One remembers the mass illusion which seized upon the emigres in 1945.  Many submitted to a natural feeling of love for their Fatherland and found themselves in prisons in their native land, where they beat their foreheads against the walls, lamenting the fact that they had been so trusting.

While the crushing blows directed against the Russian Church Abroad affected only a part of Her episcopate, the schisms — or, to be more precise, the separations from Her, which followed thereupon — were not defining landmarks in Her existence.

But the trial that befell the Church Abroad four years ago was a fatal one for Her, inasmuch as, de facto, the entire episcopate and a great part of the clergy found themselves incapable of withstanding the destructive process.

The beginning of this process was laid at the 1994 Sobor, when the Church Abroad recognized the Moscow Patriarchate for the first time, with all the consequences flowing therefrom:

"We...suppose" — the Sobor Epistle stated — "that the time has come to seek active communion with all parts of the One Russian Orthodox Church.  Moreover, there can be no talk of unification or of our submission to the Moscow Patriarchate, but only, for the time being, of an improvement in relations."  But here, just as subsequently, reassuring words were resorted to: "The aim of such conferences cannot be a compromise between truth and falsehood.  The firm cornerstone of our hope is our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.  There can be no communion between light and darkness."

In other words, we began to employ double-speak.  It was the first time in the history of our Church that such a thing had happened.

The concrete development of this process manifested itself at the 2000 Sobor, when the most important declarations were already being made and actions taken openly upon the pre-determined path.  Definite measures were taken for rapprochement with the MP as the genuine Russian Church, for which a special commission was created.  In the "political" Epistle of the Sobor, the ostensible assurance of our stand in the Truth and of our invincible opposition to sergianism and ecumenism became unconvincing.  If one likewise adds to all of this the threats of sanctions against the "unsubmissive," then the characteristics of the disciplinary system which, to many, seemed to be inescapable, became strikingly evident.

But who is to be feared?  What power is possessed by an ecclesiastical authority that betrays itself?  The new course adopted, which clearly showed through the reassuring guarantees, freed each honest Christian from that obedience to which he would have been obligated under normal conditions of church life.

In its plan of world politics, the Government of the RF had a vested interest in bringing the emigre community into a merger with the Russian Federation and thus coming into possession of [the emigre community's] bastions in the Western world.  As concerns the MP — there would have been a union between her and the ROCA within a framework of autonomy, or of some other variant of [ROCA's] communion with [the MP]; the most important thing, as far as the MP was concerned, was to receive recognition from the Church Abroad and to be legitimized by her as the true Russian Orthodox Church — not unlike Yeltsin's seeking legitimization for his regime in the burial of "the royal remains."  After her external restoration and gilding of cupolas, the MP required the bright vesture of the genuine Russian Orthodox Church, in which she would have attired herself, without having repented of her theomachic acts and without having cast off her apostate nature.  And this, only the Russian Church Abroad could give her.

Thus, ROCA would have been deprived of the vesture of Holy Rus', which she had worn throughout the entire duration of her emigration.  Having become salt that had lost its savour, Her members would be of no use to anyone.  Those seeking ways to confess the true Orthodox faith freely would be the most unfortunate of all people.

<>Following the unbounded and irrevocable fidelity to the Moscow Patriarchate demonstrated this year by the hierarchs abroad, there is a way out of this impasse for all concerned —  in particular, for those clergy desirous of honestly serving Christ: enter the ranks of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, which, under the omofor of Her First-Hierarch, Metropolitan Vitaly, has preserved her spiritual freedom.  May indifference to the Truth and the spirit of compromise, which are so inherent in the contemporary world, not become a stumbling block in this goodly union.

In a spirit of brotherly love, we call upon all those clergy desirous of coming under the omofor of Metropolitan Vitaly to direct the corresponding request to one of the below-listed addresses, providing the necessary information about themselves.