Defining Ecumenism and the Proper Resistance to It

(Extracts from The Criteria of Ecclesiastical Struggle, a talk by Bishop Auxentios of Photiki, presented on March 17, 2012, at Holy Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.)

 

PART 1: SUMMARY DEFINITION OF HERETICAL ECUMENISM:

These innovative teachings can be summarized as follows (see Archimandrite Cyprian Agiokyprianites, Orthodoxy and the Ecumenical Movement, pp. 17-22):

a) "Baptismal theology." This particular teaching maintains that baptism - Orthodox or heterodox - supposedly delimits the Church, establishing the so-called "baptismal boundaries" of the Church, and that, in this way, She includes Orthodox and heterodox, who are held together by the "baptismal unity" of the Church….

b) The theology of "Sister Churches," according to which Orthodox and Roman Catholics are supposedly "Sister Churches" in the full sense of that term, despite existing dogmatic differences; in fact, the Orthodox ecumenists have extended the term "Sister Churches" to other heterodox communions, too…

c) The theology of the "Broad Church," which talks about "the Church in the broadest sense"; about "the Church of Christ in her totality," and "no longer about Orthodoxy alone"; about a "Church outside the Church," "outside the walls," and "outside the canonical limits" and "ecclesiastical boundaries" of Orthodoxy…. (Once more, even the more liberal of the Roman Catholic ecumenists have never sacrificed their claims to primacy in the stark terms accepted and promulgated by the Orthodox ecumenists.)

d) The theology of "cultural pluralism," which regards the unity of Orthodox and heterodox as a "given" and existing dogmatic differences as a simple divergency in theological nomenclature about the same faith, corresponding to our individual cultures and complementing one another in a legitimate variety of theological traditions….

e) The theology of "common service,” which acknowledges that there are dead-ends in the "dialogues," that is, an impossibility of union in the same faith, and that, in order to overcome these, proposes a confederational and moral union of the Orthodox and heterodox by way of organization, action, and solidarity for "common service" to the world.

PART 2: SUMMARY OF THE PATRISTIC MODEL OF RESISTANCE

Summarizing our analysis of the Nestorian controversy, we see a reiteration of the principles and protocols of ecclesiastical struggle laid out by the Lord and the Apostles, demonstrated in the Life of Saint Gregory of Nazianzos, and discussed in the exegetical works of the Divine Chrysostomos.

Let us review the steps in this process of struggle with the bold proclamation of Nestorios' innovative and subversive doctrine:

1) The right-believing and healthy members of the Church recognize the heretical innovation as a "subversion" of the Gospel.

2) Keenly aware of their responsibilities, they flee the innovation and wall themselves off, "lest," as St. Cyril notes, "they should be harmed in their faith." Their separation, St. John Chrysostomos assures us, is not from some "contentious" or "ambitious" spirit, but is, rather, aimed at the preservation of Christian preaching (the "Gospel") and, accordingly, the unity of the faithful.

3) The leaders of the Church address the innovator, refuting his error for the sake of his correction and the protection of the faithful.

4) With the innovator's obstinacy and persistence in error, the walled-off, resisting, and right-believing members of the Church labor towards a hearing of the disputed issue before "the Church"; that is, a competent or Oecumenical Synod.

[We note that the collective labors involved in these first four steps are what the Holy Fathers call "resistance."]

5) At the assembly of a competent or Oecumenical Synod, the issues are again examined in full in light of the Church’s established teaching, as expressed, for example, in Scripture, Patristic writings, and worship. Error is denounced, truth is proclaimed, and the innovative, ailing individual (or contingent) is given a last opportunity to correct his (its) views.

6) With continued obstinacy from the innovator, the Synod "rejects" the heretic, pronounces the final, authoritative, and effective condemnation of both the individual(s) involved and his (their) errant teaching.

7) The heretic, now condemned, becomes as a "heathen and publican," removed from the body of Faithful believers. His errant and divisive teaching is catalogued and takes its place among the other notorious subversions of the Christian Faith, i.e., among the condemned heresies.

These seven procedural steps, though extracted from the events of a single controversy in the fourth century, can be distinguished in virtually every great ecclesiastical contest. in fact, all of the core elements of my outline have been established as conventional protocol, either in the writings of the Saints, in the Church Canons, or in the pronouncements of the Ecumenical Synods themselves (most notably the Seventh Oecumenical Synod and the follow-up First-Second Synod, held in the eighth and ninth centuries, respectively).

PART 3: SUMMARY OF THE ACTIVE RESISTANCE

By your patience and with God's help, we have now reached the last portion of our talk. Let us recapitulate our points and make some summary observations.

First, we have pointed out that, for many reasons, God allows contentions within the Church. When the divisive issues are minor, we are advised forbearance, forgiveness, and conciliation. When, however, the controversy is over some deviation from received, established teaching, that is, a matter of heresy, the Church advises a dramatically different strategy: that of resistance. We have seen that heresy is not simply a matter of wrong opinion. it also involves an ailing disposition that is marked by self-reliance and a stubborn opposition to correction.

We have seen that resistance, the process whereby the Church addresses and corrects heresy, encompasses some seven steps, as we labor to preserve the healthy faithful, restore the Church's ailing members, and promote unity in the Church. These steps are:

a) an identification of the un-Orthodox teaching;

b) a walling off, that is, separation from the new subversive teaching, lest our own faith be harmed;

c) instruction, admonishments, and reproofs are issued by the Church's teachers, for the protection of the faithful and the correction of the innovators;

d) (assuming that the innovators do not repent) we labor for the convocation of a competent or Oecumenical Synod for the adjudication of the contentious issue;

e) the convening of a Synod and a judgement, Orthodoxy is delineated, the controversial heresy is identified and condemned;

f) the innovator is given a final opportunity to repent and makes his decision;

g) should he remain obstinate, the heretic is excised from the body of the Church, becoming "as a heathen and publican."

Secondly, we have applied the rubrics of resistance—that is, an outline of the Church's method for dealing with heretical innovations—to our contemporary Church situation. We have seen that, working like a pernicious bacterium, ecumenism has infected all of the local Churches, sapping them of strength, dulling their ecclesiastical consciousness, and depriving us all of blessings. Specifically, we can list five new teachings proclaimed by the Orthodox ecumenists that are condemnable:

a) "Baptismal theology";

b) the theology of "Sister Churches";

c) the theology of the "Broad Church";

d) the theology of "cultural pluralism"; and

e) the theology of "common service."

We have argued that the heresy of ecumenism has prompted a God-pleasing resistance in nearly every local Church. Following the examples and admonitions of the Holy Fathers, right-believing Orthodox have walled themselves off for the protection of their faith. Responsible and authorized teachers in the Church—Hierarchs, Clergy, theologians, and capable laity—have raised their voices in protest, in proclamation of Orthodox teaching and in the denunciation of subversive innovations. These are the first three steps of resistance, which we have, by God's help, accomplished.

With prayer, with sincere efforts to follow God's commandments—specifically in the cultivation of love towards our neighbor and repentance in our life—and with hope in God, we labor along the fourth step, towards the convocation of a unifying, Oecumenical Synod that will adjudicate the contention, proclaim Orthodoxy, and condemn ecumenism.