But even a constant visit to the chicken coop does not turn you into a chicken. And entering an Orthodox church does not turn into a Christian someone who nourishes his mind with the fruits of secular, non-Christian and pagan philosophies.

Orthodoxy is a fairly well-defined tradition. This tradition has existed in history for many centuries – and therefore there is no need to invent what Orthodoxy is, what it has and what it does not. This is a tradition recorded in writing, and therefore it is not difficult to verify certain assumptions about Orthodoxy. This is a tradition that has always caused controversy and willingly entered it. In the course of these disputes, the Church has made very clear distinctions between what is Orthodox and what is not Orthodox. This is a tradition that preached its own principles, criticized others, and, therefore, out of polemical necessity, constantly created and improved the exposition of its faith and the ways of its argumentation. This means that Orthodoxy is largely embodied in the world of thought and philosophy. Therefore, to be Orthodox means to enter into a historical tradition that clearly distinguishes itself from all others, which has expressed and argued the basic principles of its faith.

Orthodoxy does not need to be created anew: whoever wants to be Orthodox must simply join Orthodoxy - and then the heritage of the Holy Fathers will be passed on to him as well.

It would seem that everything is obvious: realize that history did not begin with you, that you are not the first person living on earth and looking for God, and listen to the voice of Tradition.

But again and again there are strange people who allow themselves to consider themselves Orthodox and at the same time confess and defend positions that have long been evaluated by the Holy Fathers and Councils as incompatible with Christianity. Orthodoxy presupposes the ability to discipline one's mind and feelings, to captivate "every thought in obedience to Christ" (2 Corinthians 10:5). The word discipline cannot be popular in the era of postmodernism and democratic pluralism. But without disciplining the mind, no science and philosophy are possible, and without this, spiritual growth is impossible.

Thus, the Roerichs were invited to depart from the Church and realize their separation from it. They were asked not to deceive either themselves or other people with the appearance of the unity of Theosophy with Orthodoxy. But these people were incapable of acting. They were unable to honestly and courageously realize their choice. They continue to huddle against the church walls and conjure: "We are also Orthodox!"

This aspiration, contrary to all evidence and all logic, to consider themselves Orthodox, is very indicative: it means that in the depths of their souls even the Roerichs feel that the Church gives some kind of protection through its sacraments. They want to denounce the Church, criticize its history, doctrine and even the Gospel, but at the same time be under the protection of the Church. For some of the Roerichs, this is just a disguise. But for some, this is a sincere aspiration.

And it is to such people that I turn and try to explain: the grace of the Orthodox sacraments does not protect those who do not agree with Orthodox teaching. "Having asked for the union of faith and the communion of the Holy Spirit, let us commit ourselves and one another and all our life to Christ our God" – this is the condition for the validity of the Holy Chalice in us. It is impossible to reconcile the Theosophical faith with Orthodox Communion.

The Roerichs want to supplement Orthodoxy, which is too "narrow", in their opinion, with "tolerance" and "openness", they want to renew the Orthodox tradition in the light of "the latest achievements of science and culture". The irony, however, is that their very appeal demonstrates an inability to notice the changes taking place in the modern world.

Ten years ago, religion was a little-known book and cultural space. And so it seemed that "tolerance" meant the ability to buy books of different religions, put them side by side on the home bookshelf, and from time to time read a few pages from one book, then from another... But in the following years, religion broke free from the captivity of books. It has become a reality, drastically changing, and sometimes breaking the fate of real people. It turned out that "spiritual experience" really is experience. It turned out that what these books are talking about is more than real. The spirits threw off their symbolic-allegorical clothes and began to communicate directly with some excessively gullible readers. The world of religion turned out to be diverse and dangerous. A variety of "spirits" came into "contact" and did not disdain to appropriate other people's names to themselves. In these conditions of the rising dust storm, which brings all the astral-cosmic garbage into our world, to call for "openness" and "breadth", to recommend censoring the ancient Testaments at the behest of new newcomers means to maim people. In case of a dusty gust, the eyes should be squinted, not opened. The "narrowness" and "narrow-mindedness" of Orthodoxy in these conditions is simply a means of survival, a necessary technique of religious security.

After the opuses of "contactees" appeared on the book market, claiming to be a continuation of "Agni Yoga" (and the contactees claimed that Helena Roerich herself dictated these books to them from another world, or that the same Mahatmas who instructed the Roerichs got in touch with them), the Roerichs themselves began to warn that there are many fakes in the world of dreams, voices, contacts and visions. Christians have been talking about forgeries for a long time. Therefore, it is all the more necessary to pay attention to the centuries-old warnings that have always come from the Orthodox Church: "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they are of God" (1 Jn. 4,1).

And how to "test" spirits? – To do this, we need to turn to the ascetic, monastic tradition of Orthodoxy and familiarize ourselves with the signs of "delusion", seduction, which are described in it. The spiritual experience of people can flow from completely different sources. "Revelation" is not a guarantor of truth. The question is who exactly "opened". God, or not... By the trace that this "revelation" left in the soul of the contactee and in his written works, in his preaching, one can judge who this person met.

Therefore, a comparison of what the Holy Fathers preached, what the Gospel says, with what the creators of the Theosophist say, is the way to diagnose their spiritual state: who is really the spirit who, in communication with Blavatsky and the Roerichs, sometimes called himself by the name of Christ...

One should not neglect the experience of church thought and spiritual warfare. After all, our Creeds are "road signs at the crossroads of the Christian faith, warning of the danger that was once avoided with their help."