However, what is most surprising is that a completely pagan theory found refuge in the mouths of Orthodox preachers. Since when did we begin to argue with the Church of the Martyrs and defend the Gentiles? But now let us consider what objections to the idea of "traditional religions" can be raised not just for missionary reasons, but from the Revelation of the true God. Let us see the answer of St.

Carpus on the "traditionalistic" arguments of the ruler Valerius: "We do not consider your faith to be honorable only because the faith is ancient, for not everything is necessarily honest that is ancient: after all, malice is ancient, but it is not yet worthy of reverence for its antiquity. It is not necessary to speculate whether it should be accepted. We have decided to evade it and, as far as possible, to tear it out of our midst, as one that prepares the terrible fire of Gehenna for those who love it"[3].

By the way, it is clear from these words that all the rhetoric of those who claim that we should cooperate with representatives of "traditional faiths" is a manifestation of the greatest inhumanity and cruelty. After all, according to the words of St. John Chrysostom, "if it happens, which God forbid, that an unexpected death befalls us, and we depart from here without enlightenment (i.e. Baptism – S.D.)

, then, even though we have a thousand blessings here, nothing else awaits us but Gehenna, a poisonous worm, an inextinguishable fire, and insoluble bonds"[4]. So are we really going to allow our imaginary politeness, the notorious "tolerance", which in fact covers up lack of faith and indifference, to lead to the fact that we will not save our fellow Adam brothers from eternal, cruel destruction?

And this is exactly what the concept of refusal to preach among the supporters of "traditional religions" will lead us to, which is called for by those who intimidate us with Orthodox proselytism. The first thing that the Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments tell us is that our God is One, and there are no others besides Him. All other gods of the nations are demons, but the Lord created the heavens (Psalm 95:5 Greek)

, and He will never reconcile himself to the fact that man departs from Him. As Fr. Ilya: "How long will it take you to limp on both knees? If the Lord is God, then follow Him, and if Baal, then follow Him" (3 Kings 18:21). Obviously, in such a formulation of the question, no antiquity is a guarantee of truth, and even more so, cooperation between representatives of different religions is impossible.

A choice between Truth and Falsehood is necessary here! And it will not help to say that "the question of which religious path leads to the eternity of God is resolved only in this eternity, beyond the limits of temporal existence"[5]. They ignore the obvious fact that the Son is the only Way to the Father (John 14:6), and those who do not believe in the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon them (John 3:36).

In fact, for reasons of religious tolerance, the authors of such statements make a radical revision of the Orthodox faith. This approach to other religions appeared a long time ago. Since the time of Peter the Great, a distinction between heterodoxy and heterodoxy has appeared in theological works, according to which the mission should extend only to those of other faiths, and the heterodox should be perceived as Christians, even if they are mistaken in something, but who have hope for eternal salvation.

It got to the point that the government banned the publication of works refuting Protestant and false mystical errors. And all this in the name of a falsely understood "love" and "religious tolerance". However, it must be remembered that such definitions are alien to patristic writing. If we turn to the classical hereseological works of the Fathers, for example, to the "Panarius" of St.

Epiphanius of Cyprus and the chapter "On Heresies" in the "Source of Knowledge" of St. According to St. John of Damascus, we will see that they refer to heresies not only Arianism and other pseudo-Christian trends, but also paganism, Judaism, and Islam (in Damascene). Perhaps this distinction is justified in the sense that it is necessary in order to define the boundaries of the oikonomia of the Church, which is necessary to determine the possibility of a heretic joining in one way or another.

But it is not at all possible to think that there is any soteriological significance behind this distinction. Any person who distorts Revelation and rejects the apostolic faith cannot become a participant in the Eucharist, which means that he will perish. The point here is not in our love or hatred, but in the fact that any heresy is a mortal sin. And if a person does it, then he "will not inherit the Kingdom of God" (Gal. 5:21). How remarkably accurately St.

St. John of Damascus: "If anything is contrary to the truth, it is a dark invention of satanic error and an invention of an unfortunate mind"[6]. And finally, it is necessary to say something about how to receive into the Church those who have fallen away from her into heresy or wish to enter her salvific fence from the pernicious pit of error. In accordance with the sacred canons (

Canon 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council, Canon 95 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, Canon 1 of St. Basil the Great) there are three rites of reception into the Church. The first is the renunciation of heresy and holy Baptism. In this way, those heretics who have distorted the teaching about God are added to the Church. These include Jehovah's Witnesses. The second method is the renunciation of heresy and Holy Chrismation.

Through this rite of reception, those renegades enter the Body of Christ who adhere to heresies that do not affect the Trinitarian dogma and who have been baptized through triple immersion in the name of the Holy Trinity, as well as schismatics who have lost apostolic succession. The third way is a public renunciation of one's errors, and receiving forgiveness through the Sacrament of Repentance.