IV. О ТАИНСТВЕ ПОКАЯНИЯ

§ 221. Connection with the previous one, the concept of the sacrament of repentance and its different names In the three saving sacraments of the Church, which we have considered so far, a person is given all the abundance of spiritual gifts necessary so that he can become a Christian and, having become so, succeed in Christian piety and achieve eternal bliss. Baptism cleanses the sinner from all his sins, original and voluntary, and introduces him into the kingdom of Christ’s grace. Confirmation imparts to him Divine powers for his strengthening and growth in a life of grace. The Eucharist nourishes him with Divine food and connects him with the very source of life and grace. But since, having been completely cleansed of all sins in the font of baptism, a person is not freed from the consequences of ancestral sin and hereditary corruption, such as: in the soul there is an inclination towards evil, and in the body there is illness and death (§§ 91.93); since even after baptism, being already a Christian, he can sin again, even very often (1 John 1:8. 10), may be subject to illnesses, sometimes very serious, bringing them closer to the grave: then the all-good Lord was pleased to establish two more sacraments in His Church, as two saving medicines for its weak members: the sacrament of repentance, which heals our spiritual infirmities, and the sacrament of the Blessing of Anointing, which extends its saving effects to our bodily infirmities. Let's talk first about the first of these sacraments, and then about the last. Repentance, understood in the sense of the sacrament 1328, is such a sacred act in which the shepherd of the Church, by the power of the Holy Spirit, absolves the repentant and confessing Christian from all the sins he committed after baptism, so that the Christian again becomes innocent and sanctified as he was when he came out of the waters of baptism. Accordingly, the ancient teachers of the Church called the sacrament of repentance resolution 1329, confession 1330, reconciliation 1331, second baptism 1332, second board after shipwreck 1333 and so on. § 222. Divine institution and validity of the sacrament of repentance I. The Lord established the sacrament of repentance after his resurrection, when, appearing to his disciples, gathered together, except for Thomas alone, he solemnly said to them: peace be with you: and this river, duna, and the verb to them: receive the Holy Spirit. Forgive their sins, their sins will be forgiven; and by whom you hold, they hold (John 20:21–23). From these words it is clear that - a) the Lord himself taught the Apostles, and subsequently, and their successors, the Divine power to forgive or not forgive the sins of people; b) to let go or not to let go precisely by the Holy Spirit, that is, by His invisible power and action, and - c) without a doubt, to express this power in a visible way in some action. This means that repentance is a real sacrament with all the properties of true sacraments (§ 200). In addition, Christ the Savior had previously spoken the promise of this sacrament twice - the first time, when he said to the Apostle Peter, who confessed Him on behalf of all the Apostles as the Son of God: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and if you bind on earth, it will be bound in heaven; and if you loose on earth, it will be loosed in heaven (Matt. 16, 19); in another, when he testified before all the Apostles, as its primates: if (anyone) disobeys the church, make you like a pagan and a tax collector. Amen, I say to you: the tree that you bind on earth will be bound in heaven: and the tree that you loose on earth will be loose in heaven (Matthew 18:17.18). II. Since the time of St. According to the Apostles, the sacrament of repentance constantly existed in the Church and its shepherds always used the God-given right to knit and solve. Thus, the Apostolic Canons say: “If anyone, a bishop or a presbyter, does not accept a convert from sin, but rejects him: let him be deposed from the priesthood. For it saddens Christ, who says: there is joy in heaven for one sinner who repents” (right 52). In the Apostolic Constitutions, on the one hand, the primates of the Church are very clearly reminded that they have been granted by God the power to bind and decide 1334, and numerous instructions are offered on how to judge various types of sins 1335, how to deal with repentants 1336; and on the other hand, believers are commanded to honor their spiritual fathers: “because they have received from God the power of life and death, the power to judge sinners and condemn them to the death of eternal fire, and to absolve those who repent from their sins and return them to life” 1337. The ancient teachers of the Church testify to this no less clearly, for example: St. Cyprian: “And in faith and fear, those who have not committed any important crime, but only thought about it, confess it with contrition and simplicity before the priests of God, open their conscience, lay down the burden of their soul before them, seek saving healing, even for small and harmless wounds... I ask you, most beloved brethren, let us confess each of our sins while the sinner is still in this life, when his confession can be accepted, when satisfaction and absolution performed by the priests are acceptable before the Lord" 1338. St. Athanasius the Great: “As a person who is baptized by a person, that is, a priest, is enlightened by the grace of the Holy Spirit; so he who confesses his sins in repentance accepts the remission of them through the priest by the grace of Jesus Christ” 1339. St. Basil the Great: “It is necessary to confess sins before those who have been entrusted with the administration of the sacraments of God” 1340. “It is much more decent (for a nun) and safer to confess in the presence of an old woman before a presbyter who is able to offer a prudent way of repentance and correction” 1341. St. John Chrysostom: “They still live on earth (priests), but are allowed to manage the heavenly things, they have received such power that God did not give to either the Angels or the Archangels. For it was not said to the Angels: If you bind anything on earth... Even those in power on earth have the power to bind, but only bodies; and this power touches the soul itself and ascends to heaven, for what the priests determine down, God confirms the mountain, and the Master agrees with the opinion of his slaves” 1342. The same teaching about the sacrament of repentance is expounded by: Tertullian 1343, Lactantius, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Cyril of Alexandria 1344, Pope Leo 1345 and others 1346. § 223. Who can perform the sacrament of repentance, and who can begin it? 1. From the presented evidence of St. Scriptures and St. Tradition already shows that the power to perform the sacrament of repentance was first communicated by the Lord to the Apostles alone (Matt. 18:18; John 20:21; 1 Cor. 12:28; 2 Cor. 5:18.20), and from the Apostles it passed to their successors in the Church, bishops and elders (Tit. 1:7) 1347, but in such a way that the clergy are only visible instruments in the performance of the sacrament, which God himself invisibly performs through them. For it is said: the tree that you bind on earth will be bound in heaven: and the tree that you loose on earth will be loose in heaven (Matthew 18:18). In support of this, other evidence from ancient teachers can be cited, for example: Firmilian, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia (233): “The power to forgive sins was granted to the Apostles and Churches, which they founded when they were sent from Christ, and to the bishops who succeeded them by succession” 1348. St. Ambrose: “Who can forgive sins except God alone, who also forgives them through those to whom he has given the power to forgive?” 1349. And elsewhere; “This right is granted to priests alone” 1350. In the third: “people perform only service for the remission of sins, but do not show any power of their own. For they do not release in their own name, but in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; they ask, God grants; human obedience here, and generosity belongs to the supreme power" 1351. St. John Chrysostom about: “The Father gave all judgment to the Son (John 5:22): now I see that the Son gave all this judgment to the priests... The Jewish priests had the power to cleanse the body from leprosy, or better, not to cleanse, but only to testify to those who were cleansed (Lev. Chapter 14)...; but the priests of the new covenant received the power not to be witnesses of being cleansed, but to cleanse, and not the leprosy of the body, but the filthiness of the soul” 1352. Latian, Bishop of Spain (c. 370): “You say: God alone can forgive sins? Fair. But what He does through the priests is His own power” 1353. St. Leo, Pope of Rome: “The intercessor of God and men, the man Lord Jesus Christ, gave the primates of the Church the power to teach the consecration of repentance to the penitent, and through the door of reconciliation to admit them, purified by salvific satisfaction, to the communion of St. Tain. But the Savior Himself constantly participates in this matter” 1354. In general, the ancient teachers of the Church argued that Christ Himself 1355, or the Holy Spirit 1356, resolves sins in the sacrament of repentance, and on earth the visible organs of this power, after St. Apostles, served by bishops 1357 and presbyters 1358. 2. Only Christians can begin the sacrament of repentance, who, after being cleansed of all sins in the sacrament of baptism, sin again and need a new means to cleanse their conscience. But non-Christians cannot approach this sacrament: they must first take advantage of the first Christian sacrament, in which all human sins are resolved, and through it, like through a door, they will enter the Church of Christ in order to have the right to use its other sacraments. This teaching, well known from the constant practice of the Church, was clearly expressed by its ancient teachers, for example: a) St. Cyril of Alexandria: “in two ways, in my opinion, people clothed with the Spirit forgive or retain sins: firstly, when some are admitted to baptism who prove worthy of it by way of life and by testing in the faith, and some who have not yet become worthy are not admitted and not partake of Divine grace; secondly, when at another time they permit or do not permit sins, subjecting the sinning children of the Church to prohibitions, and forgiving those who repent” 1359; b) blessed Augustine: “sin... if committed by a catechumen, is washed away by baptism; and if committed by someone who has been baptized, it is healed by repentance” 1360. § 224. What is required of those approaching the sacrament of repentance? But in order for one who approaches the sacrament of repentance to truly receive remission of sins, the following conditions are required of him, according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church (Right Confession Part 1, answer to questions 112 and 113; Extensive Catholicism on Repentance): 1. Contrition for sins. This is necessary by the very essence of repentance: he who truly repents cannot help but realize the full gravity of his sins and their disastrous consequences, cannot help but feel his guilt before God, his unworthiness, cannot help but grieve in his heart, not be contrite - and where there is no true contrition for sins, there is no true repentance, but only external one. Therefore, even in the Old Testament, God himself, calling people to repentance, demanded from them, as an essential condition for this, contrition for sins: turn to me with all your heart, in fasting and in weeping and in mourning, and rend your hearts, and not your garments, and turn to the Lord your God (Joel. 2, 12. 13; demolished Ps. 50, 19 ). Likewise, in the New Testament, Christ the Savior, wanting to show an example of true repentance in the parables of the Prodigal Son and the Publican, depicts with what deep self-condemnation and contrition for his sins the former returned to his father and cried out: Father, those who have sinned in heaven and before you: and your son is no longer worthy to be called, make me as one of your hired servants. (Luke 15, 18. 19), - and with what humility and contrite heart the last one (i.e., the tax collector) was present in the church of God, standing from afar, not wanting to raise his eyes to heaven: but he was deeply moved, saying: God, be merciful to me a sinner (Luke 18:13). The Holy Fathers and teachers of the Church unanimously recognized contrition for sins as the most essential and necessary accessory of repentance. “You, beloved brothers,” wrote St. Cyprian,... repenting and contrite, consider your sins; acknowledge the grave guilt of your conscience, open the eyes of your heart to the understanding of your crime... The more we have sinned, the more we must mourn” 1361. “If Peter’s lament,” St. also inspired his listeners. Chrysostom, - has blotted out such a great sin, then how can you not blot out your sin if you cry? For to deny one’s Lord was not a small crime, but a great and very important one, and yet tears atoned for the sin. You too cry about your sin, only cry not simply and not for show, but bitterly, as Peter cried; bring down streams of tears from the very depths of your soul, so that the Lord, having mercy, will forgive you your sin” 1362. “Who will give,” cried St. Gregory the Theologian, - is there a flowing source for my head or for the leaders, so that with streams of tears I can cleanse all filth, how much should I mourn my sins? For for mortals and for blackened souls the best medicine is tears, burnt ashes and sackcloth that is safe on earth” 1363. “Those who repent must,” taught St. Basil the Great, - to lament bitterly and other things that are characteristic of repentance, express from the heart" 1364. “Repentance requires that a person first cry out within himself and break his heart, then become a good example for others, and for this he makes himself audible and declares an image of repentance” 1365. As for the properties of contrition for sins: we must take care that it stems not only from fear of punishment for sins, not from ideas in general of the disastrous consequences for us from them in the present and future life, but primarily from love for God, whose will we violated, from the living consciousness that we have offended our greatest Benefactor and Father with our sins, have appeared ungrateful before Him, have become unworthy of Him 1366. Sorrow of the first kind, without the last, would only be slavish sorrow, and not filial, sorrow actually for ourselves, and not for God, and although it could, as a consequence of the fear of God, become for us the beginning of wisdom, that is, the beginning of our conversion from wickedness to virtue, it would not yet be perfect and truly soul-saving 1367. Only the last kind of sorrow, like sorrow according to God, brings unrepentant repentance to salvation (2 Cor. 7:10). Only love for God, which animates a sinner who laments his sins, attracts to him the full favor of God and remission of sins (Luke 7:48; 1 Peter 4:8) 1368. 2. A firm intention to improve your life in the future. This is a necessary consequence of contrition for sins, so it is absolutely impossible to truly grieve for them, to lament not only out of fear of punishment, but also out of love for God, and at the same time not feel a sincere desire and determination to correct your way of life. And in the word of God, this desire and determination is certainly required from the repentant. The preacher of repentance, John the Baptist, seeing many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, said to them: the birth of vipers, who told you to flee from the future wrath? Bring forth fruit worthy of repentance (Matt. 3:7.8). St. Apostle Peter in his speech to the Jews said: repent and turn, and be cleansed from your sins (Acts 3:19). In the Apocalypse, the Angel of the Church of Ephesus was commanded: remember where you slept from, and repent, and do the first thing; otherwise, I will come to you quickly, and I will move your lamp from its place, unless you repent (2:5). The same truth was proclaimed by the teachers of the Church, for example: St. Basil the Great: “It is not he who confesses his sin who said: I have sinned, and then remains in sin; but he who, according to the word of the Psalm, acquired his sin and hated it (Ps. 53:3). What benefit will the care of a doctor bring to the patient when the person suffering from illness clings tightly to what is destructive to life? So there is no benefit from forgiving untruths to those who still commit untruths, and from apologizing for debauchery to those who continue to live dissolutely... The All-Wise Steward of our life wants those who have lived in sins, and then vow to rise to a healthy life, to put an end to the past, and after the sins they have committed, to make some beginning, as if renewed in life through repentance” 1369. “For those who repent, mere removal from sins is not enough for salvation, but they also need fruits worthy of repentance” 1370. St. Ambrose: “whoever brings repentance must not only wash away his sin with tears, but cover up previous sins with better deeds, so that the sin is not imputed to him” 1371. 3. Faith in Jesus Christ and hope in His mercy. For all the prophets testify to this, the remission of sins is received in his name by everyone who believes in him (Acts 10:43), and there is no other name under heaven given among men, by which it is fitting for us to be saved (4:12). He alone reconciled us to God by his death on the cross (Rom. 5:1, 2, 8:24, 25); He alone is our eternal High Priest, and He is also able to save to the end those who come to God through him, who is always alive to intercede for us (Heb. 7:25). Next, without faith in Christ the Savior and hope in Him, no matter how deep our contrition for sins and firm our intention to correct our lives, we would never be worthy to receive remission of sins from God (decided §§ 153. 197). 4. Oral confession of sins before a priest 1372. The need for this confession is self-evident from the fact that the priest must resolve sins in the sacrament of repentance, and in order to resolve or not resolve any sins, one must know them in advance. And since the Lord himself gave the shepherds of the Church the Divine power to knit and decide (John 20, 22. 23), and, without a doubt, not with the purpose that they knit and decide according to unaccountable arbitrariness, but so that, on the contrary, they forgive the sins of those who can be forgiven, judging by the nature of their repentance and the degree of their sins, and not forgive those who turn out to be unworthy of forgiveness, according to their own unrepentance or the gravity of one’s crimes: then the confession of sins before the shepherds of the Church in the sacrament of repentance, which is necessarily assumed by the God-given power to bind and decide, should rightly be considered a Divine institution. This institution always existed and was observed in the Church. St. Irenaeus narrates how some women, carried away into heresy and impiety by the Gnostics, upon their return to the Church, confessed (εξωμολογήσαντο) their sins and errors - while others, not wanting to undergo this test, fell into despair 1373. Tertullian takes up arms against those who, out of false shame, did not want to confess their sins, and notes that you can hide from people, but you cannot hide from God, that it is better to be allowed openly than to be condemned in secret, and that those who do not confess their sins will perish in the same way as a sick person perishes who, out of shame, does not reveal his illness to the doctor who could heal him 1374. St. Cyprian in one place complains about some priests who dared to allow access to the priesthood. the meal of people who fell into serious crimes, but did not confess them, did not repent 1375; in another, he praises the sincerity and sincerity with which many believers opened their consciences before the priests, confessed their spiritual wounds to them, and asked for saving healing 1376; in the third, he begs Christians to confess their sins in this life, while it is still possible to obtain permission from the priest 1377. Origen spoke just as clearly in the third century about this confession of sins. We read from him, for example: “there is also remission of sins, although heavy and difficult, through repentance, when a sinner washes his bed with tears (Ps. 6:7), and he has tears like bread day and night (Ps. 41:4), and when he is not ashamed to reveal his sin to the priest of the Lord and asks him for healing” 1378. Or: “If we have sinned, then we must say: I have known my iniquity, and my sin has not been covered, reh: let us confess my iniquities to the Lord (Ps. 31:5). If we do this and reveal our sins not only to God, but also to those who can heal our wounds and sins, then our sins will be blotted out by the one who says: “Behold, like a cloud, your iniquities are taken away, and like darkness, your sins” (Is. 44:22)” 1379. In the fourth century they preached the same thing: St. Basil and St. Athanasius the Great, - we have already seen their evidence in 1380, - St. Ambrose 1381, St. James of Nisibia 1382 and St. Gregory of Nyssa. The latter inspires the repentant: “shed bitter and abundant tears before me, so that I too will unite my tears with yours; accept the priest as a partner in your sorrow as a father... The priest grieves as much for the sin of the one whom he has by faith instead of a son, just as Jacob grieved when he saw Joseph's clothes... Why should you rely more on the one who gave birth to you in God than on those who gave birth to you in the body. Feel free to show him your secrets; reveal to him the secrets of the spirit, like secret wounds to a doctor: he will take care of your health too” 1383. Not finding it necessary to cite the evidence of other, subsequent writers about the truth we are considering 1384, we note that its undoubted confirmation is provided by the rules of entire Councils, local and ecumenical, defining the circumstances of confession, image, time, place, etc. Thus, the second rule of the Laodicean Council reads: “those who fall into various sins, and remain in prayer, confession and repentance, and are completely converted from evil deeds, after the time of repentance has been given to them as they have sinned, for the sake of God’s mercy and goodness, be brought into fellowship” 1385. In Canon 102 of the Council of Trullo we read: “those who have received from God the power to decide and bind must consider the quality of the sin and the readiness of the sinner for conversion, and thus use the healing appropriate to the illness, so that, without observing measures in both, they do not lose the salvation of the ill person.” § 225. The visible side of the sacrament of repentance, its invisible actions and their scope When, therefore, a repentant Christian, with sincere contrition for his sins, with a firm intention to correct his life in the future, with living faith in Christ the Savior and hope in Him, comes to the shepherd of the Church and confesses his iniquities before him: the servant of God heeds the confession, and in the name of the Lord Jesus allows, forgives, forgives all the sins of the truly repentant. Therefore: 1. The visible side of the sacrament of repentance includes significant actions: a) confession of sins, which is pronounced by the repentant Christian before the clergyman, and - b) resolution of sins, pronounced by the clergyman, after hearing the confession. This permission, according to the order of the Orthodox Church, is expressed by the clergyman in the following words: “Our Lord and God Jesus Christ. by the grace and generosity of his love for mankind, may he forgive you, child, all your sins, and I, an unworthy priest, by His power given to me, forgive and absolve you from all your sins, in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen". 2. The invisible, grace-filled actions of the sacrament of repentance are: a) immediate - remission of sins and justification (John 20, 23; removed. Luke 18, 13. 14; Ezek. 18, 21; Joel. 2, 31), and after that - b) reconciliation with God (Luke 15, 17-24; removed. Rom. 5, 1. 2; 2 Cor. 5, 19 ), c) liberation from eternal punishment for sins and hope for eternal salvation (Luke 19, 7–9; 23, 42. 43). The idea of these actions, which we have already encountered more than once in the sayings of the fathers, previously cited, is also clearly expressed: St. Basil the Great: “Defiled by some sin, although at the present time he loses his purity, in the future he is not deprived of the hope of purification through repentance” 1386. “If we expose sin by confession, we will make it a dry troscot, worthy of being consumed by cleansing fire 1387. St. John Chrysostom: “Carnal parents cannot provide any help to their children when they insult some famous and powerful person; but priests reconcile their spiritual children not with nobles, not with kings, but with an irritated God” 1388. “Have you sinned? Enter the church and atone for your sin. No matter how many times you fall in the square, you get up every time: so no matter how many times you sin, repent of your sin, do not despair; If you sin another time, repent another time, so that through negligence you do not completely lose hope for the promised benefits. You are very old, and have you sinned? - enter (the church), repent: here is a doctor’s office, not a court of justice; here they do not torture, but give forgiveness of sins" 1389. St. Leo, Pope of Rome: “The manifold mercy of God so condescends to the downfalls of men that not only through the grace of baptism, but also through the healing of repentance, the hope of eternal life is restored, and those who did not keep the gift of rebirth, condemning themselves with their own sentence, achieve remission of sins, although according to the dispensation of Divine grace, they can only receive this mercy of God only through intercession priests... It is very useful and necessary that the guilt of sins before the last day be resolved by priestly prayer" 1390. 3. One must know that the invisible actions of grace in the sacrament of repentance, in their breadth and power, extend to all human iniquities, and there is no sin that cannot be forgiven to people if only they sincerely repent of it and confess it with living faith in the Lord Jesus and hope in His merits. For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Matthew 9:13; 18:11); to bear the will before your heavenly Father, that one may perish from the little ones... (18, 14), - said the Savior, - and, no matter how great the fall of the ap. Peter, forgave him too when he truly repented. The Lord is patient with us, St. also taught. Apostles, not even though some will perish, but let all come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). If anyone sins, the imams intercede with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And that cleansing is for our sins, not for ours specifically, but also for the whole world (1 John 2:1.2). If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous, may he forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (- 1, 9). And it is known that St. Peter called to repentance even those Jews who crucified the true Messiah (Acts 2:28.37. 38), and then called Simon the Magus, the ancestor of all heretics (Acts 8:22); and St. Paul also permitted the repentant incestuous man, having first subjected him to only temporary excommunication (2 Cor. 2:7). If the Word of God mentions blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which will not be forgiven by man (Matthew 12:31), and mortal sin, for the forgiveness of which it is not even commanded to pray (1 John 5:16): then we must remember that the name of the first means stubborn resistance to the obvious truth of God 1391, complete unbelief 1392 and unrepentance 1393, and under the name of the latter also a stiff-necked rebellion against piety and truth, and persistent persistence in uncorrection 1394. Consequently, in both cases, only the moral impossibility of remission of sins is assumed - an impossibility on the part of the sinners themselves, and not on the part of grace. And as soon as sinners sincerely repent of these sins, they will receive forgiveness from God. “For,” says St. Chrysostom blasphemed the Holy Spirit, and this guilt was forgiven by those who repented. Many of those who spewed blasphemies against the Spirit subsequently believed, and everything was forgiven to them” 1395. In the same way, the Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council speak about the possibility of forgiveness of mortal sins: “there is a sin leading to death when some, having sinned, remain uncorrected. Worse than this is when they stiff-neckedly rebel against piety and truth, preferring mammon to obedience before God, and not adhering to His statutes and rules. The Lord Jesus is not among them unless they humble themselves and become sober from their fall into sin. It is more appropriate for them to approach God, and with a contrite heart, ask for forgiveness of this sin and forgiveness, and not to be vainglorious in giving unrighteously. For the Lord is near to the brokenhearted (Ps. 33:19)” (rules 5). The Holy Orthodox Church clearly expressed this belief in the possibility of remission of all sins through the sacrament of repentance when, firstly, it condemned the Montanists who claimed that it did not have the power to resolve in repentance some serious sins, such as: idolatry, murder, carnal impurity; secondly, she condemned the Novatians, who first took away this power from the Church in relation to some who had fallen away from the faith during persecution, and then in relation to all mortal sins 1396 and even venial sins 1397; finally, when at the councils she defined the rules according to which, although sinners are subject to various, sometimes very serious, penances for their sins, but, after proper execution of the penances, they are certainly awarded the permission of their sins, no matter how great they may be 1398. § 226. Penances, their origin and use in the Church 1. The name penance (επιτίμια) refers to prohibitions or punishments (2 Cor. 2:6), which, according to church rules, the clergyman, as a spiritual doctor, determines to some of the repentant Christians to heal their moral illnesses (Ecumenical Council VI, reg. 102). These are, for example, the most well-known types of penance: special fasting beyond what is required for everyone, daily going to church for all church services, home prayer combined with a certain number of bows, giving alms, traveling to St. places, excommunication from the communion of St. secrets for a longer or shorter time (Right. Ex. part 1, answer to question 113). Penances are not prescribed to all, but only to some repentant Christians: namely, to those who, either due to the severity and quality of their sins, or due to the nature of repentance, find themselves in need of these spiritual healings for their complete healing (St. Gregory. n. 5). 2. The Church received the power to impose penances on some penitents and, as it were, to bind them for a time with its prohibitions from the Lord himself, at the same time as she received from Him the power to forgive sins. For the Lord said to St. To the Apostles, and subsequently, and their successors, not only: if you loose on earth, they will be loosed in heaven, but also: if you bind on earth, they will be bound in heaven (Matthew 18:18), - not only: whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven, but together: and whose sins you hold, they hold fast (John 20:23). The Holy Apostles, indeed, used this power. So St. Paul, having heard about an incestuous man who had appeared among the Corinthian Christians, and wanting to heal him, subjected the wicked man to the strictest penance, ordered him to be excommunicated from the Church, to hand him over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit would be saved (1 Cor. 5:1-5), and then, when the penance had a saving effect and the culprit repented, he forgave him and commanded the Corinthians again accept the repentant into church fellowship (2 Cor. 2:6-8). 3. Holy Church, in succession from St. Apostolov, also used penance from the very beginning of its existence. This is known: a) From the testimony of St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian 1399 and Apostolic decrees 1400. b) From the rite of public repentance that existed in the ancient Church. According to this rite, the penitents were divided into four classes, each of which stood under a special penance: the class of mourners, who did not have the right to be present at public worship, and were prostrate on the church porch and, crying, asked those entering the church to pray to God for them; to the class of listeners who were allowed to enter the church vestibule and participate in the hearing of St. Scriptures and teachings while the Liturgy of the Catechumens was being celebrated; to the class of kneelers who entered the church itself and were present at the service a little longer, but usually kneeled at the doors of the church; and to the class of those who stood in the congregation, who stood with the faithful throughout the entire liturgy, but could not participate with them in the communion of St. Mysteries of Christ 1401. c) From numerous rules, conciliar and patristic, regarding various types of penances, their properties, degrees, changes, etc. 1402. Penances, although, in essence, are punishments, but, in meaning, punishments are only corrective, medical, paternal (παιδεία), exactly the same as those the Apostle speaks of: the Lord loves him, he punishes (παιδεύει) (Heb. 12:6), and in another place: from the Lord he punishes ( παιδευόμεθα), lest we be condemned with the world (1 Cor. 12:32). And not punishment in the proper sense (τιμωρία), as the Roman Church teaches, which a repentant sinner supposedly must temporarily suffer in order to satisfy the offended truth of God for his sins 1403. In short: penances are cures for sins, not rewards, not satisfaction for sins with eternal truth 1404. I. To prove the first thought, which determines the true meaning of penances, we call as witnesses: 1) St. Apostle Paul. He, as we have seen, imposed a grave punishment on the Corinthian incest, which he himself called penance - he ordered that he be excommunicated from the Church, handed over to Satan for the use of the flesh... for what purpose? May the spirit be saved (1 Cor. 5:1-5). And then, as soon as he noticed that the penance produced sorrow and repentance in the sinner, he immediately removed it (2 Cor. 2:7). Next, the Apostle punished not in order to actually punish and through punishment to satisfy the truth of God, but to correct it, and when the medicine had a beneficial effect, to take it away, precisely because its further use, as already unnecessary, instead of benefit, would not only cause harm to the patient, and not how much (excessive) sorrow would be sacrificed to him (2 Cor. 2:7) 1405. 2) Rules of St. Councils, ecumenical and local, and St. Fathers. From these rules it is clear with indisputable clarity: a) what. If the ancient teachers of the church considered penances to be punishments, then they were only corrective punishments, and directly called them spiritual healings; b) that when imposing penances on sinners, they were not concerned with justly punishing one more, the other less, according to the crimes of each, in order to properly satisfy the justice of God for sins, but precisely to adapt penances, as medicine, to the nature and degree of spiritual illnesses; c) that the only purpose of penance before God and before the Church was not considered to be any satisfaction with God’s truth for sins, but only to heal sinners, to protect them from sins for the future; d) that, therefore, they did not necessarily wait until the sinner suffered the full punishment determined for him, and thus satisfied the truth of God, but, on the contrary, if they noticed the beneficial effect of these punishments on the sinner, they reduced them, shortened the time of penances, or even completely removed them; d) that, finally, penances were not imposed for all sins, but only for some of the most important ones, and therefore, they did not at all consider penances to be satisfactions of God’s truth: otherwise such satisfaction, although to varying degrees, should have been demanded for every sin, large or small. Here are some extracts from these rules: “Those who have received from God the power to bind and decide must consider the quality of the sin, and the readiness of the sinner for conversion, and so use the healing appropriate to the illness, so that, without observing measures in both, they do not lose the salvation of the sick person. For the disease of sin is not the same, but is varied and diverse, and produces many branches of harm, from which evil develops abundantly, and further spreads until it is stopped by the power of the healer” - (VI ecumenical rights. 102; demolished. I ecumenical pr. 12; Ancyra. pr. 5; Carthage. 52). “Why should one who demonstrates spiritual healing art, firstly, consider the disposition of the sinner and observe whether he is heading towards health, or, on the contrary, by his own morals he attracts illness to himself, and how, meanwhile, he establishes his behavior: and if he does not resist the doctor, and heals the spiritual wound through the application of prescribed medicines: in this case, according to his dignity, show mercy to him” (ibid.; demolished by Vasil. ve. right 3). “For God and He who has received pastoral leadership are all concerned about bringing back the lost sheep and healing those wounded by the serpent. We must not drive further along the rapids of despair, lower the reins to relaxation of life and to neglect: but we must certainly, in some way, either through harsh and astringent, or through softer and easier medical means, counteract the illness, and strive to heal the wound: and experience the fruits of repentance and wisely manage a person called to heavenly enlightenment.” (ibid.). “Just as in bodily healing the goal of the medical art is one, the return of health to the sick, but the way of healing is different: for according to the difference in ailments, each disease is accompanied by a suitable method of treatment: so in other diseases, due to the multitude and variety of passions, a variety of healing care is necessary, which produces healing according to the ailment... Therefore, anyone who wants to apply decent healing to an ailing part of the soul must, firstly, consider in which part the illness occurred; then, according to decency, apply medicine to the suffering person so that, out of ignorance of the healing method, medicine is not given to one part when the disease is in another” (Grigor. Nissk. Right. 1). “In any kind of crime, first of all, one must look at the disposition of the person being healed, and for healing, it is not time that is sufficient for healing (for what kind of healing can come from time?), but the will of the one who heals himself through repentance” (Gregory of the Holy Orders 8). “For those who undergo repentance more zealously, and by their life show a return to the good, which is permissible for arranging the useful in the church’s economy, shorten the time of hearing and quickly lead them to conversion: similarly, shorten the time of this, and sooner admit them to communion, in accordance with how he learns by his own test the condition of the one being healed” (- right. 4). “At the discretion of conversion, the continuation of penance will be shortened for him, so that, instead of nine, for each degree of repentance, either eight, or seven, or six, or just five years will be assigned, if by the greatness of repentance he anticipates the time, and in zeal in correcting himself surpasses those who, over a long period of time, are less active in cleansing themselves from defilements. Thus, even if there is true conversion, let the number of years not be observed, but with by shortening the time, let the repentant be led to return to the Church and to the communion of the Holy Mysteries” (- reg. 5, demolished. I Ecumenical reg. 12; Basil. vel. pr. 74). “A lot happens from irritation from sinful deeds and all kinds of evils. But our fathers were pleased not to go into much detail about some of them, and they did not recognize that healing all sins from irritation that occur requires a lot of care. Scripture forbids not only a slight wound, but also all slander or blasphemy (Col. 3:8; Eph. 4:31), and everything similar that occurs from irritation: but they are only against evil- acts of murder put protection in penances” (- rights. 5). And in order to understand how penances can serve as a cure against spiritual illnesses, for this we must take into account the following: a) Penances, as church punishments, naturally humble the sinner’s pride, teach him to become more deeply aware of his guilt before God and before the Church, arouse in him hatred of sins and a desire to correct himself. And next, penances indicate to repentant Christians a certain field for further exercise and greater strengthening of all those good feelings and intentions that penitents have during their repentance, and which should serve as the beginning in the matter of their correction. Let us recall only the four degrees of penitents that existed in the ancient Church. b) Penances, for the most part, consist of some kind of pious exercises that are directly directed against the known passions and vices of the sinner, and therefore directly contribute to their eradication. Thus, abstinence and fasting are prescribed as penance for an intemperate and voluptuous person; to a stingy or predator - giving alms 1406; absent-minded and chasing worldly pleasures - frequent going to church, reading St. Scriptures, home prayer, etc. It is obvious that the more each of these sinners fulfills the penance assigned to him with good disposition, the more he will wean himself from his previous weaknesses and inclinations, and acquire the opposite skill. c) Penances, as church punishments, striking some sinners, admonish and frighten others, and thereby protect them from similar sins, contribute to the correction of morals between members of the Church, and at the same time to the protection of its canons and decrees against the willfulness and disobedience of erring children 1407. I. The teaching of the Roman Church is unfair that penances are punishments in the proper sense, albeit temporary, which the penitent must endure in order to bring some satisfaction to the truth of God for his sins. This - 1) It is contrary to the Christian teaching about satisfaction with the righteousness of God and the justification of the sinner. The Word of God teaches that complete and complete satisfaction with the truth of God for all the sins of the human race was brought once and for all by Christ the Savior; that He suffered the full brunt of the suffering that sinners had to endure for their iniquities (Isa. 53:5; Rom. 3:25; Col. 1:20; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 2:2), and became an eternal high priest, who can save to the end those who come through him to God, who are always alive, to intercede for them (Heb. 7, 25) (§ 153). It teaches, on the other hand, that in order to justify sinners before God, that is, for them to assimilate the redemptive merits of Christ the Savior, two conditions are required from sinners themselves: first, repentance and faith: repent and believe in the gospel (Mark 1:15; Acts 2:38), and we believe in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by the faith of Christ (Gal. 2:16); Rom. 8, 24. 25; 10, 9); and secondly, as evidence and fruits of repentance and faith, good works: a person is justified by works, and not by faith alone (James 2:24); in Christ Jesus there is neither circumcision as is possible, nor uncircumcision, but faith pursued by love (Gal. 5:6; Matt. 7:21); It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the creators of the law (these) will be justified (Rom. 2:13) (§§ 197. 198). By fulfilling these conditions, by which the merits of Jesus Christ are assimilated, a sinner can truly appease God and satisfy Him; not, however, in the sense that repentance, faith and good deeds of a person had the meaning of an atoning sacrifice before God in themselves, but only in the sense that they assimilate to us the ready merits of our Redeemer, who fully satisfied the righteousness of God for us. But to assert that repentant sinners themselves, in addition to living faith and good deeds necessary for assimilation of the Savior’s merits, should undergo some kind of punishment in order to satisfy the truth of God for their sins, means expressing one of two things: either that the Savior did not suffer enough for sinners, that the satisfaction He brought for the sins of the whole world is still incomplete and must be filled with the suffering of the repentant sinners themselves; or that a person’s faith and good deeds are not sufficient for him to assimilate the merits of the Savior... To do otherwise would be to overthrow the Christian doctrine of atonement and justification. If St. John the Baptist demanded from repentant sinners fruits worthy of repentance (Matt. 3:8) 1408: then these fruits did not mean punishments to satisfy the righteousness of God for previous sins, but good deeds that would testify to the sincerity of the repentance of sinners, and which, we repeat, can really appease and, in a certain sense, satisfy God. John the Baptist, as he himself explains his demand, specifically inspired the repentant to change their former vicious lifestyle, to henceforth fulfill their duties and act piously (Luke 3:8-15). Likewise, if the Scripture says that the Ninevites, after the preaching of the prophet Jonah, by universal fasting and bitter tears earned themselves forgiveness from God (Jon. 3:10), that Nebuchadnezzar was commanded to atone for their sins by alms (Dan. 4:24), and that in general alms cleanses from sin and delivers from death (Tov. 4, 10) 1409: then it is in no way possible to assert that all of the above means had value in the eyes of the heavenly Judge in themselves, as satisfaction of His righteousness, and not solely because they served before Him and can serve as living evidence of the sincere repentance of sinners and the fruits of their conversion to God. How can a person’s true repentance be expressed if not in tears, not in sighs, not in prayer, not in fasting, not in almsgiving and other pious actions? The Lord himself confirmed this when he said: turn to me with all your heart, in fasting, and in weeping, and in mourning. And rend your hearts, and not your garments, and turn to the Lord your God: for he is merciful and generous, slow to anger and abounding in mercy, and repent of your evil (Joel 2:12, 13). God is pleased with the true repentance of a sinner, expressed in fasting, prayer, almsgiving, etc. 1410, and He forgives sins in this case solely because of His infinite goodness towards those who repent, and not at all because of His truth, which is supposedly satisfied with the said actions. Could the Ninevites and Nebuchadnezzar satisfy the infinite truth for all their sins at such an insignificant price? 2) Contrary to the concept of God's truth. If, as the Latins also believe, a completely sufficient and even abundant sacrifice has already been brought to her for all the sins of the world by Christ the Savior (Gal. 3:13, etc.), and yet it is also required that repentant sinners not only believe in the Savior in order to assimilate His merits to themselves (Rom. 3:26), and bear fruits worthy of repentance, but also endure at least At least, temporary punishments for one’s sins are to satisfy eternal truth: this means that it punishes twice for the same sins and accepts double satisfaction. If, secondly, such satisfactions are really necessary, according to the judgment of eternal justice, on the part of the repentant sinners themselves: then, without a doubt, on the part of all sinners and for all sins, although to varying degrees, according to the difference of sins - and yet the Latins teach that such temporary punishments are assigned by eternal justice only to some sinners, the more guilty, while others are forgiven in repentance both their sins and all punishment. If, finally, let us say again, such satisfactions to the truth of God are necessary on the part of the repentant sinners themselves: then, without a doubt, they are necessary both when sinners for the first time seek cleansing from sins in the sacrament of baptism, and when they wish to be cleansed another time in the font of repentance, although in the latter case there should be more satisfaction, because the repentant are more guilty. Meanwhile, the Latins teach that in baptism God forgives sinners all sins and all punishment, without demanding any satisfaction from them; demands satisfaction only in the sacrament of repentance from Christian sinners, as more guilty, and while forgiving them sins and eternal punishments for sins, does not always forgive temporary punishments 1411. It is another matter to assert that a sinner, having received remission of sins in the sacrament of repentance, must still bear fruits worthy of repentance, must cleanse himself from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit and correct his way of life, and that for this purpose God can send and impose various punishments on the sinner, either directly or through the pastors of the Church. But these will already be medical punishments, aimed at the moral benefit of the punished themselves. In vain do the Latins point to the examples of Adam (Wis. 10:1; Gen. 3:10), Moses, Aaron (Num. 20:11.12.24; Deut. 32:49) and especially David (2 Sam. 12:13), for whom God forgave their sins, but also determined temporary punishments 1412 . Why do we call all these punishments the actions of a formidable Judge, demanding retribution for insulting His truth, and not the actions of a merciful Father, who, forgiving his criminal son, if he punishes him, then only for his own correction, to protect him from future similar crimes, or, at least, as an example to other children? It must be remembered that St. Scripture strictly distinguishes between the punishments with which God strikes the wicked, and the punishments that He sends on those who are faithful to Him and who turn to Him with all their hearts: it represents the first as the actions of the wrath of God and the truth that requires satisfaction (Jer. 23:19; Rom. 1, 18, etc.); the latter - by paternal punishments (παιδεϋματα), medical ones, sent only to correct people, to keep them from evil, even through the fear of punishment, to strengthen them in goodness and similar purposes (1 Cor. 11:32; Heb. 12:6-8; 1 Peter 1:6.7; James 1:12). If I love them, says the Lord himself, I rebuke and punish (παιδεύω), and immediately shows the purpose of these punishments: be jealous and repent (Apoc. 3:19). That's why St. Paul, together with Solomon (Prov. 3:11), instructs the faithful not to neglect the punishments of God: my son, do not be overwhelmed by the punishment of the Lord; weaken below, we will be rebuked by him (Heb. 12:5). 3) Contrary to the teaching of the entire ancient Church. There are quite a lot of conciliar and patristic rules regarding penances, and in none of them are they called satisfaction for sins, but only cures for sins, as we have already seen 1413. The same teaching was expounded by the Fathers of the Church in their private writings. For example, one of the universal teachers, St. John Chrysostom, who talked so much about repentance, preaches with all clarity - a) That God forgives the sins of Christians who repent, that is, sins committed after baptism, without any punishment. “The Prodigal Son represents the image of the fallen after baptism; and that he means those who fell after baptism can be seen from this: he is called a son, and no one can be called a son without baptism. He lived in his father’s house and received a share in all his father’s property, but before baptism he cannot take advantage of his father’s property or receive an inheritance. Thus, all this points us to the class of the faithful... When the prodigal son, having gone to someone else’s side and having learned from experience how disastrous it is to be removed from his father’s house, returned, his father did not bear any grudge, but accepted him with open arms. Why is this so? Because he was a father, not a judge. And now there were rejoicings and feasts, and holidays, and the whole house became bright and joyful! What are you saying? Is this payment for vice? Not for vice, man, but for returning (to the house); not for sin, but for repentance; not for bad deeds, but for correction. And what’s even more, when the eldest son was upset by this, the father kindly reassured him, saying: you are always with me, but this one was lost, and found, dead, and alive (Luke 15, 31. 32). When, he says, it is necessary to save a perishing person, then this is not a time of judgment and strict examination, but only philanthropy and forgiveness. Not a single doctor, instead of giving medicine to a sick person, subjects him to penalties and punishment for a disorderly life... So, knowing that (God) not only does not turn away from those who turn, but also accepts them no worse than the virtuous; which not only does not punish, but also Himself goes to look for the lost and, having found them, rejoices (over them) more than over those who were safe, let us neither despair about sins nor overly hope for good deeds.” And in another conversation: “The Divine Scripture says: speak up your iniquities first, so that you may be justified (Isa. 43:26): say sin in order to resolve sin. This requires no labor, no verbosity, no monetary outlay, or anything else like that: say the word, open yourself to sin, and say: I have sinned” 1414. b) That through repentance and self-condemnation we can, if we want, free ourselves not only from eternal, but also from temporary punishments, and God subjects us to the latter only when we ourselves do not want to repent, moreover, with the goal of healing us from sins. “Even if they had reasoned for themselves,” says the Apostle, they would not have been condemned (1 Cor. 11:31). He did not say: if we punished ourselves and suffered for guilt (εί έκολάζομεν εαυτούς, εί έτιμαρούμεθα), but only: if we wanted to acknowledge our sins, condemn ourselves and confess iniquities, then we would be freed both from this (καί τής ένταύθα) and from future punishment (τιμωρίας). For he who condemns himself doubly appeases God: both by the fact that he recognizes his sins, and by the fact that he becomes less inclined to sin in the future. And since we do not want to do even this easy thing, as we should have done, then, not wanting to condemn us with the world, but sparing us, God punishes us here, where the punishment is temporary and the consolation is great, since cleansing from sins is possible, and a sweet hope remains that makes the present easier. Therefore, wanting together to comfort the weak, and to make others more zealous, (the Apostle) says: we are judged by the Lord and punished 1415. He did not say: we are being executed (κολαζομεθα); did not say: we are struck like criminals (τιμωρούμεθα), but we are punished like children (παιδευόμεθα). For this is more of an admonition than an accusation, more of a healing than a punishment, more of a correction than a beating” 1416. c) That the entire duty of pastors and spiritual fathers is to heal sinners from their sins with punishments and other measures, and not actually execute them for their sins. “Christians are primarily forbidden before everyone to use violence to correct those who fall into sin. Worldly judges exercise great power over people who break the laws and restrain them from committing crimes against their will. But in the Church we must turn to a better way of life not through oppression, but through conviction. And the laws have not given us such power as to prohibit sinners from sinning; but even if they were given, we cannot in any case take advantage of it: since God rewards only those who abstain from sin freely, and not under compulsion. Therefore, it takes a lot of skill to ensure that the weak, obeying their convictions, voluntarily agree to accept healing from the priests, and even more so that they thank them for the healing. For if anyone, having been bound, breaks the bonds and gives himself up to running (and everyone, having freedom, can do this), he will increase the evil for himself. If he despises words that cut like iron; With such contempt he will add a new wound to himself, and the reason for healing will turn into the cause of a grave illness. And no one can treat him under compulsion and against the wishes of the patient. What to do? If you act leniently with those who must be subjected to cruel treatment, and do not allow deeper wounds to those who need it, then the wound will heal in part, but not in part... Why does a shepherd need to have a lot of prudence and many eyes in order to observe the state of the soul from everywhere. For how many become bitter and despair of their salvation because they cannot endure cruel healing; so, on the contrary, there are also those who, having not been adequately punished for their sins, become careless, become more depraved, and sin with greater boldness. So the priest’s duty is: not to leave anything without testing, but through a strict examination of everything, to choose means that are consistent with the state of souls, so that the effort does not remain unsuccessful” 1417. d) That, finally, prayer, alms and other pious exercises prescribed to sinners as penances are only different ways of repentance, different healing means for healing spiritual ulcers. “We said that there are many and different ways of repentance, so that salvation would be easy for us... Are you a sinner? Enter the church, say: I have sinned, and you will atone for the sin. As an example, we presented David, who sinned and made amends for his sin. Then they suggested another way, that is, crying about sin, and they said: what kind of work is this? You don’t need to spend money, or go a long way, or do anything else like that, but you just need to cry about sin... Then we pointed out the third path of repentance, and presented the Pharisee and the publican from Scripture - that is, that the Pharisee, having arrogantly boasted, lost his righteousness, and the publican, showing a sense of humility, came out with the fruit of righteousness and, without using any labor, became righteous - he gave words, but received affairs. Now let's go further and introduce the fourth path of repentance. What is this path? This is alms, the queen of virtues, which very quickly takes people to heaven itself, the best protector” 1418. “But there is another way of repentance for you, also very convenient, through which you can be freed from your sins. Pray every hour, do not become exhausted in prayer, and without laziness implore God’s love for mankind, and God will not turn away from someone who constantly prays, but will forgive you your sins and fulfill your petitions” 1419. “Count how many healing remedies there are to heal your ulcers, apply them all one after another incessantly: self-abasement, confession, forgetfulness of malice, thanksgiving for the sorrows sent to you, helping the poor with money and things, and finally unceasing prayer... So, will we be worthy of any apology when, having so many paths leading to heaven, and so many means for healing ulcers? spiritual, received after baptism, we remain in these ulcers”? 1420. True, some of the ancient teachers in the West, such as Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose and Augustine, sometimes called penances satisfactions 1421; but not in the sense that penances themselves serve as some kind of expiatory price or sacrifice for sins for Divine justice, but in the fact that they, like paternal punishments, arouse true repentance in sinners, with which the Heavenly Father is appeased; and how pious exercises provide repentants with a field and opportunity to express and testify before God all the truth and depth of their repentance, which alone actually satisfies Him 1422. Thus, Tertullian, speaking about the need for confession, which was performed publicly in the primacy of the Church, and which prescribed different degrees of penance for sinners, expresses: “satisfaction is commensurate with confession (in the designated sense), repentance is born from confession, God is appeased by repentance” 1423. St. Cyprian exhorted the fallen: “let us turn to the Lord with all our hearts, and expressing repentance for sin through true sorrows, let us implore God’s mercy. May the soul prostrate itself before Him, may contrition satisfy Him (illi moestitia satisfaciat), may all hope be placed in Him. As we must ask Him, He Himself said: turn to me with all your heart, in fasting and in weeping and in mourning, and rend your hearts, and not your garments (Joel 2:12). Let us turn to the Lord with all our hearts: we will atone for sin and His offense through fasting and in lamentation and weeping, as He himself exhorts... Bring complete repentance, prove the sorrow of your contrite and weeping soul... For those there is repentance that satisfies, and whoever rejects repentance for sin closes the door of satisfaction” 1424. Exactly the same with the blessed one. Augustine, following St. Ambrose 1425, says that a repentant sinner satisfies God for his sins with tears of repentance, the sacrifice of a contrite and humble heart 1426. § 228. Injustice of the teaching of the Roman Church on indulgences With the fall of the teaching of the Roman Church about penances, as temporary punishments to satisfy the truth of God, the teaching of the said Church about indulgences (relaxations or leniency) inevitably falls. The main features of this teaching are the following: I) in the sacrament of repentance, God, while remitting sins and eternal punishments for sins to repentants, does not always forgive temporary punishments, which, whether imposed by the confessor (in penances), or even not imposed, must certainly be suffered by the sinner, whether here on earth, or beyond the grave in purgatory, to satisfy the truth of God; II) but since a person is weak and his strength is insufficient for such a purpose, then these temporary punishments can be removed from him and replaced in the eyes of eternal Truth by the abundant merits of Christ the Savior and the Saints who make up the treasury of the Church; III) the power to make these substitutions and thus free sinners not only living, but also dead, from temporary punishments, i.e. the power to give indulgences, belongs to the Church 1427. I. We have already seen the injustice of the first thought: it is contrary to the Christian teaching about the satisfaction of God’s truth and the justification of the sinner, it is contrary to the teaching of the entire ancient Church, it is contrary even to the common concept of God’s truth and the forgiveness or remission of sins. All that remains to be said here is: 1) If penances are not temporary punishments that a repentant sinner supposedly must endure to satisfy the righteousness of God, then there is no need to remove them, or more precisely, there is no need to replace them before God with the abundant merits of Christ the Savior and the Saints. And next, the doctrine of indulgences is built on sand. 2) If, on the contrary, penances are only paternal punishments, with the goal of healing spiritual illnesses: then they, like medicines, can be removed, or weakened, or replaced with other medicines according to the condition of those being treated, as prescribed by the rules of St. Councils and how the Orthodox Church has acted until now. But to remove penances without paying attention to the moral state of those being treated, to give indulgences to sinners without discerning whether they have corrected themselves or not at all, means to abuse power to the detriment of the sinners themselves. 3) If the actions of penances, as medical punishments, are limited to the limits of this life, when sinners can still be healed and corrected, and do not extend into the afterlife 1428: then giving indulgences in favor of the dead, to free them from the supposed purgatory, is completely unnecessary. 4) Only those imposed on someone can be removed; but to remove from the sinner punishments that were not imposed on him, or that were imposed, only not by us, but by God himself, for example, in the supposed purgatory: this, on the one hand, is strange, on the other hand, it is illegal. I. In the reasoning of the second thought it should be noted: 1) The Savior’s merits are truly endless and constitute an inexhaustible treasure of grace that justifies and saves sinners. But these merits can be assimilated and imputed to people only under the condition of their faith, true repentance for sins and good deeds, the fruits of faith and repentance, or at least a firm intention to correct themselves and henceforth live holy (§§ 197. 198), as the pastors of the Orthodox Church do when resolving sinners in the sacrament of repentance (§ 224). But to impute the merits of the Savior to sinners without fulfilling the specified conditions on the part of the sinners themselves, to free them, by virtue of these merits, from punishments for sins, albeit temporary, to which God himself subjects sinners in his own truth, in short, to give indulgences to people is a completely illegal matter. 2) The merits of the Saints, no matter how great, can never be considered overdue, excessive, unnecessary for themselves, and imputed to other people, sinners for their justification in the eyes of God’s truth. For, firstly, all the exploits of the Saints do not entirely belong to them, but were accomplished with the help of the grace of God, and they themselves have value before the court of eternal Truth from the merits of Christ. Secondly, the commandment of the law of the Gospel, which leads to the belly, is very broad (Ps. 119:96), so that no matter how much a person fulfills it, there will always be a lot left in it that he has not yet fulfilled. Be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48): this is the goal to which Christians are called and should strive! That is why such men as St. The Apostle Paul did not consider themselves to be completely perfect and said: I do not think that I have attained to myself: forgetting the things that are behind, but reaching out to the things that are ahead, I pursue with zeal for the honor of the high calling in Christ Jesus (Phil. 3:13, 14). To do anything beyond what is necessary would mean to achieve a higher perfection than that required by the faith of Christ. Thirdly, we must remember that in the house of the heavenly Father there are many abodes (John 14:2). The baby dies soon after his baptism, pure and innocent: for him a certain degree of bliss; an adult dies, having managed to show his faith through works and bear good fruits: for him there is a different reward; An ascetic goes to God, having spent his entire life in the labors of fasting and chastity, arbitrary poverty and the deepest self-abasement: for such a person there is still another, higher degree of bliss. Consequently, no matter what good deeds someone does, no matter what merits they render on earth, for all these merits there will be a due, appropriate reward, and they cannot in any way be called unnecessary, superfluous, or useless for the righteous themselves. Fourthly, from the fact that God spared and is always ready to spare sinners for the sake of the righteous (Gen. 18:33; Exod. 33:32.33), one should not conclude 1429 that He spared and spares the former for the excessive merits of the latter, being satisfied with these merits, and imputing them to sinners, and not for another reason. The righteous are true, His beloved children and friends (John 15:14. 15); all their ways are pleasing to Him (Ps. 1.6); all their desires are good before Him (Prov. 11:23); all their requests and prayers are pleasing to Him (Proverbs 15:29). It is because of this love for their saints, and especially because of their intercession and prayers, which they send to His throne for others, often with such strength that they themselves, like Moses and Paul, wish to be deprived of the kingdom of God for the sake of their neighbors (Ex. 32:32; Rom. 9:3). The Lord spares sinners, - spares his criminal children through the prayers of his beloved, truly pleasing to Him; He spares, obviously, out of his infinite goodness towards both, and not according to justice, which is supposedly satisfied for the sins of the former by the abundant merits of the latter. 3) In particular – in relation to penances. Even if it were fair that there are abundant merits of the Saints, and that these merits, together with the merits of the Savior, can be imputed to sinners to free them from the punishments determined by the righteousness of God; but since penances are not punishments imposed on sinners to satisfy the truth of God, but are healing means for healing their spiritual illnesses, then it is impossible to replace penances with the indicated merits, it is unfair to give indulgences to sinners for the sake of these merits and remove spiritual healing from them before they have beneficial effects. I. The Latins base their last thought - a) on the words of the Savior spoken to the Apostle Peter: and whatever is loosed on earth will be loosed in heaven (Matthew 16:19), and b) on the example of the ancient Church 1430. Let's answer this: 1) True, the Apostle Peter, like the other Apostles and all the shepherds of the Church (Matt. 18, 18; John 20, 22. 23), received the Divine power to resolve sinners, to free them from sins and from punishment for sins. But - a) Not otherwise than in the name or by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ alone, from whom they received this authority, and who, teaching it, said to them: as the Father sent me, and I send you..., receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins you forgive, their sins will be forgiven them: and to whom you hold, they hold (John 20:21-23). There is not the slightest hint here about the merits of God’s saints. Consequently, to allow sinners, and on the basis of some merits beyond the due merits of the righteous, the shepherds of the Church have no power at all. b) Not otherwise than in the sacrament or through the sacrament of repentance, and so on, under certain conditions on the part of the penitents themselves. For, firstly, the sacrament of repentance is actually based on the shown words of the Savior, according to the consciousness of the Latins themselves; and secondly, the shepherds of the Church can absolve sinners from their sins and from punishment only by the grace of the Holy Spirit (receive the Holy Spirit, let it go...), which is communicated generally through the sacraments and, in particular, for the absolution of repentant Christians, through the sacrament of repentance. Consequently, to absolve from sins or from punishment for sins those who did not approach the sacrament of repentance, or who did, but without the proper conditions and did not truly repent, to give indulgences to all who ask indiscriminately - the pastors of the Church do not have the power. c) Moreover, the pastors of the Church do not have the right to give indulgences in favor of the dead and absolve them from sins and from punishment for sins in (imaginary) purgatory by their own power, when the dead can no longer proceed to the sacrament of repentance and fulfill the conditions required of the repentant. Nowadays the Latins themselves recognize that the Church cannot extend its permissive power to the souls of the dead, and that in the Savior’s commandment: if you loose on earth, it will be loosed in heaven, the word on earth must be applied to both the permitting and the permitted 1431. Therefore, the right of their high priest to give indulgences in favor of those in purgatory is based only on the following reasoning: “all prayers for the dead, the offering of a bloodless Sacrifice, alms and other good deeds are useful for the dead: why cannot the abundant merits of Jesus Christ and the Saints, attached to them per modum suffragii, as intercession, i.e. through the offer of these merits, be useful for them? daddy to God? 1432. Thus, the merits of the Savior can have a beneficial effect on the dead, due to the infinite goodness of God: due to these merits, prayers sent for them by the living, and alms, and especially the offering of a bloodless Sacrifice, are useful to the dead. But from this it only follows that the bishop of Rome, like all other shepherds of the Church, by virtue of the merits of the Savior, can and is obliged to pray for the dead, especially when celebrating the liturgy, trusting in the mercy of God and leaving it to the power of God himself to heed or not heed these prayers, to allow or not to allow sinners from punishment, and it does not at all follow that the pope has the right to give, at his own discretion, indulgences for the liberation of Christian souls from purgatory. 2) Pointing to the example of the ancient Church, Roman teachers assert 1433: a) “The Apostle Paul gave indulgence to the sinner and freed him from temporary punishment.” But St. Paul, as we have already noted, imposed penance on this sinner specifically for his moral healing, so that the spirit would be saved, and not to satisfy the righteousness of God, and removed the healing when it had its effect and the sinner truly repented (2 Cor. 2:6.7). Consequently, here indulgence in the Roman sense could not take place at all. b) “In the days of Tertullian and Cyprian, the Church often, at the intercession of martyrs and confessors, forgave those who had fallen from the faith, freed them from penances or punishments they had deserved, and thus demonstrated its power to grant indulgences.” True, the primates of the churches of that time had a lot of respect for St. sufferers, and out of respect for their intercession, those who had fallen away were sometimes accepted; but not at all because they imputed to the latter the overwhelming merits of the former: for, even at the intercession of the martyrs, a necessary condition for the forgiveness of sinners was their repentance and correction. “The Lord may,” says St. Cyprian, who discussed this subject in detail, can mercifully forgive, through the prayers of the martyrs through the mediation of the priests, but only to the repentant, toiling, asking 1434 - to the one who will pray with all his heart, cry with true tears and tears of repentance, and incline the Lord to mercy with constant good deeds" 1435. And at the same time St. The Father repeatedly exhorts the fallen not to rely on the intercession of the martyrs, but to turn to God with all their hearts, to beseech Him themselves, to appease Him with sincere repentance and correction of life 1436 that without this condition the martyrs cannot do anything for them, they cannot, like slaves, let go of what has offended the Lord himself 1437, they cannot morally, contrary to the will of God and the Gospel, intercede for someone unworthy 1438, and that their petition is accepted when it is fair, and can be fulfilled by the priest in accordance with the will of God 1439. On the other hand, he asks the martyrs and confessors themselves to pay attention to each sinner’s own merits, carefully weigh his intentions, evaluate the type and quality of sins 1440, and intercede only for those who truly repent and propitiate God 1441. Consequently, when the ancient Church forgave sinners through the intercession of martyrs and confessors, it respected the testimony of the latter, as people completely worthy of its faith about the truth of the repentance and conversion of the former, and did not forgive because it imputed the overwhelming merits of the saint. Sufferers for sinners. c) “The Ancient Church, imposing penances or temporary punishments on sinners, often alleviated them, that is, gave indulgences, as can be seen from the rules of the Council of Ancyra and others.” But why did it make it easier? Only based on the moral state of the penitents - because, looking at penances as spiritual healing, she found it necessary and useful for those being treated to either weaken, or change, or increase, or even remove the healing altogether - and not at all because of any imputation of the merits of the righteous to sinners. It is enough to read the rule of the aforementioned Ancyra Council: “Let bishops have the power, having experienced the type of conversion, to be philanthropic, or to apply a greater period of repentance. Most of all, let the life that preceded the temptation and followed it be tested, and thus let love for mankind be measured” (right. 5; demolished. 7). The same is confirmed by the Council of Nicaea 1st 1442, St. Basil the Great 1443, St. Gregory of Nyssa 1444 and others 1445. And it is remarkable that in ancient times leniency was given to repentant sinners not suddenly, after penance was imposed on them (as, on the contrary, it was and now sometimes happens in the Roman Church, especially on anniversary celebrations, when permission from punishments is given even before they are imposed), but after a long time, during which the sinner had time to sufficiently experience the severity of his guilt and punishment and repent 1446. It is equally remarkable that the ancient Councils and Fathers, when death threatened those who were under prohibition, released them from church punishment, admitted them to the sacrament of communion, and, after the danger had passed, again forced them to bear the previously prescribed penance 1447. It is an undoubted sign that the ancient Church looked at penances not as satisfactions of the truth of God, which could be conveniently replaced by the merits of the Savior and the Saints, but as corrective measures, from which one condition was exemption - the actual correction of the sinner. Having, therefore, not the slightest basis in St. Scripture, neither in St. Traditions, as a dogma of the Roman Church, indulgences turn out to be harmful in relation to Christian life: they undermine true repentance for sins, indiscriminately take away from sinners the healing means necessary to heal their spiritual illnesses, and, deceiving the people with the ease of reconciliation with God and the Church, they have contributed and can contribute to the general corruption of morals 1448. Let us not mention the various abuses of the Roman hierarchy that were and are always possible during the distribution of indulgences 1449. For repentance can be and is still understood in the sense of virtue. Tertullus. de poenit. c. IX. X, Ἐξομολόγησις, Irin. adv. haer. 1, 13, no. 5. 7. August. de civ. Dei XX, 9, n. 2. Concil. Carthag. V, c. XI. Tertullus. de poenit. c. IV; Jerome. Epist. ad Pammach. et Ocean. de error. Orig.; Epist. ХСVII ad Demetriad. de serv. virginit. Const. Apost. II, p. 11. 12. Ibid. c. 38. 40. 41–43. 18. Ibid., p. 33. De laps. c. 28. 29, in Patrolog. curs. compl. T. IV, p. 488. 489. ... δια τού ίερέως λαμβάνει τήν άφεσιν χάριτι Χριστοΰ. Adv. Novat, fragm. (in Galland. V, 213). About mobile rules, summary, rep. to the question 288, in TV. St. Father XX, 360. There's an answer there. to the question 110. On the Priesthood III, 4. 5, pp. 59–60, in Russian. translation St. Petersburg 1836. Peccetur restituendo sibi institutam a Domino exomologesin sciens, praeteribit illam, quae babylonium regem in regna restituit (De poenit. p. 12). Lakmanz. Divin. inst. IV, 30; Grieg. nissk. homil. in eos, qui alios acerbe judicant, in T. II, p. 234, Morel.; Ambros. de poenit. II, 7. 11; Jeponym. in Math. XVI, 19; August. de adult. conjug. 1, 28, n. 35; 11, 16, no. 16. 17; de civ. Dei XX, 9, n. 2; Kup. Alex. in Johan. XX, 23. Multum enim utile ac necessarium est, ut peccatorum reatus ante ultimum diem sacerdotali supplicatione salvatur (Epist. LXXXV, p. 3, ad. Cacc.). Asterius in Luc. XV, 11 (fragm. in Combefis, auct. 228); Kassian. de incarn. VI, 18. Right Apostle. 52; demolished note 1334–1337. Potestas peccatorum remittendorum apostolis data est et ecclesiis, quas illi a Christo missi constituerunt, et episcopis, qui eis ordinatione vicaria successerant (Epist. ad Cypr.). Jus hoc solis permissam sacerdotibus est (de poenit. 1, c. 2, n. 7). On the priesthood III, 5. 6, pp. 60. 61–62, in Russian translation. ... Cui utique operai incessabiliter ipse Salvator intervenit (Epist. LXXXIV, ed. Cacc.). Origen. in Lev. homil. VIII, no. 10; Patsuan. Epist. ad Sympr. III, no. 7. Ambrose. de poenit. 1, 2; Evsev. Qu. ad Marin. n. 9 (Mai 1, 277); Kup. Alex. in Johan. XX, 33. Const. Apost. 11, 12. 20. 21; Firmilian. Epist. ad Cypr. (inter. Cypr. Epist. LXXV); Afanas, vel, homil. in illud: profecti in pagum, n, 7; Ambros. de poenit. 11, 2. Origen. in Num. homil. X, n. 1; Jacob. Nisib. de pmnit, Serm. VII; Jerome, in Math. XVI, 19; Theodorite. in Exod. qu. XV. De adult. coniug. 11, 16, no. 16.Cfr. Tertullus. de poenit. c. 7, 12. De lapsis cap. XXXV, n Patrolog. curs. compl. T. IV, p. 492. Conversation on repentance III, paragraph 13, in volume II of conversations. to Antiochus. to the people, pp. 320–321, St. Petersburg. 1850. Poems about yourself, in TV. St. Father IV, 291. Morals right 1, ch. 3, same VII, 360. Tolkov. on ch. 15 Isaiah, ibid VI, 422. “When you sin, cry and groan not because you will be punished, for this means nothing; but that you have insulted your Master, who is so meek, loves you so much, cares so much about your salvation, that he betrayed his Son for you. This is what you should cry and moan about, and cry incessantly. For this is what confession consists of” (Chrysostom on 2 Corinthian conversations. IV, p. 120, M. 1843). Ille timor nondum castus praesentiam (Domini) et poenam timet… Non timet, ne perdat amplexus pulcherrimi sponsi, sed timet, ne mittatur in gehennam. Bonus est et iste timor, utilis est. (Augustine. Enarr. in Ps. CXXVII, n. 8). Opus est ergo, ut intret timor primo, per quem veniat charitas. Timor medicamentum, charitas, sanitas (Augustin. in Epist. Johann. Tract. IX, n. 4). “Just as fire, falling on a substance, usually consumes everything, so the fire of love, wherever it falls, consumes and burns out everything... Where there is love, all sins are consumed” (Chrysostom on 2 Tim. Conversations VII, paragraph 3). Plot. on Is. 1, art. 14, in TV. St. Father VI, 58. 59. Morals right 1, ch. 4, ibid VII, 361. ...sed etiam emendatioribus factis operire et tegere delicta superiora, ut non ei imputetur peccatum (De psenit. II, 5, n, 35). It should be noted that although in the ancient Church there was a twofold way of confession: public, performed before the whole Church, and private before one priest; but even during the first type of confession, which all Christians listened to, the right to forgive or not forgive the sins of those who repented belonged only to one shepherd, as during the last one. Next, in that other case, the essence of the sacrament of repentance remained inviolable. Over time, the Church, out of maternal condescension towards her children, abolished the popular way of confession, without thereby changing the sacrament itself in the least. Adv. haer 1, 6, n. 3; 13, no. 5. 7. (1374) De roenit cap. X; cfr. c. III. Ibid: cfr. in Genes. homil. Χ VII, n. 3.9; in Ps. XXXVII, homil. II, no. 6. See note above. 1339–1341. Evidentissime Domine praedicatione mandatum est, etiam gravissimi criminis reis, si ex foto corde et manifesta confessione peccati poenitentiam gerant, sacramenti coelestis refundendam gratiam (De poenit. 11, 3). Serm. de poenit. VII. c. 2. 4. Homil. in eos, qui alios acerbius judicant, in Opp. T. 11, p. 137, Morel. Chrysostom de cruc. etlatr. homil. IX, n. 3; in Hebr. hom. IX, n. 4.5; Theodore. Hercules. in Ps. CVI, 23; Innocent. Epist. ad Decent, c. VII; Huл, lib, III, Epist. 33; Grieg. great in 1 Reg. lib. V, c. 4, n. 55. See also Ankir. right 2.5.7; Neokes. right 3; Nikeisk. I, right. 17; Vasil. led right 84. Tolkov. on Is. Ch. XIV, art. 20, in TV. St. Father VI, 397. Tolkov. on Is. Ch. IX, art. 18, also 326. On the Priesthood III, 5, p. 64, in Russian. translation Conversation on repentance III, n. II, in volume II of conversations. to Antiochus. to the people, pp. 318–319, in Russian. translation Epist. LXXXV, sar. 3, ed. Sass. “Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. Why? because the Holy Spirit is known to you, and you are not ashamed to reject the obvious truth. For if you already say that you do not know Me, then you know for sure that casting out demons and performing healings is the work of the Holy Spirit. So, you do not only blaspheme Me, but also the Holy Spirit. Therefore, your punishment, both here and here, is inevitable” (Chrysostom on Matt. conversations XLI, in vol. II, p. 217, according to Russian translation). Afanas. led in Math. XII, 31. 32 (Galland. V, 185). Augustine. Epist. CLXXXV ad Bonif. n. 49. Vth Ecumenical Council of rights. 5. On Matt. conversations XLI, in vol. II, p. 216, in Russian. translation Sozomen. church history 1, 10; Ι V, 28; VII, 25; Epifan. haer. LIX, 1. Eulogius Alex. adv. Novat, lib. IV (apud Phot. Bibloth. cod. CCLXXX, p. 886). See index, appendix. to the book rules, word: penance. Irin. adv. haer. 1, 13, no. 5; III, 4; Tertullus. de poenit. c. 6. 7. 10. 11 Cyprian. Epist. VII. LII. Const. Apost. II, 16. 18. 41. See 1st Ecumenical The Council is right. 11. 12 et seq. See the word: penance in the index in the rule book. Concil. Tridentin. Sess. XIV, cap. 8. The Patriarch of Constantinople Jeremiah, in response to Protestant theologians on behalf of the Eastern Orthodox Church, by the way, wrote: “regarding the punishments determined by the canons (κανονικάς ίκανοποιίας), we think: if they are imposed by the ministers of the Church, as medicines, for example, on the proud, covetous, intemperate and dissolute, envious and haters, lazy or suffering from any other vices; then they are very useful and greatly assist the penitent in the matter of correction. That's why St. The Fathers ordered that they be placed on those who convert and repent. But if they are used only for the self-interest of those who impose them, and not with a true soul-beneficial purpose; if they are not used in the way that the Fathers prescribed to use them and used them themselves in the beginning, to heal only sin: in this case, we reject them, then we also recognize them as vain and dishonorable, and we affirm that this is undoubtedly how they should be recognized” (Acta Theolog. Wirtemberg. et patriarch. Hieremiae, respons. patriarchae 1, p. 12, p. 89, Wirtem. 1584, in Xp. 1842, 1, 243–244). See cb. Chrysostom talk to this place, in conversation. IV at 2 Corinth. pp. 107–308, Moscow. 1843. In another place he notes: “having commanded that the sinner be handed over to Satan, Paul, after (the sinner) had changed and become better, said: Be satisfied with this prohibition for such a person, even if it comes from many. In the same way, affirm your love for him (2 Cor. 2:6.8) ... What happened, tell me? Didn't you hand him over to Satan? Yes, he says; only not so that he remains in the hands of Satan, but so that he can quickly get rid of his power” (Conversation on repentance 1, paragraph 283, in the second volume of conversations to the Antioch. people, p. 283 in Russian translation). “He who has appropriated someone else’s property through secret theft, and then through confession has declared his sin to the priest, let him cure his illness by an exercise opposite to his passion, that is, by distributing property to the poor, and having squandered what he has, he will show himself cleansed from the disease of covetousness” (Grig. niss. rights. 6, in the book of rules, p. 342). Demolished. Feof. Prokopovich - Christ. orthod. Theolog. iol. III, p. 700–702, Lips. 1793. By the way, the Latins point to this place to confirm their teaching. See, for example, Perrone, Feyer, Lieberman and others, in the treatise. about the sacrament of repentance chapter: de satisfactione. And Roman theologians refer to all these places. See also there. St. Chrysostom reasons: “What saved those Ninevites? They imposed strict fasting on their spiritual sores, clothes made of sackcloth, sprinkled them with ashes, moistened them with bitter tears; They threw themselves to the ground, and with it they changed the image of their life. Let's see which of the listed medicines healed them... You see, says the Prophet, you see God turning from his evil ways, and God repenting of the evil he said he would do to them (Jon. 3:10). He did not say: God saw the fasting of the Ninevites, the sackcloth and ashes. I say this not to reject fasting, let it not be, but to convince you to do what is better than fasting, to abstain from all evil” (on 2 Cor. Discourses IV, pp. 118. 119, in Russian translation). Here we can also recall the rule decreed at the Roman Council, which took place in the third century, against the Novatians: “Novatus and others, who exalt themselves with him and decided to approve of his brother-hating and inhuman thought, are considered excommunicated from the Church; opposite the brethren, who through misfortune have fallen, heal and heal with the means of repentance” (Evsev. ts. ist. book IV, ch. 43, v. 1, p. 386 in the river). Conversation about repentance 1, paragraph 7. 8, in volume II of conversations. to Antioch. to the people, pp. 286–289. Conversation on repentance II, n. I, ibid p. 291; demolished page 344. In 1Corinth. homil. XXVIII, n. 2. On the Priesthood II, pp. 33–36, in Russian. translation Conversation on repentance III, paragraph 2. 3, pp. 307–308. Conversation on repentance III, paragraph 10, p. 317. On 2 Corinth. conversations IV, pp. 122–123. St. argues in a similar way. Basil the Great: “In illness, doctors advise patients to be attentive to themselves and not to neglect anything that serves to heal. But in a similar way, the Word, the physician of our souls, with this small help heals the soul suffering from sin. Therefore, be careful with yourself so that as you sin, you will receive benefits from healing. Is your sin great and grave? You need a long confession, bitter tears, intense vigil, continuous fasting. Is the Fall easy and tolerable? Let repentance be equal to it. Just pay attention to yourself, so that you can know the health and illness of your soul” (Conversation on the words: listen to yourself, in the Holy Father VIII, 36). See further note. 1423–1426. In this sense, even in the Orthodox Church, penances are recognized as a means of appeasing or satisfying God: “we accompany the remission of sins, wrote Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople, with penances for many good reasons: firstly, so that, through voluntary suffering here, the sinner is freed from the involuntary, grave punishment of those in another life; for the Lord is not appeased by anything so much as by voluntary suffering. That's why St. Gregory says that “tears are rewarded with philanthropy.” Secondly, in order to destroy in the sinner those terrible lusts of the flesh that give rise to sin; for we know that the opposite is cured by the opposite. Thirdly, so that penance serves as a kind of bond or bridle for the soul, and does not allow it to again take up the same vicious deeds from which it is just being cleansed. Fourthly - in order to accustom one to work and patience; for virtue is a matter of work. Fifthly, so that we can see and know: has the penitent completely hated sin? But we free the one who is about to depart from the world from all this, and forgive him his sins, content with the sincerity of his repentance and the sincerity of his conversion” (Acta Theolog. Wirtemb. et patriarch. Hieremiae, respons. 1, p. 12, in Xp. Thu. 1842, 1, 244). ... Poenitentia Deus mitigatur (De poenit. c. IX). And then: “itaque Exomologesis prosternendi et humilificandi hominis disciplina est, conversationem injungens misericordiae illicem...” (ibid., Patrolog. curs. compl. T. 1, p. 1243). De lapsis c. 29. 32. 31: illic superest poenitentia, quae satisfaciat; Qui autem poenitentiam criminis tollunt, satisfactionis viam claudunt (in cit. Patrolog. IV, p. 489. 491. 492). Grandi plagae alta et prolixa opus est medicinä grande scelus grandem habet necessariam satisfactionem... Et ideo fortius dolendum, quia peccatum est fortius (De lapsu virgin. consecr. c. VIII, n. 37, in cit. Patrolog" XVI, 378-379). Non enim sufficit mores in melius commutare et a factis malis recedere; nisi etiam de his, quae facta sunt, satisfiat Deo per poenitentiae dolorem, per humilitatis gemitum, per contriti cordis sacrificium, cooperantibus eleymosinis (Matth. V, 7) (Serm. CCCLI, p. 5, n. 12 in cit. Patrolog. XXXIX, p. 1549). Perrone, Praelect. Theolog. vol. VII, Tract. de indulgentiis. It is known from the rules of the cathedrals that before death, penances were removed from the penitents, and they were accepted into church communion, and those excommunicated from the sacrament of the Eucharist were awarded the Holy Spirit. Communion, even if the time of their repentance has not yet ended (Sob. Ankir. rights. 6. 22; Neokesar. rights. 2; Nicea. 1 pr. 13; Carthage. pr. 7; Basil. great. pr. 73; Grig. Nyssk. pr. 2). As the defenders of indulgences conclude. Perrone, cit. Tract. de indulgentiis, proposit. 1. Institute catholic in mod. Cateches. T. III, p. 307. Perrone, Tract. de indulg. propos. IV. Perrone, Tract. de indulg. propos. 1. Potest ille indulgentiam dare, sententiam suam potest ille deflectere; poenitenti, operanti, roganti potest clementer ignoscere, potest in acceptum referre quidquid pro talibus et petierint martyres et fecerint sacerdotes (De laps. c. XXXVI. in Patrolog. curs. compl. T. IV, p. 494). Si precem toto corde quis faciat, si veris poenitentiae lamentationibus et lacrymis ingemiscat, si ad veniam delicti sui justis et continuis operibus inflectat, misereri talium potest... (ibid. p. 493). De laps. c. XVII. XXIX. XXXV, ibid. p. 480. 489. 491. …nec remittere aut donare indulgentia sua servus potest, quod in Dominum delicto graviore commissum est.., (ibid. c. XVII). Martyres aut nihil possunt, si Evangelium solvi potest, aut si Evangelium non potest solvi, contra Evangelium facere non possunt (ibid. c. XX, p. 483). Mandant martyres aliquid fieri; sed si justa, si licita, si nou contra ipsum Dominum a Dei sacerdote facienda... (ibid. c. XVlll, p. 481). Oro vos, ut... sollicite et cauto petentium desideria ponderetis, inspiciatis et actum et opera et merita singulorum, ipsorum quoque delictorum genera e qualitates cogitetis,... (Epist. X ad martyr. et confessor. n. 3, in Patrolog. T. citat, p. 255). …quorum poenitentiam satisfactioni proximam conspicitis… (ibid. n. 4, p. 256). “In all things, the disposition and manner of repentance must be taken into consideration” (right 12). “Healing can be measured not by time, but by the way of repentance” (canon. last to Amatphiloch. pr. 2). “Nevertheless, we write this so that the fruits of repentance may be experienced. For we do not judge ourselves by time alone, but look at the image of repentance” (ibid., right. 84; demolished. 7). “For those who undergo repentance more zealously, and by their life show their conversion to the good, it is permissible to shorten the time of hearing and quickly bring them to conversion: likewise, shorten the time of this, and sooner admit them to communion, in accordance with how he learns by his own trial the condition of the one being healed” (canonical epistle to Litoius, pr. 4). Papa Innocent. Epist. ad Decent, c. VII. Cathedral. Ankir is right. 5; Nikeisk. 1, pr. 12, etc. Nikeisk, 1, pr. 12; Grigor. nissk. pr. 2.5; Karphag. IV, can. LXXVI. LXXVIII. As History confirms, according to the consciousness of even historians of the Roman Church: see, for example. Fleury, 4 Discours. sur l'hist. eccles. n. 2 et 16. Fleury, Hist. eccles. T. VI, livr. 104, chap. 48, ed. 1840. You might be interested in: