View of Professor V.V. Bolotov on Old Catholicism and Roman Catholicism

On the day of the opening of his tombstone on April 19, 1903. In 1882, at the solemn meeting of the Orthodox Palestine Society, the late T. I. Filippov said: “When a conversation arises between us about the spirit of the Latin Church, about its continuous, never-resting activity aimed at winning the souls of an alien flock, about the miracles of self-sacrifice performed by its troops sent to all corners of the world, about the material and mental benefits provided them in corners of the globe unknown to anyone - and when, next to this seething and animated activity, our calm and costless inaction is juxtaposed, then we usually get out of difficulties with a completely special, original method of judgment. We have invented our own theory for this case, which teaches that propaganda is not at all characteristic of the spirit of the Orthodox Church and is not at all included in the circle of our duties, that it is enough for us to preserve what we have and not to look for what belongs to others, that the alarming activity of the Latin Church is explained by the tendency inherent in every error and vice to increase the number of its followers.” Such an accusation of the Russian people, it seems to us, is too harsh and perhaps unfair. The influence in the sense of propaganda in the narrow sense of the word is explained rather by the tolerance towards any belief inherent in the national character of the Russian people 1 . But besides this reason, there is another – dogmatic-canonical. This is especially true in the relationship between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church, at its “ecumenical” (concilia oecumenica) councils (Tridentinum and Vaticanum), recognized the Orthodox Church as heretical and anathematized it, therefore, propaganda aspirations towards the Orthodox Church as “errious” are quite understandable and from its point of view natural. The Orthodox Church, after the separation of the Roman Church from it, did not have ecumenical councils and did not give its “ecumenical” judgment on relations with the Roman Catholic Church. churches. This is where the root of the relationship of the Orthodox Church to Rome is. In view of this state of affairs, the relations of the Orthodox Church are not completely normalized, as a result of which both hierarchs and learned theologians of the Orthodox Church look at these relations differently. Some consider Roman Catholicism more alien and hostile to Orthodoxy, while others consider Protestantism. Since the slogan of modern times in the Christian East and West is Christian unity 2, it is very interesting to know the view on this issue of such an outstanding learned theologian as Professor Vasily Vasilyevich Bolotov. Speaking about Bolotov in general, as a learned theologian, as well as about his views on Old Catholicism and Roman Catholicism, we involuntarily recall the words of the poet Schiller, who said: “Wenn die Könige baün haben die Karner zu thun,” because Bolotov was a real king of theological science in the broad sense of the word. – Bolotov most clearly expressed his views on both Old Catholicism and Roman Catholicism in his classic article: “Thesen über das Filioque,” ​​which, in its scientific nature, can be compared with the best works on dogmatic issues. In this article, Bolotov makes a distinction between “dogma”, “theologumenon” and “theological opinion”. By “dogma” he understands the same thing that the Orthodox Church recognizes - in the words of St. Vincent of Lirinsky: "id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est, which is also recognized by the Old Catholics. By "theologumenon" he means "theological opinion", but the opinion not of ordinary, but of outstanding theologians, who have a special meaning for Christians - this is the essence of the opinions of Sts. the fathers of the undivided church - the opinions of those whom we call "οι διδάσκαλοι τη ς οὶυνμέμης." By “theological opinion” Bolotov means the opinion of famous learned theologians, among whom he was licet maxime dignus (p. 682). From this it follows that dogmas contain “necessaria”, and theologumenon “dubia”, and therefore dogma is necessary and obligatory, while theologumenon and “theological opinions” do not constitute necessary conditions for church unity. According to Bolotov: “theological opinions and theologumena constitute an actual luxury item, and do not serve as an absolute necessity” (p. 685). Considering the teaching of the “Filioque” theologumenon, Bolotov, understandably, considers it quite possible to unite the Old Catholics with the Orthodox Church. He writes: "We and the Old Catholics stand at different levels of culture. Among us Russians, very few people still feel the need to have, in addition to dogmas, a theologumena and private opinions, while among the Old Catholics theological opinions have already been developed," (p. 686) 3). Recognizing the “Filioque” as a theologumenon, which serves as a result of education, Bolotov considers the cause of the division (impedimentum dirimens) of the Eastern and Western churches to be the papacy 4. To the question: “What was the reason for the division of the united Catholic Church?” Bolotov replies: “Communication was interrupted by the Roman papacy, the old implacable enemy of the Catholic Church, which, in all likelihood, will only cease to exist when the last enemy - death - disappears!” (pages: 687 and 712). From these words it is clear that Prof. Bolotov did not hold out hope for the possibility of connecting with the Roman-cat. church even in the most distant future. Reading these arguments by Bolotov about Roman-cat. church we are reminded of Bruno's poems in his “cena delle ceneri. Dimmi in che modo si potranno corregere questi? Con toglierli via quel capo, e piantarline un altro“. The late V.S. Solovyov asked: “Is there such a world power that could truly unite in historical life the divine principle with the human, piety with education, religion with humanism?” We firmly believe that there is such a force, but it is not abstract: it is made up of the great people of the Holy Church through their works and lives, the quorum magna pars was Vasily Vasilyevich Bolotov. K.I. Pobedonostsev. Moscow. Collection. Page 218. Prof. Kovalsky (now Archbishop Dimitry of Kazan) “On the significance of the national element in history. development". Page 1. Compare Sylvester. Experience is right. Dogma. Theologian. T. II. Page 599. This view was expressed in our theologian. Literature Prof. Belyaev, and scientifically and historically processed the prototype. I.L. Yanyshev in "Chronicles" for 1854, Part II “Histor. A look at the department churches."