The Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate sent a letter to the Chairman of the World Council of Churches on this day in 1976. On February 21, I wrote about the foundation of the World Council of Churches (WCC). The Fifth Assembly of the WCC took place in Nairobi, Kenya from November 23 to December 10, 1975. At this point most of the member churches belonged to the countries outside of the western world. General Secretary Dr. Philip Potter, a native of Dominica, represented this reality. While encroachment on human rights by military regimes in Latin America attracted attention of the assembly, the publication in its unofficial newspaper of the appeals about religious freedom in the USSR from Priest Gleb Yakunin and Lev Regelson produced negative reaction from the delegation of the Moscow Patriarchate. The Russian Church de facto received the right to veto information contradicting its official narrative. It is well known that the Moscow Patriarchate used ecumenical work to negotiate better conditions for the Church with the authorities at home. What is not well known is that representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate defend the uniqueness of the Orthodox Church as it is seen in this letter. On March 3, 1976 a session of the Holy Synod of the ROC (MP) reviewed the progress of the 5th WCC Assembly and the resolutions adopted by it. On behalf of Patriarch Pimen and the Holy Synod, a message was sent to the WCC Central Committee, its chairman Archbishop Edward Scott and general secretary Philip Porter, in which a number of critical considerations were expressed; in particular, it was noted that: “I. 1. The General Assembly at Nairobi has put before the Churches the question of common mission and evangelization as the most important task at the present stage of ecumenical development… But it is our deep conviction that without achieving unity in the faith and the foundations of church polity there can be no true ‘common Christian witness’ and consequently no sufficient success of united action in mission. This does not mean, of course, that there should be no mutual assistance in the fulfillment by each Church of its duty of Christian witness, mission and evangelization. “2. Another danger that poses a serious threat to Christian unity and the future of the ecumenical movement after Nairobi is the illusion nurtured by some in the ecumenical movement that the World Council of Churches could achieve such a degree of ecumenical convergence among its member churches that one of its future General Assemblies would become a Pan-Christian Council. To think so is to suggest that the World Council of Churches may in the future become some kind of “supra-church”… Hence one step toward the seductive and dangerous idea of the basic ecclesiological significance of the World Council of Churches and its central apparatus in Geneva… It is well known that the World Council of Churches is an instrument in the hands of its member churches in their search for and efforts to achieve Christian unity. And if the ecumenical movement reaches, with the help of God, such a degree of unity in the faith and in the foundations of the ecclesiastical order of the member Churches that it is possible to restore Eucharistic communion between them, the World Council of Churches should cease to exist as having fulfilled its ministry. - We welcome the WCC’s desire to further develop dialog with representatives of non-Christian religions and secular ideologies, which expresses the idea of common responsibility for the fate of the world in which we live. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that the Holy Scriptures and the experience of the Church exclude the possibility of convergence between Christianity and secular ideologies. That is why dialog must a priori not allow for the idea of such a convergence. As for the dialog with representatives of non-Christian religions, on the same grounds, it should in no way lead to syncretism.
- …The Orthodox Church cannot join in the position of the Protestant majority, which allows the possibility of a female priesthood, often expressing its attitude to this problem in secular categories alien to Divine Revelation.
III. 1. At the Assembly, during the frequent moments of worship and public prayer, there was found to be an artificially created atmosphere of exaltation, which some were inclined to regard as the operation of the Holy Spirit. From an Orthodox point of view, this may qualify as a return to a non-Christian religious mysticism, which cannot contribute to the creation of a genuine prayerful mood, when believers in Christ especially feel themselves brothers and sisters. - …We are also surprised by the fact that all the main reports at the assembly were presented by its Protestant participants, such that the voice of the Orthodox was not heard in presenting and revealing the main theme of the assembly, “Jesus Christ liberates and unites”… At the same time, being aware of the numerical minority of the Orthodox among their Protestant brothers, we realize that it is very easy to gather an arithmetical majority of votes of the Christians from the Protestant tradition in a discussion or vote. The question arises before us as to whether this is the right thing to do in the interdenominational family of the World Council of Churches.
- …An attempt has been made, not without the encouragement of certain officials of the World Council of Churches, to substitute for the voice of the delegation of the Russian Orthodox Church the opinion of Church dissidents who are in strained relations with the Church authorities and alienated from the sentiments of the overwhelming majority of Church members. In this connection, we cannot pass by the emerging tendency in the World Council of Churches to have direct contact with such people, bypassing the Church leadership, which we consider to be a direct or indirect distrust of the priesthood of our Church or a desire to sow this distrust.
For its part, the Russian Orthodox Church, despite its disagreement with the negative aspects of the assembly, still values its participation in this ecumenical fellowship of the World Council of Churches. Therefore, following the participants of the First General Assembly of the WCC in Amsterdam, we would like to repeat, addressing our sisters and brothers at the World Council of Churches: “We have decided to stay together!” Source: Monk Benjamin (Gomarteli), Letopis’ tserkovnykh sobytii nachinaia s 1917 goda, [Timeline of Church Events Beginning with 1917]. Part VI: 1972-1982, Historical Studies of the Russian Church Abroad. "Nairobi, 1975: The World Council of Churches and Human Rights," Online Atlas on the History of Humanitarianism and Human Rights. Photo: wwc. |
