On Anti-Ecumenism: Words versus Actions

 On Anti-Ecumenism

June 2016

Anti-ecumenism is a movement that opposes ecumenism. Anti-ecumenism employs two strategies of warfare against ecumenism. One group of anti-ecumenists is selected and appointed by ecumenism itself—this speaks volumes. To make it more understandable, it is similar to how one politician might be pro-American, another pro-German, another Anglophile, another Russophile, and so on. The other group of anti-ecumenists consists of the Hellenophiles = those with a Greek spirit, the Christ-minded, the genuine Orthodox. Of course, there are also the counterfeit = false Christians, that is, the hypocrites who deceive the simple faithful because, as the saying goes, they present a good outward appearance = facade, while inwardly they are full of impurity.

The pan-heresy of Ecumenism, since the beginning of the previous century, has been attempting by every means to conquer Orthodox Hellenism. Ecumenism has dissolved the boundaries of respect, invaded Orthodoxy, and imposed on the Orthodox Churches individuals with ecumenist mindsets in leadership positions and offices, individuals trained in its own universities. These individuals, like new Janissaries, have turned against Orthodoxy, which internally nurtured them with an Orthodox mindset that they have abandoned, instead adopting what ecumenism has offered them.

Orthodoxy today is under captivity and persecution within its own domain. The persecutors are the Orthodox themselves, meaning that the betrayal comes from within. The enemy, in essence, is external but does not appear as external, while being internal, it appears as external. In this way, they deceive and mislead the Greeks. This makes the struggle for the faith more difficult.

The healthy spiritual forces of Orthodox Hellenism, that is, the faithful people as guardians of the faith, are called to react, to revolt, and to struggle for the faith as prescribed by the Scriptures. All these volunteer fighters who resist this invasion are called anti-ecumenists, and their struggle is termed anti-ecumenistic.

For approximately 100 years, two forces, two centers, two headquarters [of anti-ecumenists] have prevailed, defending against the pan-heresy of Ecumenism. One is genuine anti-ecumenism, and the other is counterfeit, false anti-ecumenism. The target, of course, is one: Ecumenism. However, the strategies of the struggle are two, as are the "revolutionary" groups.

The first group reacting against ecumenism consists of the anti-ecumenists of words and writing.

The second group reacting consists of the anti-ecumenists of deeds and action. Both strategies in the war against heresy are equipped and supplied with weaponry from the Scriptures. This division of the two revolutionary forces for the faith renders the struggle hindered, difficult, unpredictable, weak, powerless, feeble, and doubtful in terms of its effectiveness and ultimate outcome. It is as if a person is divided between two paths while the path is one. In such a case, defeat is inevitably the result.

Every division is a cause of any impending destruction. Here operates a) deception = the deceived people, rather a mob, and b) fraud = the fraudulent leaders, both political and religious. It is possible that, on the one hand, there is also deliberate betrayal. It is inconceivable that, with so much knowledge and such a wealth of recorded history up to today, the supposedly "God-appointed" elected leaders of Orthodoxy are deceived and serve fraud, even unwillingly. It is inconceivable that the Church proposes and designates different weapons for one revolutionary group and different weapons for the other group. Are we perhaps in a period of GREEK ORTHODOX CIVIL WAR, similar to the years 1944–1949, when the same source funded the then catastrophic war for GREECE, while today the same source seems to be destroying ORTHODOXY? With the Greeks then, as now. If so, it is as if the Church itself is mocking the two resistance groups, resulting in their defeat—or at least the defeat of one of the two.

The defeat will not be of the Church, as it will never be defeated, but it will be of the faithful [however many the faithful may be in number] who live during the specific time period in which these events unfold. However, both resistance groups base their struggle on Scripture. Is it possible for the Church to provide the wrong prescription for addressing the heresy of ecumenism? Certainly not. Is it possible for Scripture to contradict itself? Certainly not. Which of the two groups is conducting a truly Orthodox struggle, and which group is waging a supposedly Orthodox struggle?

Below, we will attempt to understand the motives and intentions of each group regarding the ORTHODOX FAITH, as this is the matter at hand.

We separated the two militant groups because they exist and operate within the Orthodox Greek sphere.

One group is composed of those who attempt, through dialogue, discussions, conferences, writings, and information dissemination, to mobilize and recruit faithful believers for the struggle while remaining within the sphere of the polluted heresy. They resemble a doctor who, instead of curing patients of a virus, becomes infected himself. They make the correct diagnosis but stop there, failing to propose surgery—that is, the appropriate treatment or prescription for curing the disease—out of fear of potential consequences and complications. It is as if they are asking the enemy to provide them with weapons to fight against him. Is it ever possible for an enemy to give you the instructions and weapons with which to defeat him? Certainly not. A similar struggle for Orthodoxy has been conducted for about fifteen years by the academic [anti-ecumenist] group in our homeland. This group includes two or three bishops, two or three clergy members, and lay university professors (the exact number does not matter), along with some other clergy and laity who have drafted and signed lengthy confessions of faith, gathering as many as twenty thousand (20,000) signatures. They have organized conferences in several monasteries allegedly of anti-ecumenist sentiment, filled with photographs of ecumenist patriarchs, to devise plans for their struggle. However, their decision has always been to give the enemy more time to further undermine the Orthodox faith. It is as if they were telling the ecumenists: “You know, we are preparing and sharpening our swords, so you should listen to us and take your precautions. Otherwise, in six months, we will attack you,” and so on—foolish thoughts, proposals, and practices. Their stance as "anti-ecumenists" of words secures for them social recognition, honor, and glory, elevating them to the status of generals in a war they have already lost. Nevertheless, they enjoy nationwide the glory of victory. In words, they are appointed to play the role [as if in a theater] of the anti-ecumenist. They let it be heard through statements that they will break communion if the ecumenists proceed beyond the permissible Orthodox boundaries. Moreover, they prohibit laypeople and clergy—whether married or celibate priests—from walling-off, claiming that only bishops have the right to do so. Walling-off has existed in Greece from 1924 until today, but for these pseudo-anti-ecumenists, it has never functioned. Regarding today’s priests who have broken communion, they say nothing at all—not even two lines have they written, nor do they want to know their names—simply because they are not bishops. If one day there were even a single bishop who broke communion, they would write volumes of books, simply because he would be a hierarch. It is unlikely that a bishop who breaks communion will be found. May we, for the good of Orthodoxy, be proven wrong in our prediction.

The second resistance group consists of those engaged both in words and in deeds, that is, in action. These are the ones who saw the invading enemy, namely heresy, and immediately reacted by taking a battle position with the weapon of ceasing commemoration (against the pro-heretical shepherds who align with heretics), that is, by implementing a walling-off. This is a weapon that prevents the enemy and the contamination of heresy from spreading within Orthodox territory, safeguarding the spiritual health of the Orthodox faith. Their stance as anti-ecumenists of action ensures for them certain persecution, social isolation, insult, defamation, excommunication, and deposition—essentially the opposite of the first group. It is a [timeless, albeit with different tactics] phenomenon of the era for ecumenists to collaborate with the so-called "anti-ecumenists."

CONCERNING THE WORDS OF THE ANTI-ECUMENISTS. The "anti-ecumenists," since they are under orders not to directly offend the ecumenists, carefully select passages or commandments of the Church. They take words, offer words, and stop there. They claim, "We must not turn the Church into a street demonstration," and they call this discernment! The Apostles became a spectacle to the world—they were ridiculed in the eyes of society at that time to convince the world of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ. Yet these individuals argue that we must not turn to public demonstrations! Do they truly have Christ within them, those who think and act in this way? From sources and Scriptures, they selectively use passages that somehow justify the tactics of the ecumenists. They choose and record what suits them, or rather what suits certain others—namely, the ecumenists. They carry out tactics and strategies dictated by superiors, demonstrating obedience and submission to the bishop. They present and propose—acting as though they are mediators—acceptance, acknowledgment, and peaceful coexistence between the two sides (i.e., ecumenists and heretics), framed academically, as one might say. Their tactics are limited to "selective dialogue for appearances and persuasion," involving discussions, conferences, and councils, the decisions of which remain on paper, amounting to mere paperwork and nothing more. These "anti-ecumenists" tell the ecumenists: "We honor and respect you, even as you betray our faith. The Scriptures command us to disagree with you. You need to have an opponent, and that opponent is us. If we do not represent this so-called 'anti-ecumenist' struggle, others with a patristic mindset, uncompromising, might come, and then we wash our hands of it." The ecumenists prefer such opponents and recognize them. There is mutual respect between them, akin to the popular saying: "Among rogues, there is honesty." It's as if they are being told: "Since you do not break communion and still commemorate us, write whatever you want." These so-called anti-ecumenists, who operate with the above reasoning, are called commemorators. They recognize the heresy and the danger it poses to the Orthodox faith, as well as the individuals responsible for spreading the contamination of heresy among the faithful. Fully aware, they undertake the struggle, taking the lead to prevent genuine faithful clergy and laity from coming into direct confrontation with the heretical ecumenist shepherds. They voluntarily bind themselves, claiming sole responsibility for preserving—or rather increasing—the contamination of heresy.

The "anti-ecumenists" of words, through their tactics, will continually betray themselves while also self-promoting, for no rational mind willingly exposes its weaknesses. This category of "anti-ecumenists" neither convinces the ecumenists—since they have willingly offered themselves as tools for the ecumenists, who will use them to their advantage and later discard them—nor do they persuade the genuinely anti-ecumenists of action, those practicing walling-off. The ecumenists will ultimately set them aside, as no one loves a traitor, even if many love betrayal. Since these so-called "anti-ecumenists" fail to persuade the ecumenists, how can they possibly persuade the truly anti-ecumenists of action? They will be dismissed unless they genuinely repent. History, too, will likely regard them as fallen figures; today, they might be described as quietists—a stance exceedingly dangerous for the Orthodox faith. Soon, the masks will fall, and the thoughts and deeds of many hearts will be revealed. They acknowledge in theory that the Church suffers from the contamination of heresy because of its shepherds. They recognize that their shepherds engage in heretical acts, ecumenism, and uniatism or are otherwise heretics, ecumenists, or uniates. They acknowledge that their shepherds maintain spiritual communion, pray together, co-celebrate, deliberate, and make joint decisions with non-Orthodox and heterodox individuals, thereby betraying the Orthodox faith. They recognize that, at the highest clerical levels, even full concelebration occurs—that is, shared communion. They admit that their shepherds commune with heretics and heresy, either indirectly or directly. They acknowledge and confess that they will continue commemorating them until the shepherds do something even more treacherous to the faith (e.g., shared communion, which already exists) and remain in a state of waiting, claiming that they will supposedly break communion when they perceive something more overtly heretical—an unlikely scenario. It is more appropriate to call these individuals pro-ecumenists, much like one would use terms such as pro-American.

The Orthodox laity as a whole is left inclined toward or even prefers the theoretical anti-ecumenists rather than the practical ones. A theoretical, intellectual, and speculative victory offers some hope that in the future, you might truly defeat the enemy. However, this will ultimately prove to be a fatal mistake, more likely harmful than beneficial in the long run. The future lies ahead of us, and we will responsibly taste the fruits—likely of defeat rather than victory. Everything has an expiration date, whether sooner or later. People may plan, scheme, and prepare according to their own desires, but these plans pass through the approval of God's will. Humanity attempts whatever it wishes or desires, but ultimately, it is God who permits what happens. If only God, like the "deus ex machina" of our ancient ancestors, would intervene and rescue us from every difficult situation in our lives. Yet, brothers and sisters, God has made us free so that we may either glorify ourselves (be elevated) or disgrace ourselves (be diminished) before God and humanity through our own choices. Amen.

Author anonymous, translated from the original Greek.