The Epistle to the Romans about unleavened bread, and the Sabbath fast, and priestly marriages

St. Nikita Stifat wrote five “Words against the Armenians,” the last of which was expanded and remade into an appeal to Western Christians, “The Epistle to the Romans on Unleavened Bread, and the Sabbath Fast, and Priestly Marriages.” This polemical work aims to criticize a number of Latin liturgical and disciplinary practices. St. Nikita refutes three Roman traditions: 1. The use of unleavened bread in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. The author argues that unleavened bread is lifeless and refers to the Old Testament Jewish rites, not corresponding to the “life-giving” meaning of the Body of Christ. He cites evidence from the Holy Scriptures, pointing out that Christ at the Last Supper used leavened bread, not unleavened bread, and that the Apostolic Canons and Councils prohibit participation in Jewish rites. Also Rev. Nikita Stifat says that in the body of Christ there are three living elements - spirit (breath), water and blood. Since warm blood and water flowed from the Savior’s perforated side, Christians should partake of His Blood also warm. 2. Fast on Saturday. The monk condemns the practice of fasting on Saturday (with the exception of Holy Saturday), relying on the Apostolic decrees and rules of the Ecumenical Councils, which prescribe the celebration and celebration of the liturgy on Saturdays and Sundays. 3. Celibacy of priests (celibacy). The author defends the right of clergy to legal marriage, citing the Apostolic Canons and the 13th canon of the VI Ecumenical Council. These rules permit the ordination of married deacons and elders and prohibit them from divorcing their wives “under pretense of piety,” in direct contradiction to the Roman practice of celibacy. St. Nikita Stifat emphasizes that the “innovations” of the Romans are a deviation from the apostolic tradition and testify to “Judaic wisdom.” It should be noted that in 1054, on behalf of Patriarch Michael Cerularius, St. Nikita Stifat actively participated in the escalating polemics between the Eastern and Western Churches, writing a number of works against Latin customs (the use of unleavened bread, Saturday fasting, celibacy of priests). These works became famous both in the East and in the West. According to Cardinal Humbert, the de facto head of the papal mission in Constantinople, during a colloquium in the Studian monastery on June 24, 1054, in the presence of Emperor Constantine IX, Ven. Nikita Stifat admitted himself defeated. He publicly anathematized his work, “The Epistle to the Romans on Unleavened Bread, and the Sabbath Fast, and Priestly Marriages,” as well as all those who deny the primacy of Rome. As a sign of renunciation, the treatise was burned in the monastery courtyard. After the mutual anathemas imposed by Cardinal Humbert on Patriarch Michael Kirularius and his supporters, and then the reciprocal anathemas of the Synod of the Church of Constantinople, the position of St. Nikita Stifata, criticizing Latin customs, became generally accepted and even in demand in Byzantine theology. The saint's anti-Latin writings were not condemned by the Eastern Church. On the contrary, they became widespread and became important sources for subsequent polemics with the Latins. The publication presents text written in Church Slavonic in civil script. See also: The Word of Nikita Stiphatus against the Latins (Russian translation) by St. Nikita Stifat (in Church Slavonic in civil script) Kindness, even to sincere love, about all the wisest and most noble Romans. From the hedgehog to sincere love and humility towards those who have it abound. These things abound, causing the participant to endure everything, to suffer everything, as the apostle said, and not to be arrogant against his neighbor, or to take nan, but to seek below his own, or to have zeal for him, and strife, and litigation. All this love and humility will drive away and create a person not to walk according to God, but according to man-pleasing. Paul also curses him, saying, “Where is the essence of strife and zeal and quarreling in you, are you not carnal and walk after man?” In the same way, I pray for your love to humble yourself for the sake of God’s commandment and to hear from us, the humble and the poor, who have been asked in abundance from the various Romans who come here, about unleavened bread, which we say with the love of Christ towards them: those who still partake of unleavened bread, under the shadow of the law, eat the Jewish table, and not the verbal and living meal of God and to us a believing person is essentially and uniquely. As if from the very beginning you should ask for the essentials of learning how to produce bread. What is essential, unless it is essential to us. But there is not a single bread that is of any value, except the body of Christ, as it was a food of value to us according to the flesh of that humanity. Yes, even if the being of our intervention is animated, the word will be perceived. For it is not essential for us to eat bread and take unleavened bread and receive communion. Unleavened bread appears to be soulless. Just like the very nature of things, the little alum who fearfully introduced himself into the intervention of food teaches most clearly. And mix everything with it. And all the dough came together as one. By the power of some animal it warms it. And he is moving as if he is living and doing, even though in unleavened dough he would not be a Pharisee, for if he is lower, then the word commands us to run away from him. The Divine is a part of the community of nature, and we partake of it every day; we have communion with Christ. As Peter, the Supreme Apostle, said: May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and Jesus our Lord, and little by little and for these sakes you will be partakers of the divine nature. It is not that the nature is divine, who says when, the Lord thought, the unleavened and dead dough of the Jews, which you offer as a sacrifice to God and eat the living flesh of the Lord as a substitute. What kind of fellowship do you have with Christ, eating the lawful hay, and not the New Testament? Even if you say this, but do not speak, for Christ’s beloved disciple: if we speak as if the imams are communicating with him, and we walk in darkness, we lie and do not create the truth. If we walk in the light, for in the light there is communion between the imams and each other, and the blood of Jesus Christ his son will cleanse us from all sin: even those who eat unleavened bread walk in the darkness of the law. What kind of communion is there to have with Christ and with those who exist in the light of His New Testament and grace, who eat the body of Christ and drink his most pure blood and thus have communion with each other and with Christ. Cleansed as if he had been foretold from all sin. Unleavened bread is not bread, neither is it perfect, nor is it self-perfect, but it is insufficient and is only half-eaten, requiring the fulfillment of alum. Look, because in the unleavened workshop there is not a single animal force, it is dead. In this bread, the speech of the body of Christ is three animals and gives life, which is worthy of those who eat: Spirit, water, and blood. Just as Christ’s confidant, John, himself testifies to my word: three are the witnesses, speaking, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and three are in one, that is, the body of Christ. Even during Christ’s crucifixion, when water and blood flowed from his most pure rib, I pierced him with a spear. The living and holy Spirit abides in his deified flesh, even though we eat the bread, we transfer it into the body of Christ. We live in it, as we live and eat deified flesh, so we live and drink its blood and drink its warmth, with the flowing water from its incorruptible rib, we are cleansed from all sin and burning, we are filled with the Spirit, for the warmth of the being, as you see, as if from the side of the Lord we drink, before we are alive from the flesh, by the Spirit, and the warmth of Christ is the warmth of the blood and water having expired among those who eat unleavened bread, there will be no place to be. Yes, even if the place of food is dead, O wise ones, like the word of the decree, for the sake of praise you say, as if, like you, we knead with salt and alum and water, and so we make the offering of our dough, but with water and brush and fire we make unleavened bread, and with these three we make our pure sacrifice. I ask you: these three, water and waste and fire, what do you accept? And why do you think this is a place to be? Is it the flesh of the Lord? But John, beloved by Christ, did not say: three are the witnesses - water, meat and fire, but that: Spirit, water and blood, and three are in one. It is as if we are the body of Christ, as it was said, that we are united in a nutritious way with those around us for the sake of the incarnate God, who is co-corporeal with him and bone from his bones, as it is written. If you accept this into the uncreated and incorporeal nature of the Holy Trinity, you sin, falling into the heresy of the Lord, who say, to suffer the flesh of the Word, and therefore to the Divinity. Heaven together the Trinity became incarnate: Father and Son and Spirit. Let these three be seen in that: water, as you say, and waste, and fire, and as in place of that you create unleavened bread as a sacrifice. But there is one Holy Trinity, the Son and Word of God, who was incarnated from the pure blood of the Holy Virgin and became human, and having accomplished all that he had done, he was crucified in the flesh, to the deity who did not suffer, for he was crucified in the flesh, giving us the bread of his flesh to eat, who live by the Holy Spirit. Sitsa rivers: take, eat, this is my body, which was broken for you for the remission of sin. What do you have in common with our brothers and sisters about Christ and the law established by Christ, even as you still eat unleavened bread? We are a new creation in Christ. The ancient mimoidosha, you hear Paul saying, is now all new. If you judge these things, why are you uncircumcised? Christ was circumcised. Because you are not cleansed according to the law, Paul and those who did this and all the rest do not keep the old things, and those who are in the law do. For their sake, the name of God is blasphemed among the nations, just as it is written: your praise is not good, and I proclaim to you the Apostle’s words: don’t you know, he said, how little kvass leaves everything mixed with it? The word is not about bread. But this, although the Apostle writes to the Corinthians, is not as you think about celebrating unleavened bread, in any way, but because they despise the same as the mashchek who ate, but also in the old customs of their false mind they boast. Although Paul objected to them and from the old transformation of malice, as in this way, with kvass, I say and show them the intervention. As if evil alone is little despised, it creates great harm in the common body of the Church. By the same token, he said and did not cry: let those who have done this deed be removed from your midst. Maybe, as I said, this anger will spread throughout your entire city. Like a small alum, all his interventions leaven. Hug and knead everyone, and there will be one dough. This, he said, is a great sin in all. Cleanse away the old leaven of sin, so that you may have a new addition, just as those who were baptized by nature are unleavened. These words are pure, mortified by the world and carnal lusts, for this is our Easter, for it is for us to be free from sin and death that Christ was consumed. By the same token, we celebrate not in the leaven of old sin, not in the leaven of malice and wickedness, but in the absence of leaven of purity and truth, that is, pure life and faith. With her, as a true believer of God, we are true admirers of this. Sitsa bo and the great Gregory the Theologian will publish his verb. And this is, about wisdom, the meaning of the apostolic saying, and not as you accept about the unleavened bread of the holiday and communion. If only the unleavened workers had been celebrated, Paul would have sent them to the Corinthians, so they would not have been betrayed in tens of tens and legitimized the pious Church of Christ through all the rules. In the 70th canon he commanded with a prohibition and affirmed to all not to accept from the Jews: if any one, said a bishop, or a presbyter, or a deacon, or any clergy of any class, fasts with the Jews or celebrates with them, or accepts from them the feast of their inception, that is, unleavened bread or anything like that, let it be cast out. If he is a human being, let him leave. If you say, do not accept this from Judea, but do in houses whatever comes from this, whatever you receive from them, whatever you do in houses is unleavened, and for this reason you will receive the most severe torment, as if you left what was commanded to do quickly from Christ and his Apostle. Do as, under the law, the works that exist, even as the Jews do, sitting in darkness and shadows, who do not obey the word of Paul, who says: Brother, for every rank that is called is called, let it abide in him. It will not be found in the Divine Scripture, like unleavened bread, spoken of by Christ or by his Apostles. Having always secretly taught from him the mystery of the New Testament, Paul wrote a speech to the Corinthians: judge, I say, we bless the cup of blessing, is there not communion in the Blood of Christ? The bread we break, is it not the fellowship of the Body of Christ? As there is one bread, there is one body of many. We all partake of the one bread. And again: for I received from the Lord, and gave it to you, as the Lord Jesus at night, in agony, giving himself over to bread, saying, and not unleavened bread, and, giving thanks, breaking it, and saying: take and eat, behold, this is my body, which was broken for you, behold, do in remembrance of me. And not by one, saying bread, but by multitudes, and not just this, but all the evangelists - Matthew: And to them that eat, Jesus said, Jesus received bread, giving thanks, breaking it, and giving it to the disciples, and saying: Take and eat: behold, this is My body. Same with Mark. Luke does the same: take the bread and, having given thanks, break it. And John also said: “Waten the bread,” he said, “The Lord will give it to Judas, Simon’s Iscariot, and from the bread then Satan will come into him.” All this bread is spoken of, and unleavened bread is not remembered anywhere from them. Because it was more fitting for Christ to suffer on that very day of the legal Passover, on which the lamb was expected from the Jews. And you want Easter from the deicides to happen on the day of the heel, the 14th day of the Moon, in the first month, the five thousandth and five hundredth and the 34th year of the present. The circle is the 18th of the Sun, the 5th of the Moon. Yes, having not been betrayed, he would not finish his Passover, betray his disciples, recline at supper on Thursday evening, and after supper, receiving the bread and breaking the bread, he would betray the sacrament of the New Testament to the Apostles. In the night there is a quarter, in the nude I gave myself over to Judas, as it is written. And it’s not like I had yet another unleavened meal on Thursday. On the 13th of the Moon, the leaven of the bread had not yet been taken away, but on the 15th of the Moon it would not be accepted legally, and on the 14th the lamb was only expected. Moreover, the 14th day of the first month of the Moon is called Easter by the law. On the 15th, the first unleavened bread is given on Saturday, and even if the Lord delivers the sacrament on the 13th of the Moon, the lamb is expected on the 14th. In it the Lamb of God will be devoured, taking away the sins of the world, even if there are five. On Saturday there is no feast of unleavened bread, when unleavened bread is eaten. When did the Lord give this to the Apostles to eat, as you say, the Apostle made unleavened bread from the apostles, food after his resurrection from the dead? Don’t you see that you are clearly convicted of things, but then you will not be unleavened when Christ betrays the secret to the disciples? I will also point you out from the Mosaic Law. Speech: these are the feasts of the Lord and these holy ones, you will call upon them during them: in the first month, on the 14th day of this month, the feast of the Passover of the Lord, and the 15th day of this month is the feast of unleavened bread of the Lord: for seven days you eat unleavened bread. This is a skill derived from the Mosaic law. For I do not run away with unleavened food, when the supper comes, the sacrament is given to the disciples. Whenever the first unleavened bread was made by Judah, the 15th day had no effect. Even though it is Saturday, that is why it is called a great day, then the Lord would not be buried under the earth. Yes, brethren, you oppose the truth in vain: if only you had known to be faithful to the Apostles to eat unleavened bread, your sacred Pope Agathon and the divine and sacred Gregory of Acragantium, and other places filling Papineau, who was under Constantine, the grandson of Heraclius, who was always divine, would have opposed the sixth council more strongly. unleavened bread you will set forth the law. Not a single thing is true. Yes, I will add to the word and these regulations. Deciding in the 11th of his rule: no one from those who are in the priestly rank or people from Judea should eat unleavened bread and eat it, or take it as their own, or call for sick people, or accept medicine from them, or wash in the baths with these people. If anyone begins to do this, if there is a clerk, he will erupt; if he is a man, he will excommunicate. Yes, even if he makes unleavened bread and is poisonous, even if he does not accept these from the Jews, but he was an imitator of them in this - he is a wise Jew and a transgressor of the law, transgressing the rules and deeds of the Apostle and Father, and sweeping aside, like the word of a decree. But since you are forbidden to deal with unleavened goods, the entire Divine Scripture is a decree. Bring, then, I will show you what is unlawful about fasting on the Sabbath. Tell us where to eat the Sabbath, food from the Apostle, be it not? To the apostles, in the fifth chapter of their broadcasts, which were written by Clement of Rome, Bishop of Rome, in the same testimony, in the 19th chapter they decided: The Lord commanded us to fast Wednesday and Friday, because of the councils of the Jews, and for the sake of passion. He will betray the same great Sabbath, not as it is proper to fast the Sabbath, as it is the chamber of power, but as it is only proper for it to be fasted, since the Creator is under the earth. Towards the end of the book, he said again: every Saturday except one and every week, when you make preparations, rejoice. It's appropriate to have fun in these times, and don't cry. In the book of those waiting for the testament, in the 24th chapter, this is the speech: Celebrate the Saturday and the week, for it is a remembrance of the work of the Lord, and the same of the resurrection, but there is only one Sabbath preserved by you throughout the whole year - the Lord's burial, which is proper to fast, and not to celebrate. There is a Creator underground. The strongest is her and the greatest cry, but the absence of the co-creation of joy. But since this was secretly bequeathed by Clement to the Pope, not having been made up for this, but guided by the Divine Spirit, it is no small crime to be fasting on Saturday and the church will be tied to this prohibition. Deciding in the 64th number of their sacred rules: whoever the cleric will find a week-long day of fasting, or Saturday, only one thing: let him be erupted. If he is a human being, let him leave. To this subsequent one, in the 6th Council, the fathers, according to this, legislate, the intercessor of the Council, Agathon, the Pope of Rome, and Gregory of Akragantia, bishop of Rome: having previously taken the city to Rome, in the Holy Great Lent, Pentecost, to fast that Saturday, desiring faithful church adherence to the holy Council, as To adhere to the Roman Church is an unshakable apostolic rule that says: if any cleric finds a week-long day of fasting, or Saturday, only one thing: let him be cast out, if any man, let him excommunicate. This, according to the Apostles, who laid down the rule and taught the faithful church with the Pope of Rome, Agathon, from where and from whom did you eat the Sabbath: but also perform the offering of the perfect liturgy on the holy days of fasting, is it Saturdays and weeks, from where did you eat the law and from whom did you eat the teacher? Is it from the Apostle? Not at all. The apostles laid down the rule about this, and said: If any presbyter, or deacon, or reader, or singer does not fast the holy day of forty days or Wednesday and heels: let him erupt, if he is a man, let him excommunicate, unless he is forbidden by bodily weakness. We therefore celebrate the Liturgy at the 3rd hour of the day, at which time the sacrifice is also ordained to be offered up. Why do you fast until the 9th hour, allowing liturgy in the meantime? No way. Yes, even if you are not weak, you are subject to anathema. The fathers of the Gangra Council, in the 19th canon, decided thus: if anyone is proud of those who fast, except for bodily needs, and allows devoted fasts to the community and those kept by the church, affirming in him a perfect thought, let him be anathema. The fathers of the Council of Laodicea, in the 51st canon, decided: that it is not proper for the martyrs to celebrate at Pentecost, but to commemorate the holy martyrs on Saturdays and weeks. And in the 49th canon you again decide: it is not proper to bring bread on Lent, except on Saturday and during the week only. But in the sixth and Ecumenical Council, the fathers also in the 52nd canon laid down the law with the holy Agathon, the Pope of Rome, saying: in these holy days of Lent, on Saturday and week, and on the day of the Holy Annunciation, that there may be a sacred liturgy for the presanctified. So, having received it, we perform the service on Saturday and then on the 3rd hour of the week, at which time the Holy Spirit descends on the Apostles, and bringing them we consecrate the gifts, from which the entire week is sufficient. On the other days of the week, at the 9th hour of time, having finished all the hymnology, having completed vespers, we perform the entrance of the priests with the deacons, only carrying the censer, and after reading the paremia, we made imaginary prayers from the great Basil, and presented gifts from the offer, and having prayed over them, we also exalt the reksha handed down to us from the Lord sacred bread and with the verb presanctified: “Holy to the Holy!”, and united, we partake of the bread and cup of the Mysteries of Christ, and, having thus given thanks, we dismiss the gathering. And we share a common meal with potions and juices, and we partake of warm waters if we want. The essence is that they endure the entire week with the single gift of blessing that is naphora. But you, who offer the liturgy that is perfect every day at Pentecost, which must be ascended at the 3rd hour of the day, are lying in violation of the rules of the church and for this reason you fall under the oath of the saints, as you said. Who is it that betrayed you and rebuked and tore apart a priestly marriage? Who from the church teacher will betray this to you without place? If he gets married without getting married, he also rushes to marriage later, according to the law it is prohibited. If, having previously married, there is an ordained priest, in a pure life and chastity, and that marriage is permitted, lawbreakers of nature: from the Apostolic Testaments and their sacred ones I will indicate the rules in the 16th book, written by Clement, the Pope of Rome, in the 16th chapter of the Apostles deciding this: bishop, or presbyter, or deacon, with the verb supplied to monogamous people. Whether their spouse is alive or not, it’s not too old for those who are celibate to come to marriage, or those who have married to marry others, but if they have enough to come to their marriage, they will be able to get married. In the 5th canon of the sanctified rules, they decided: a bishop, or a presbyter, or a deacon, shall not cast out his wife through the guilt of reverence; In the 40th canon: let the special episcopal wealth be revealed, and the bishop’s wealth not be wasted as a result of church wealth, such as when I have a wife and children, and relatives, and so on. Even if it were forbidden for priests to live with their lawful wives, they would not have laid down the slaughter of the Supreme Leader by the Apostle. If you had spoken to your wife as an Apostle to the church, then your word would have been true, if in your sacred rules, which were foretold from us, you would not have commanded not to expel the bishop and priest, a lesson of reverence, from your wife, and not to dissolve the bishop’s mania, for the sake of the church things, for the sake of their wives and their children. What are you talking about the Holy Ecumenical 6th Council, is it not the Pope of your Holy Agathon, who has many rekhoms, having a presiding leader, even in the 170th Father, who prostrated himself, how the Divine Agathon then answered to this holy Council, setting out the commandments about transgressions of the law, and keep them now. And with him the Holy Gregory of Akragantia, Bishop of Akragantia, even if these traditions had come from the Apostles, the Pope would not have endured if these rules were laid down against you. But since it is necessary to know the tradition and is strange to the Apostolic teaching, for this sake, together with all the fathers of the Holy 6th Council, just as about the unleavened bread and the Sabbath fast and the great sacred sacrifices, the Pentecostal, so also about the brothers, the priest laid down the law of the rivers: because in the Roman Church, in the rank of rule, we have given those who want: deacon or the presbyter was honored with ordination, promising that it is not for this purpose that they marry their wives, we follow the ancient rule, apostolic fear and rank, even as we combine sacred men according to the law, and from now on we will firmly be willing. It is in no way forbidden for those to have intercourse with wives or forbid them to have intercourse with each other during communion, but for those who find themselves worthy to be appointed subdeacon or presbyter, it is in no way forbidden to be elevated to the calico rank. Living with a lawful wife, then during the ordination let him be tortured to promise that he will retreat from the lawful wife of copulation with his lawful wife: and little by little: if anyone dares to defy the apostolic rule, we strive, which from the sacred presbyter or deacon, or subdeacon, to deprive him of copulation and intercourse with his lawful wife, let him be erupted. In the same way, if any presbyter or deacon, through the practice of reverence, marries his wife, let him go away, but while remaining, let him be cast out. Where did you come from and from whom did this fierce ailment come from, the wisest men of Rome and the noblest of all others? Not knowing, as if there were no Jews from the Jews who believed under the Apostles, the money-grubbers and money-lovers have found themselves and want to turn many of the faithful away from the gospel, and because the preaching has grown in faith, they will also preach Christianity together. We speak of those who exist about Simon and Demas, Nikoliz and Kleob. And the supreme Apostles, in the sixth book of the testament, in the 16th chapter, decided more clearly: we know that Simon and Kleob, who wrote a book in the name of Christ, and his disciple, are deceiving you and the servants of Christ. And in the Old Netius, they copied the hidden books of Moses and Enoch, Adam, Isaiah and David, and Elijah, and the three patriarchs, corruptible and hostile to the truth, but also of Paul, the Lord's Apostle. This, as I remember, having foretold that such things would come from such in you, in a word declaring to you, the Philippian wrote: watch out for the dogs, watch out for the evil workers, watch out for the cutting. And Timothy again in the last times, speaking: the netizens will depart from the faith, heeding spiritual flattery and the teachings of demons, in hypocrisy they speak falsely and are seared in their conscience, forbidding marriage, being dishonest, and so on. And Titus: reprove those, speaking, impudently, so that they may live in the faith, not heeding Jewish fables and the commandments of men, who turn away from the truth. Yes, as you know, test about this, beloved, food from such poisonous ailments, spoken of and exposed. I say unleavened bread, Saturday fasting, priestly marriage, and even after eating the offerings in fasting, and now having become accustomed to keeping them from the inspired scripture, keep them and create them. The ever-shining eyes of the Church of the being of God and of the entire Universe may unite with you our brethren such as those who were spoken of for the sake of spreading the body of Christ. With a frank face we contemplate the Glory of the Lord. In accordance with the unanimity of the Orthodox faith, both the image and the same are transformed from glory into one and the same into eternal glory, as from the Lord Spirit, as he is the head of our body and church and in him we are all articulated. This to the Romans to you: if we obey the people who are, by whom we have decided, and by whom we have commanded you, it is good to obey the Spirit, and to obey the word according to the word. It’s good about the thing if you don’t give us evidence from the divine scriptures that compose you. About them you are voluntarily resting, as if you were resting on the throne of feelings. And we knowingly obey not the harsh words of the spirit, we kiss you in silence in Christ Jesus our Lord. To him be glory and power with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.