who should say that such a weakening of the spirit of Christ could possibly come to pass within her knows nothing of the Church, and is altogether alien to her.… And the man who is living within the Church does not submit to false teaching or receive the Mysteries from a false teacher; he will not, knowing him to be false, follow his false rituals. And the Church herself does not err, for she is the truth, she is incapable of cunning or cowardice, for she is holy. And of course, the Church, by her very immutability, does not acknowledge that to be error, which she has at any previous time acknowledged as truth…" (A. S. Khomiakov, Tserkovnoe Edinenie)[2]

Can we not stand up for the Church, while not betraying her sacred traditions?

We have been through a lot during the course of the last few months, and all that time the chief thought occupying my mind was: what decision to make -- to leave these hierarchs now, or else to wait a bit. The whole while I kept weighing things from a human point of view, being afraid, and begging God on behalf of myself and my large family. And then one day everything somehow cleared up of its own accord, the consternation began to subside, and my heart grew firm in its resolve. What then was the thought that occurred to me? Well you see, all these patriarchs and other hierarchs are found in deep mystical communion with shamans, pagan priests, heretics, and all sorts of deliberate blasphemers, participating in their impious rituals (thus, in the afore-mentioned Canberra, the "Orthodox" served Liturgy on the shamans' altar). And in this their mystical union we likewise partake, being found in full communion with our hierarchs. For those who remain in this communion here, it carries over (if we do not change and repent) into eternity, and they shall answer for it before God, because they knew better, yet did not depart, they did not shun those luring them to spiritual ruin. And not only did they accompany them, but they invited others along too. What do you say, Fr. Lazarus, is it not so? No, it is the truth!

Christianity without confession of faith does not exist. And there is no better way to incline others to the truth, than to believe in it oneself, and not argue about it, but confess it. To confess ones faith is the obligation of a Christian, whether he wants to or not, whether it suits him at this particular moment or not. To confess Christianity, and not semi-Christianity, Christ, and not His secularized, dramatized surrogate. Ecumenism is a sort of theatrical production on the stage of this world. Soon the curtain shall fall, and the actors shall wash off their grease-paint, and their true faces shall be revealed, revealed shall be the stage-managers of the scenes, revealed shall be the purpose of these productions -- to deprive the Truth of its own face, which has been operating throughout the history of the human race. To attempt either to excuse all these activities, somehow smoothing them over, or to confess some sort of universal (ecumenical-syncretistic) Christianity without the Orthodox Faith, these are simply different roles in one and the same unsightly spectacle, whose end is nigh.

If anyone is able to demonstrate that all the above-written is not the truth, but is simply the fancy of my mind, that is, all of it has been imagined by me and is not reality, then for the rest of my life I will accept that person as my teacher and the teacher of the entire Church. But if someone, avoiding the questions touched upon by us here, should speak of some imaginary church without proper confession of faith, of church harmony without God, of well-being without piety, then I would conclude that he has forgotten about his eternal soul and is taking care for some sort of temporal goods, which may be not at all material ones. There is something of even greater "value" in this world -- that is spiritual glory and honor for the blind and the leaders of the blind.

Fr. Lazarus, remember you once said to me: "What strange times: with those with whom it is impossible to discuss religion, with them it is possible to pray; and with those with whom it is forbidden to pray, with them we are of one mind."

Can it be that such a time has now come for us too?

"The Pan-Orthodox Conference in Geneva in June 1968… expressed 'the general desire of the Orthodox Church to be an organic member of the World Council of Churches…' His Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras informed the World Council of Churches of this decision in his special letter dated June 30, 1968. There were no reservations; no mention was made of any missionary aims, either in the one case or the other.

"We must be very clear as to what sort of religious union it is of which the Orthodox Church has been declared 'an organic member', and what the dogmatic implications of such a decision are.

"In 1950, in Toronto, certain basic statements were accepted by the World Council of Churches which, while more cautious than the present statements, were already not in conformity with the Orthodox doctrine of the Church. …However, even then, on p. 3, we read: 'The members recognize that the membership of the Church of Christ is more inclusive than the membership of their own church body.' (Six Ecumenical Surveys, New York, 1954, p. 13.) But since in the preceding point (No. 2) it was stated that 'The member Churches of the World Council believe on the basis of the New Testament that the Church of Christ is one,' there is either an implicit contradiction or else the profession of a new doctrine -- viz., one can belong to the One Church without believing in her doctrines and without having liturgical union with her… This doctrine is Protestant, but not Orthodox.

"…In order to evaluate all this from the point of view of the Orthodox Church, it is sufficient to imagine the reception it would find among the Holy Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils. Can anybody imagine the Orthodox Church of that period declaring itself an organic member of a society uniting Eunomians or Anomoeans, Arians, Semi-Arians, Sabellians, and Apollinarians?

"Certainly not! On the contrary, Canon I of the Second Ecumenical Council does not call for union with such groups, but anathematizes them. Subsequent Ecumenical Councils did the same in regard to other heresies.

"The organic membership of the Orthodox Christians in one body with modern heretics will not sanctify the latter, but does alienate those Orthodox from the catholic Orthodox unity. That unity is not limited to the modern age. Catholicity embraces all the generations of the Holy Fathers."

(Metropolitan Philaret, First Sorrowful Epistle, July 14/27, 1969.)

All of this was in the 1960s; but what came afterwards?

At present there is much public discussion of the idea that Ecumenism and its affairs are not yet a heresy, but the path to heresy. It is said that only when everyone communicates at the same liturgy, when they unite in eucharistic union, then we must flee. This is the interpretation of the so-called "Orthodox" who are supposedly conducting the struggle from within. But let's see what the hierarchs, with whom this "struggle from within" is being waged, think and have in mind.

We will bring forth one relatively recent example, which characterizes well the world view of the contemporary hierarchs of the official Churches. I recall how one student, upon completing the course of the Ecclesiastical Academy, was defending his dissertation on the topic "Ecumenism As A Heresy".[3] Speaking of the so-called "Lima liturgies", he stated that this was a certain new, implemented, eucharistic unity, which takes place at Ecumenical gatherings. The Patriarch, smiling, retorted: "But this is not a liturgy, and shame on you, Orthodox, to call it a Mystery." Amazing words, amazing ideas! Of course that is precisely the point, these "Lima liturgies" are not the Orthodox Liturgy, and could not be! But it is a certain kind of new liturgy of a new union, rather, one of the types for these syncretistic liturgies. So, according to the conceptions of your hierarchs-ecumenists, unity in rituals and services is not unity in the literal sense. You say that for you too such ecclesiology is not acceptable. But then a strange picture presents itself to us: that which is permissible according to the views of your "hierarchs-ecumenists", and which in their opinion does not represent apostasy, that is impermissible in the view of "those struggling from within". Well, how then are we to resolve this problem? How are we to compel them to admit their errors? But errors in what? In that which they in principle do not at all consider to be wrong? And so, what is the end result: although this contradiction would seem to be insurmountable, nevertheless, they (by their mutual affirmation) are the Church, and together they will constitute the Church? Yes, what can one say, a strange conception concerning Christianity and concerning the Church. But in what then do they maintain unity? What sort of Church do they form together -- being divided, and not of one mind concerning matters of faith and the Christian life? On just such an understanding of Church unity does ecclesiological heresy flourish, that is, the heresy of those who expound incorrectly concerning the essence of the Church, who in a human manner philosophize concerning the Church, that is, false teachers, whom the Hieromartyr Methodius calls "Sirens which conceal their hatred of men with sweet singing." As it is, these hierarchs will never admit that they are found in religious communion with non-Orthodox, and will never inscribe on their omophorions that they are heretics; while the other side, that is, the "strugglers", will never manage to prove anything to them. Perhaps because they have no desire to prove it? He, who thinks that there must take place an Orthodox liturgy which all will perform together, Orthodox and non-Orthodox, and at which everyone together will communicate the one sacrifice, he awaits this in vain.

You, "strugglers from within", are not carrying on a struggle against falsehood and deception, but rather you make excuses for those found in communion and unity with heretics. How so? Because you yourselves, being in communion with your bishops, through them and together with them, are found in mystical union with all the ancient and modern blasphemers. Is it not so? You would do well to recall the words of Saint Amphilochius of Iconium: "God the Father can not abide dishonor shown to His Son, and He turns away from and does not love those who blaspheme Him, and He is angry with those who enter into communion with the blasphemers". Yea exactly so, you, "strugglers from within", in reality justify the betrayers and blasphemers of Apostolic laws, which were instituted precisely to preserve us within the Church of Christ. By not keeping the Apostolic Tradition, you put yourselves outside of the Church, you depart from her. And now in addition, you aggravate your disastrous condition in that, together with your hierarchs-apostates, you attempt by word and deed to persecute those who expose them in their apostasy and do not wish to remain in this impious union. You, "strugglers from within", in reality are the revilers and persecutors of those who call impiety and irreligion by their proper names, and thereby you yourselves become blasphemers of the Church, which is founded on Eternal Truth, and not on falsehood, and not on the cunning justification of apostasy and apostates.

Timely here are the words of the Martyr Plato (commemorated on November 18): "Although I am of the same name as Plato, I am not of the same turn of mind. For a name cannot unite those whom beliefs separate. Therefore, I am not like unto that Plato, nor Plato unto me, save in name only. I study and teach that philosophy which is of Christ, whereas he is a teacher of that philosophy which is folly before God, 'for it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to naught the understanding of the prudent.' [I Co. 1: 19] The teachings then, appertaining to Plato, which you call divine, are false tales, which by means of cunning words corrupt the minds of guileless simpletons." The very same thing can be said concerning you and us, that although we are called by the same name -- Christian, we are not of the same mind, for a name cannot unite those whom beliefs divide.

I will remind you, "strugglers from within", that those Christians who had not betrayed their faith, and for the sake of a false church unity, did not enter into communion with heretics and apostates, were often beaten by those frightened Christians who had betrayed Christ. Thus the apostate chief citizens stoned their bishop, Isaacius (commemorated on November 20), in the camp outside the town.

"Strugglers from within", why, you are not even sincere with your own hierarchs, because you place the heavy burden of having sinned against the faith on them alone, and thus condemn them to eternal perdition, while you, pharisaically justifying yourselves before the people, say that it is no concern of yours and that no guilt falls on you. Where is your love and respect for your hierarchs?! But again I ask: what sort of church do you together constitute, while condemning one another of apostasy?!

At this point it would be timely to return to that with which we began. Thus, nothing existed on an officially dogmatic level specifically dealing with the reverence due to icons, in the Symbol of Faith nothing was said about icons, it was only a part of ancient Church tradition, yet during the time of the iconoclast heresy many thousands of Christians were crowned with crowns of martyrdom and confession. "As much as he ( Saint Gregory of Decapolis) could by words and epistles, he taught them to worship the holy icons and to honor them according to the Tradition of the Church." According to the Tradition of the Church!

Nothing is said in the Symbol of Faith concerning prayers with heretics and non-Christians, or concerning any other sort of religious communion with them, but a Christian who participates in these doings thereby blasphemes the Symbol of Faith in its entirety, and not merely a certain article thereof. Those committing such things are trafficking in all the hidden mysteries of the Church, they are offering the forbidden fruit, the eating of which is spiritual death, the second death, the eternal one. And for those found outside the Church, these ideas and the practical application thereof become a temptation and a stumbling block. For them is sealed up the door which leads into the Temple of the true God, which is the Orthodox Church. Thus this temptation, introduced by the Orthodox ecumenists, has seized in its grip the Orthodox and non-Orthodox, has seized upon the whole world. Oh, fatal fare, venom of the ancient serpent!

Well, what do you say, philosophizing Platos, "strugglers from within", have you come to a parting of the ways with us? Yes! And we with you! Because you, by means of cunning words, with your false tales which corrupt the minds of guileless simpletons, abet their degeneration and ruin. With sadness I must remind you of the words of Saint Basil the Great: "With those who make a pretense of confessing Orthodoxy, but who are found in union with people of a different mind, and who do not hearken to admonitions, persisting in their obstinacy, you must not only severe union, but you must cease to call them brethren." (PG, Vol. CLX, col. 101c.)

[1]  These two letters were written in response to recently published attacks by Archimandrite Lazarus Abashidze against those who have severed communion with Catholicos-Patriarch Ilia II over his involvement in Ecumenism. In early 1997 Archimandrite Lazarus had published a forty-page booklet vehemently condemning Ecumenism. However, Fr. Lazarus subsequently sought to disassociate himself from the non-commemorators, and has even turned on them. See: A Brief History of the Struggle Against Ecumenism in the Georgian Orthodox Church (Boston: Holy Transfiguration Monastery, September 1997), p. 4.

[2]  A. S. Khomiakov, The Church Is One, (Seattle, Wash.: St. Nectarios Press, 1979), pp. 19-20.

[3]  Fr. Zurab is in fact speaking of his elder brother, Fr. Gelasius Aroshvili. Fr. Zurab himself was only begrudgingly granted his degree after successfully defending his dissertation on the topic "The Heresy of Roman Catholicism". Although it was admitted by all that Fr. Gelasius defended his dissertation quite soundly, nevertheless the examining committee, headed by the Patriarch, refused to award him a degree.