Answer to those favorable to the Latin Church about the unfair exaltation of the papists with the imaginary dignity of their Church (against Catholics)

It is in vain that some of the Orthodox are surprised by the existing propaganda of the Roman Church, the supposed selflessness and activity of its missionaries and the zeal of the Latin sisters of mercy, and incorrectly attribute such importance to the Latin Church that, as if, after it fell away from the Orthodox Church, this latter did not remain the same, but had the need to seek union with it. According to strict research, this opinion turns out to be false; and the energetic Latin activity not only does not arouse surprise, but, on the contrary, arouses deep regret in the hearts of people who think well and understand the truth: From Apostolic times and to this day, the Orthodox Eastern Church has observed, unchanged and undamaged by innovations, both the teachings of the Gospel and the Apostles, and the tradition of St. fathers and the resolutions of the Ecumenical Councils, at which God-bearing men, having gathered from the entire universe, collectively compiled the divine Symbol of the Orthodox Faith, and, proclaiming it aloud to the entire universe in all respects perfect and complete, forbade with terrible punishments any addition to it and any subtraction, or change, or rearrangement of even one iota in it. The Roman Church has long deviated into heresy and innovation. Basil the Great also accused some of the bishops of Rome of this in his letter to Eusebius of Samosata. “They do not know the truth, and they do not want to know; they argue with those who tell them the truth, and they themselves affirm heresy.” The Apostle Paul commands to move away from those damaged by heresy, and not to seek union with them, saying: “a heretic of a man, deny the first and second punishment: knowing that he has become corrupt, he sins and is self-condemned” (Titus 3:10,11). The Conciliar Orthodox Church admonished the private Roman Church not twice, but repeatedly; but the latter, despite all the fair convictions of the former, remained stubborn in her erroneous way of thinking and acting. Back in the seventh century, an incorrect wisdom arose in Western churches that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son. At first, some popes rebelled against this new thinking, calling it heretical. Pope Damasus speaks of him this way in the Council Definition: “Whoever thinks right about the Father and the Son, but wrong about the Holy Spirit, is a heretic” Other popes, Leo III and John VIII, also confirmed this. But most of their successors, deceived by the rights to predominance, and having found many worldly benefits for themselves, dared to change the Orthodox dogma about the procession of the Holy Spirit, contrary to the decrees of the seven Ecumenical Councils, and also contrary to the clear words of the Lord Himself in the Gospel: “He who proceeds from the Father” (John 15:26). But just as one mistake, which is not considered a mistake, always entails another, and one evil gives rise to another, so it happened with the Roman Church. As soon as this incorrect wisdom had time to appear in the West, that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son, it itself gave birth to other similar fiends, and little by little introduced with it other novelties, for the most part contradicting the commandments of our Savior clearly depicted in the Gospel, such as: sprinkling instead of immersion in the sacrament of Baptism, taking away the divine Chalice from the laity and the use of handkerchiefs and unleavened bread instead of leavened bread, the exclusion from the Liturgy of the divine invocation of the All-Holy and Life-Giving and All-Accomplishing Spirit. It also introduced novelties that violated the ancient apostolic rites of the Catholic Church, such as: “the exclusion of baptized infants from Confirmation and the reception of the Most Pure Mysteries, the exclusion of married persons from the priesthood, the recognition of the pope as an infallible person and as the locum tenens of Christ, etc. Thus, the entire ancient apostolic order of the celebration of almost all the Sacraments and all church institutions was debased - an order that was maintained by the ancient holy and Orthodox Church of Rome, which was then the most honorable member of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.” (Cir. last. § 5, paragraph 12). But the main heresy of the Roman Church, not in essence, but in action, is the invented dogma of supremacy, or rather the proud search for predominance of the bishops of Rome over the other four Eastern Patriarchs. For the sake of this predominance, adherents of the Roman Church placed their pope above the rules and institutions of the Ecumenical Councils, believing in his infallibility. But what this papal infallibility is, true history testifies. Pope John XXIII is spoken of in the definition of the Council of Constance, which deposed this pope: “It has been proven that Mr. John the Pope is an inveterate and incorrigible sinner, he was and is a lawless man, rightly accused of murder, poisoning and other serious atrocities, who often and persistently before various dignitaries asserted and proved that the human soul dies and extinguishes along with the human body, like the soul of animals and cattle, and that the dead will by no means be resurrected on the last day.” The iniquities of Pope Alexander VI and his sons were so monstrous that, according to contemporaries, this pope was concerned about establishing the kingdom of Satan on earth, and not the Kingdom of God. Pope Julius II reveled in Christian blood, constantly arming Christian peoples against each other for his own purposes. There are many other examples testifying to the great errors of the popes; but now is not the time to talk about them. With such historical evidence of damage by heresy and the errors of the popes, are the papists rightly exalted by the imaginary dignity of the Roman Church? Is it fair to disparage the Orthodox Eastern Church, which bases its infallibility not on any one person, but on the teachings of the Gospel and Apostles and on the rules and decrees of seven Ecumenical and nine Local Councils? At these Councils there were God-inspired and holy men from all over the universe, and they established everything concerning the needs and spiritual needs of the Church, in accordance with Holy Scripture. Therefore, do the papists act properly when, for the sake of worldly goals, they put the person of their pope above the rules of the Ecumenical Councils, considering their pope more infallible? For all the reasons stated, the Catholic Eastern Church cut off communication with the private Roman Church, as having fallen away from the truth and from the rules of the Catholic Church. The Roman bishops, just as they began with pride, will end with pride. They are trying to prove that the Orthodox Catholic Church has fallen away from their private Church. But this is unfair and even ridiculous. The truth testifies that the Roman Church has fallen away from the Orthodox Church. Although the papists, for the sake of imaginary correctness, pretend that their patriarchate, at the time of unity with the Catholic Catholic Church, was among the five the first and eldest; but this is for the sake of royal Rome, and not for any spiritual dignity, or power over other patriarchates. They also unfairly called their Church Catholic, that is, conciliar. A part can never be called a whole; and the Roman Church, before its fall from Orthodoxy, constituted only a fifth of the united Catholic Church. Especially because the Roman Church should not be called conciliar, because it rejected the decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, following its own incorrect reasoning. Some are struck by the number and ubiquity of adherents of the Latin Church, and therefore those who unreliably understand the truth think that for this reason should not the Latin Church be called Universal or Catholic? But this opinion is very erroneous, because nowhere in Holy Scripture is a special spiritual right attributed to multitudes and numbers. The Lord clearly showed that the sign of the true Catholic Church does not lie in multitudes and numbers when he says in the Gospel: “Fear not, little flock: for it has been your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom” (Luke 12:32). There is also an example in Holy Scripture that is not in favor of the multitude. After the death of Solomon, under his son, the kingdom of Israel was divided, and Holy Scripture presents the ten tribes as falling away, and the two tribes, which remained faithful to their duty, as not falling away. Therefore, in vain does the Latin Church try to prove that it is right by its multitude and numbers and ubiquity. Sign of the Universal Church at the Ecumenical Councils of St. the fathers indicated something completely different, i.e. it was conciliarly laid down: to believe in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and not just in the universal, or universal church. Although the Roman Church has its followers everywhere in the universe, since it does not preserve the holy conciliar and apostolic decrees, but has deviated into innovations and incorrect wisdom, it does not at all belong to the One, Holy and Apostolic Church. Также весьма ошибочно рассуждают к латинам благосклонные, которые думают во 1-х, что по отпадении западных от православия, в Соборной Церкви будто бы чего-то не достает. Ущерб сей заменен давно премудрым промыслом – основанием на севере Православной Церкви Русской. Во 2-х, будто бы ради прежнего старшинства и ради численности Римской Церкви Православная Церковь имеет потребности в соединении с оною. But the judgment is human and the judgment of God is different. The Apostle Paul clearly says: “What fellowship has light with darkness?” ( 2Кор. 6, 14 ) – т. е. что свет истины Христовой с тьмою еретичества никогда совмещаться не может. Латины же своей ереси оставить не хотят, и упорствуют, как свидетельствуют о них, на деле исполняющиеся столько столетий, слова Василия Великого : «истины они не знают, и знать не желают; с теми, кто возвещает им истину, они спорят, а сами утверждают ересь» , как сказано выше. Those who are favorable to the Latins, instead, should better reason about what was said in the psalms: “they hated the church of the wicked” (Ps. 25:5), and regret those who, for the sake of dominance and love of money, and other worldly goals and benefits, outraged almost the entire universe through the inquisitions and crafty Jesuit intrigues, and still outrage insult Orthodox Christians in Turkey through their missionaries. Latin missionaries do not bother to convert natural Turks to the Christian faith, but try to seduce Orthodox Greeks and Bulgarians from the true path, using all sorts of unfavorable means and tricks for this. Is this not deceit, and is it not evil deceit? Would it be prudent to seek union with such people? For the same reason, is it worth surprising at the imaginary zeal and imaginary selflessness of these figures, that is, the Latin missionaries and sisters of mercy? These are truly pathetic ascetics. They are not trying to convert and lead people to Christ, but to their dad. What else can I say to the questions: Can the Latin Church and other faiths be called New Israel and the ark of salvation? and how should we understand the Eucharist of the real Roman Church? Only the Orthodox Church can be called New Israel, but one damaged by heretical wisdom cannot. The Holy Apostle John the Theologian says: “She came forth from us, but was not besieged from us: even though they were from us, they remained with us: but let them be revealed, for they are not all from us” (1 John 2:19). And St. The Apostle Paul says, “there is one Lord, one faith” (Eph. 4:5), that is, there is one true faith, and not every belief is good, as those who are separated from the one true Church foolishly think, about whom St. The Apostle Jude writes: “For in the last time there will be scoffers, walking after their own lusts and ungodliness: these are separating themselves from the unity of faith and are bodily (spiritual), not having the spirit” (Jude 1:18, 19). Therefore, those who are alien to the spirit of truth will be called the New Israel? or how they will be a saving refuge for someone, when both cannot be accomplished without the grace of the Holy Spirit. In the Orthodox Church it is believed that the bread and wine in the sacrament of the Eucharist are transubstantiated by the invocation and invasion of the Holy Spirit. But the Latins, as stated above, considered this invocation unnecessary and excluded it from their liturgy. So, let him who understands understand about the Latin Eucharist. Another question: if, as it has been said, besides the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, which the Orthodox Church is called and is, the salvation of other faiths is so doubtful: then why is this truth not openly preached in Russia? The answer to this is very simple and clear. In Russia, religious tolerance is allowed and people of other faiths, along with Orthodox Christians, occupy important positions in our country: the heads of educational institutions are, for the most part, people of other faiths; the heads of provinces and district towns are often non-religious; regimental and battalion commanders are often non-religious. Wherever a clergyman begins to openly preach that there is no salvation outside the Orthodox Church, high-ranking Gentiles will be offended. From this situation, the Russian Orthodox clergy received, as it were, a skill and an ingrained ability to speak evasively about this subject. And maybe some, for the same reason, and from always dealing with people of other faiths, and more from reading their works, began to think more leniently in relation to the hope of salvation and other faiths. Despite the spirit of meekness and peacefulness and patience of the Orthodox Church and its shepherds and followers, in the West published in previous centuries by followers of various Christian faiths, mainly in our times so many books are published against the teachings of the Eastern Church that it would be difficult to even count them, not only to appreciate them. And although such books are generally filled with slander, fables, reproaches, obvious fabrications and lies, especially mental poisonous intricacies, with the obvious goal of creating in Europe a spirit hostile to the Eastern Church, especially to our fatherland, and, having shaken the doctrine of our Orthodox Church, to seduce its followers from the path of truth: but since they are published under tempting titles, in cozy forms, with such typographic neatness that they seem to involuntarily attract the curiosity of readers, then of course in our fatherland, where these works penetrate through dark paths, there are quite a few who, having a superficial understanding of the subjects of Christian teaching, cannot help but be carried away by thoughts contrary to the truth. The writers of the Latin Church are now especially armed against the Orthodox, proclaiming the dominance of their pope and the private Roman Church over all governments and private Churches and the peoples of the world; Currently, the Jesuits in France are mainly engaged in this, who, taking advantage of the widespread dissemination of the French language, are intensifying with some feverish activity, through writings in this language, to instill everywhere their way of thinking, which is contrary to the doctrine and hierarchical structure of the Eastern Church - not sparing for this purpose the most monstrous inventions, obvious lies and unscrupulous distortion of historical truths. Many of the Orthodox educated, reading these works in French, and not reading their own in Russian about the Orthodox doctrine, can easily believe an intricate lie instead of the truth, which they do not know well. For those who wish to know in detail the reasons why the papists deviated so far from Orthodoxy, it is useful to read the recently published work on the relations of the Roman Church to other churches - Avdiah Vostokov. In this book, in the 2nd part, there are especially remarkable passages about the oath of Latin bishops to their pope and about the slander of papists against the Orthodox, p. 49, 60 and 137. Spiritual Conversation 1858 No. 41. You might be interested in: