Church affairs in Germany

Pope Pius IX issued on November 21 an extensive and formidable district letter, referring mainly to German ecclesiastical affairs. As one would expect, in this message the pope addresses the most decisive condemnation and excommunication from the Church to the Old Catholics and, at their head, to the main one, in the pope’s opinion, the heresiarch and false bishop Reinkens. In response to this condemnation, a pastoral letter from Reinkens appeared the other day; To characterize the current relations of Old Catholicism to the pope, which eliminates any possibility of reconciliation, we consider it useful to cite some passages from Reinkens’ message. “We are accused,” he says, “of many terrible errors regarding the fundamental tenets of the Catholic faith; one can only regret that none of them are named. Already according to the Council of Trent, there are two main dogmas of the Catholic faith: 1) interpretation of the text of Holy Scripture in accordance with the general Christian spirit of all centuries and, where possible, in accordance with the unanimous understanding of it by the Fathers of the Church; 2) the famous Catholic legend, the meaning of which was clarified by Tertullian 1 and formulated in such clear words by Vincent Lerinsky 2: “What has always been believed, everywhere, by everyone.” This is what can exclusively be considered dogma. At the Vatican Council of 1870, the pope, despite the complaints and written protests of more than a hundred bishops, overthrew these two fundamental principles of the Catholic faith, trampled them under foot, and scattered the protesters like an unreasonable herd. Contrary to the general spirit of the Church, expressed in the continuation of 1500 years, and the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers of the Church, he distorted the meaning of the famous text (Luke 22:32), which speaks of the personal confession of faith of the Apostle Peter in the sense that it contains confirmation of the divine privilege of the Roman bishops to determine the truth in matters of faith and morals, always and everywhere, at personal discretion, without the consent of the Church, by right universal shepherds of the whole Christianity. And for another fundamental principle of the Catholic Church, according to legend, he has such contempt that he put himself in its place, dismissed the bishops of the most significant dioceses who withdrew in protest before the solemn meeting and finally recognized as a dogma what, according to the testimony of the most authoritative and learned bishops, neither in the past nor at the present time was an object of faith for everyone. Only by eliminating these two fundamental principles of the Catholic Church was it possible to pronounce the “terrible errors” on July 18, 1870 and forcefully impose them on Christianity. But the pope also speaks about the supposedly “sacrilegious” accessories of the ritual that we have adopted as part of our worship. If he had had the opportunity to attend our divine service, he would have encountered such piety as they have no idea about in Rome. The one who, standing at the altar, remains in the true teaching of Christ does not commit sacrilege. Paul was not blasphemous in his ministry when he directly opposed and rebuked Peter for not walking the truth uprightly (Gal. 2:11–14). But those who abuse their power stand sacrilegiously at the altar, who, through unjust withholding of the sacraments and damage to property and good name, force believers to recognize lies as the word of God; Those who insult the shrine are those who, standing at the altar, loudly admit what their conscience refuses to believe. True, the teaching of the Roman Curia is different. All of ancient Christianity preached that unjust punishment falls on the head of the one who inflicted it. Now an immoral system reigns in the Roman hierarchy, which arose with the papal bull of 1713, unigenitus 3, according to which everyone is obliged, under pain of excommunication, to carry out the orders of their superiors and, if required, to abandon the recognized truth and confess a lie. On the basis of this, the ministry of a priest, excommunicated or renounced in the most improper way, began to be considered sacrilegious. But Athanasius the Great 4 did not stop ministering despite the fact that the pope and 600 bishops excommunicated him from the Church because he did not want to deny the Divinity of Christ the Savior.” Next, Bishop Reinkens refutes the pope's arguments against the correctness of his election as bishop: “Pius IX disputes the validity of my election. I answer: your own election, carried out by the cardinals (an institution of recent origin), you cannot recognize as legal on the basis that, according to the spirit and decrees of the ancient Catholic Church, elections must, of course, be made by the people and the clergy. If my election does not contradict the spirit and laws of the ancient Church, then there can be no question of its correctness in the face of the Church, even if it contradicted modern positive legislation. Episcopal jurisdiction derives its force from the perfect foundation of the election of consecration, and not from the act of any external jurisdiction exercised by the “bishop of bishops.” And in this the Council of Trent is on my side. But the pope claims that the “height of shamelessness” on my part lies in the fact that my consecration as bishop was performed by a Jansenist, 5 whom I myself allegedly previously recognized as a heretic and apostate. But I never considered the venerable Bishop Geykamp 6 an apostate and a heretic. Long before my election, I was already convinced that the Utrecht Church, so cruelly persecuted by Rome, does not adhere to Jansenism and is more Orthodox than the Roman Curia itself. The succession of bishops in this Old Catholic Dutch Church, to which Pius IX forcibly, against all canon law, opposed the New Catholic Church, is undeniable. Without falling into a new false teaching, the pope did not dare to recognize the bishops of the 80 million population professing the Greek-Eastern faith as “false bishops” only on the grounds that they were not approved by him; for the same reason, he cannot call either me or the pious and peace-loving Bishop of Deventer, who consecrated me, “false bishops.” Dad is also extremely unpleasant that we started talking about the “parish community” and its rights; For a long time they played with the word “church”, and as soon as the rights of the Church were discussed, this word meant the rights of either the hierarchy, or even exclusively the Roman bishopric. We, Catholics of the old faith, hereby declare that all the promises and gracious gifts of redemption, according to the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers of the Church, are given to the church community, although it is under pastoral authority. Ecclessia 7 of the Holy Scripture is nothing other than the Christian community in the unity of the people with the clergy. It is only in this sense that the word Church should be understood according to the Holy Scriptures. But what does Pius IX have to do with the true Church in the evangelical sense now? After all, he solemnly renounced it in the dogmatic constitution of July 18, 1870! After all, he most solemnly declared to Christianity his dogma, according to which his cathedral sayings in matters of faith and morality are in themselves infallible and do not at all require the consent of the Church. By this he opposed himself to the Church: he is everything, she is nothing; thus he stands outside the Church. “Obey me, not the Church,” he says! But since he himself no longer obeys the Church, we would be at odds with our conscience if we began to listen to him. The Church is our mother, whom Pius IX pays no attention to. Therefore, his power is alien, but is the power of the church, and not Christ’s. St. Cyprian 8 teaches that the bishop should not undertake anything in government without the advice and consent of the community, especially should not appoint clergy without this consent and not accept secular people into the clergy. Pius IX says that “the bishop of the Old Catholics calls upon his head the condemnation of Christ the Savior as a thief and a robber, because he did not enter through the door, but along another road.” But in the text to which the pope refers (John 10:1–18), the Savior points to himself as the door and the good shepherd. Paul was called to the apostleship by Jesus Christ Himself (Gal. 1:2), and not by the Apostle Peter; however, until now it had never occurred to anyone to call him a “thief and robber.” But Pius IX directly puts himself in the place of the Savior and points to himself as the “door.” This is the “idol in the Vatican” to which Montalembert pointed before his death 9 . Hasn’t the pope heard that the Oratorian Faber 10 wrote a book “On Reverence for the Pope,” without which no one can enter into bliss, since it is necessary for Christian holiness? Doesn't he know about the temptation aroused by some French and English religious dreamers who called the pope the third incarnation of the Son of God? Hasn’t he heard that during the Vatican Council, in Rome itself, one of the bishops preached this pagan teaching to the people from the pulpit? Doesn’t Pius IX know that those dreamers, that is, “pious priests and monks,” preach and write that the pope, if he wished, could say: “I am the holy spirit, I am the way, I am the truth, I am the life, I am the Eucharist”? Doesn’t he know that in one church hymn they put Pius instead of Deus; that he is greeted with a hymn to the Holy Spirit? That the official journal of the pope, Civilta-cattolica, declared the pope to be the owner of the gifts of the Holy Spirit and asserted that “when the pope thinks, God thinks in him” and “that he is for Christians the same thing as the Savior Himself would have been if he had remained on earth”! When Pius IX, having heard such blasphemous speeches, tore his clothes, like Paul and Barnabas in Lystra, when they rushed at the people, loudly exclaiming: People! What are you doing? And am I a person like you? 11 But the pope wants to see the effect of his excommunication, so he orders those who honor him to “count us among those with whom the Apostle forbade having any relations, not even to say Ave (hello) to them.” He means the Apostle John. In his second letter, verse 10 reads: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or welcome him.” But let him not present the texts one-sidedly and in fragmentary phrases! We will understand the exact and complete meaning of these strict words only when we bring them into relation with the words of the Savior in the Sermon on the Mount: “And if you greet only your brothers, what special are you doing? Don't the pagans do the same? Therefore be ye perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:47,48). When in one village the Samaritans did not want to give Jesus shelter because he looked like he was traveling to Jerusalem, his disciples James and John said: “Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and destroy them?” But He, turning to them, rebuked them and said: “You do not know what kind of spirit you are; for the Son of Man came not to destroy the souls of men, but to save” (Luke 9:52–56).” The pastoral message concludes with the following words: “Brothers! What should we do if Pope Pius IX exhausts his entire stock of slanderous and disgraceful words, if he calls us even the most pitiful sons of perdition in order to stir up a senseless crowd against us? If we are true disciples of the Savior, and I am sure of that, then we will receive the peace that the Lord gives us, “not as the world gives,” and then “Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid” (John 14:27). What peace the words sound: “Bless those who persecute you; bless, and do not curse!” “Do not repay anyone evil for evil!”, “If possible, for your part, be at peace with all people!” Meanwhile, Reinkens was officially recognized as the bishop of the Prussian, Baden, and Hesse-Darmstadt governments. The Prussian government assigned him a budget of 16,000 thalers; Badenskoe appoints for his part. Obviously, the German state power expects, among other things, to take advantage of the Old Catholic hierarchy in its struggle with Roman Catholicism, which has already reached its extreme point. The Archbishop of Poznan, of course, will soon be deprived of his title by a state court. In all likelihood, other bishops and all the priests appointed by them will suffer the same fate. The law on civil marriages and registrations has already been adopted in the legislative chamber by a huge majority. A new form of oath was recently issued for all newly appointed bishops, which unconditionally obliges them to obey state authorities and state law. But new bishops, of course, will not soon be appointed by the pope, unless according to the rule partibus infidelium 12. Thus, the entire Roman Catholic population in Prussia must soon be under interdict, without churches and without pastors, and the interdict this time will not come from the pope, but from the state authority. It must be assumed that the Prussian government, having decided to accept such a situation, has firm hope for a favorable outcome from it, because a normal situation of this kind is unthinkable. It can hardly count on a concession from the pope and the clergy. Does it perhaps hope that the large Roman Catholic population, tired, will be inclined little by little to move into the fold of the Old Catholic Church and recognize the Old Catholic priests as their own? It’s hard to believe this, but if Bismarck 13 had managed to win such a victory over the minds, this victory would have opened a new era in church and national history and would have become in the latter the second feat of the newest political Hercules, the unyielding chancellor, even more amazing than the first feat. Tertullian Quintus Septimius Florence (155/165–220/240) - early Christian writer, theologian, author of 40 treatises, of which 31 have survived. He laid the foundation for Latin patristics and ecclesiastical Latin. Vincent of Lerinsky, or Lirinsky (? - before 450) - saint of the undivided Church, hieromonk, early Christian author of Gaul. He is revered as the Father of the Church in the Catholic Church and locally in the Orthodox Church. Unigenitus (lat.) – only begotten, only one. Athanasius the Great (c. 298–373) - saint, bishop of Alexandria, defender of Orthodoxy against Arianism, one of the compilers of the Nicene Creed. Jansenism is a religious doctrine of the 17th-18th centuries. within the Catholic Church, condemned as heresy. Jansenism is characterized by a belief in predestination. Geikamp Jan (1824–1892) - Archbishop of the Utrecht Jansenist community, who achieved the union of his Church with the Old Catholics (Declaration of September 24, 1889). Ecclessia (Greek) – meeting. St. Cyprian of Carthage (?–258) - Bishop of Carthage, Latin theologian who spoke out against apostasy and schism. He saw the unity of the Church not in the judgments of any “bishop of bishops,” but in the conciliar agreement of bishops, equally endowed with the grace of the Holy Spirit and independent in governing their flock. Montalembert Marc Rene de (1714–1800) - marquis, French military leader, fortification theorist, division general, member of the Paris and St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, participant in the Wars of the Polish and Austrian Succession, consultant to the Minister of War L. Carnot after the French Revolution. Frederick William Faber (1814–1863) was an English poet, writer, theologian, Oratorian, and author of religious hymns and songs. partibus infidelium (lat.) – part of the infidels. Bismarck-Schönhausen Otto Eduard Leopold von (1815–1898) - German statesman, prince, first Chancellor of the German Empire, Colonel General, Field Marshal, pursued a strict anti-clerical policy towards the Church.