Besides this. To be united, let’s say, with papacy, we need first to be ourselves united. If the Patriarch of Moscow can not meet the pope due to all that the Russian Church suffered and suffers from papacy, how is it possible for other Churches to meet with the pope? You can not meet with your brother’s enemy, and if your brother is wrong, first you help him understand his error, and as long as you are unable to do it, you don’t meet with his (real or supposed) enemy. This is just elementary solidarity, not even full love – and we lack even this. How then do we imagine unions – with who? If the pope had the love he says he have, why does he cause problems and try to proselytize the Orthodox, while the whole West, immersed in atheism, gives him a great field of work?
By putting doctrinal union as a priority, a union that needs centuries to be achieved, if it is achieved, by dividing our Churches, making people doubting about their shepherds, by the (called as ‘witnessing’) relativizing the truths of Orthodoxy, we don’t only damage ourselves, but also the Western churches; beyond the dialogues’ conclusions, we strengthen, even not knowing it, the very mentality of the union as a superficial attachment despite the deep and numerous differences of the traditions. As much as we become totalitarians, real union will be vanishing, and Europe will lose even the possibility of forming a soul and a face.