P atristics- (from the Greek pater - father) denotes the totality of theological, philosophical and political-sociological doctrines of Christian thinkers of the 2nd - 8th centuries, the so-called church fathers. In the 2nd-3rd centuries. there was fragmentary philosophizing by the apologists of patristics: Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen. In the 4th-5th centuries. - systematization of church doctrine: Basil the Great, in the west - Augustine. 6th century - stabilization of dogmas and codification of sciences under the auspices of theology: Leontius of Byzantium, Boethius...
The four figures are named Doctors of the Western Church- Saint Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Pope Gregory the Great.
The heyday of Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine occurred in the period between the victory of the Catholic Church in the Roman Empire and the barbarian invasion. Immediately after they left the scene, Italy, Spain and Africa found themselves at the mercy of the barbarians. Civilization entered a period of centuries-long decline and only after about 1000 years, the Christian world was able to once again produce people equal to Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine. Their authority was revered throughout the Middle Ages; More than anyone else, they contributed to determining the form that the church took.
Ambrose- substantiated the church concept of the relationship between church and state (independence of the church). Jerome- gave the Western Church the Latin Bible, the initiative of the monastic movement came from him. Augustine- developed the theology of the church, which was in effect until the Reformation. He tried to reconcile philosophy with scripture, something that earlier Christian philosophers had not done. His best work is "Confessions". Augustine argued that the world was not created from matter, but from nothing, while Greek philosophy argued that the world could not be created from nothing. These views in Christian times led to pantheism: God and the world are inseparable. Augustine tried to correlate these two theories. He said that God is eternal and exists outside of time. He does not precede his own creation of time, since he is outside the flow of time. The past and the future can only be understood as the present: the past can be identified with memory, and the future with expectation, but they are facts relating to the present, i.e. time is an aspect of our thoughts. In the work "On the City of God" Augustine says:
1. about the wickedness of the pagan gods.
2. in the present world there are two cities - earthly and heavenly, they are mixed, but in the future they will be separated.
3. Blessed is eternal, but not everything that is eternal is blessed.
Gave synchronization of sacred and secular history.
Patristics of the 5th - 6th centuries.
5th century- this is the time of barbarian invasions and the fall of the Western Roman Empire. After the death of St. Augustine (430), philosophical thought almost died out. At this time, the Angles invaded Britain, the Franks invaded Gaul (modern France), and the Vandals invaded Spain. In the middle of the 5th century, St. Patrick converted the Irish to Christianity, i.e. German kingdoms were formed in Europe. The Goths came to Italy, and they were driven here from the east by the Huns (Mongols). During this period of chaos, the church was torn by controversy over the issue of the incarnation. The main opponents are two clergymen - Cyril and Nestorius. Kirill- Patriarch of Alexandria, and Nestorius- Constantinople. The controversy arose over how the divine and human natures of Christ relate to each other. Nestorius: in Christ there are two faces - human and divine, the Mother of God is the mother of the human, the divine face had no mother.
Kirill believed that in Christ there is only the divine. As a result, the church split.
In the 6th century- Boethius, Justinian, Gregory the Great.
Boethius: imperfection is a flaw that presupposes the existence of a perfect image. Evil is in the absence of a positive principle. Bliss and God are the highest blessings, therefore they are identical, therefore everyone who is happy is God. Virtuous people are powerful, bad people are weak.
What little survived from the culture of ancient Rome was preserved by the church, which had three areas of activity: 1. monastic movement; 2. the growth of the influence of the papacy; 3. conversion of barbarians from paganism to Christianity.
The monastic movement began simultaneously in Egypt and Syria around the beginning of the 4th century in the form of solitary hermits and monasteries. The first hermit is Saint Anthony (270). Pachomius (315) founded the first monastery. Most of the monks did not read or work. Played a major role in the monastic movement Saint Benedict, founder of the Benedictine Order. He did not require strict asceticism. Gregory the Great born in Rome around 540 into a wealthy noble family. He was prefect of Rome. He distributed his wealth to found monasteries. He had no sympathy for secular knowledge.
The traditional name of the leaders of the Christian Church of the 2nd-8th centuries, who created its dogma and organization. The main church fathers in Catholicism are Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory I the Great, in Orthodoxy Athanasius of Alexandria, ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
- (holy fathers) the traditional name of the figures of the Christian church of the 2nd 8th centuries, who created its dogma and organization. The main fathers of the Church in Catholicism are Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory I the Great, in Orthodoxy Athanasius of Alexandria... Historical Dictionary
Church Fathers- (“holy fathers”), the traditional name of the figures of the Christian church of the 2nd 8th centuries, who created its dogma and organization. The main church fathers in Catholicism are Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory I the Great, in Orthodoxy Athanasius... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary
Church Fathers- ("Holy Fathers") is the traditional name of the leaders of the Christian Church of the 2nd - 8th centuries, who created its dogma and organization. The main fathers of the Church in Catholicism are Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory I the Great, in Orthodoxy Athanasius... Encyclopedic Dictionary of World History
The traditional name of the leaders of the Christian Church of the 2nd 8th centuries, who created its dogma and organization. The main church fathers in Catholicism are Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory I the Great, in Orthodoxy Athanasius of Alexandria, Basil... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary
See Patristics. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. 2010… Philosophical Encyclopedia
Church Fathers- (holy fathers) those of the church writers whose works are recognized by the Church itself as the most accurate expression of the teachings it preserves. When people talk about the Fathers of the Church, they usually mean great theologians, such as, for example, Saint Ignatius... Orthodoxy. Dictionary-reference book
A term used to designate early Christian writers who developed doctrine on the basis of Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. Thanks to these authors, the church accepted the philosophy and culture of the Greco-Roman world, assimilating its sound elements, and... ... Collier's Encyclopedia
Three Hierarchs Fathers of the Church (in Orthodoxy, Holy Fathers) is an honorary title used since the end of the 4th century in relation to a group of outstanding church figures and writers of the past, whose authority had special weight in the formation of dogma, the compilation ... ... Wikipedia
Traditional name the most prominent figures of Christ. churches of the 2nd 8th centuries, which created its dogma and organization. Ch. O. c. in Catholicism, Ambrose of Milan, Augustine, Jerome, Gregory the Great, in Orthodoxy, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory the Theologian, John... ... Soviet historical encyclopedia
Books
- , Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) Category: Religion and spiritual literature Series: Contemporary Theology Publisher: BBI, Manufacturer: BBI,
- Church Fathers. From Clement of Rome to Saint Augustine, Benedict XVI, The Book of Pope Benedict XVI is a collection of texts he spoke publicly on Wednesdays from March 2007 to February 2008. In each of these weekly meetings, Dad introduces us... Category: Catholicism. Protestantism Series: Contemporary Theology Publisher:
FATHERS AND TEACHERS OF THE CHURCH - in Christianity, the traditional name for outstanding theologians and church leaders who played an important role in the development of Christian dogma and the organization of the Church and developed church teaching and their own Christianity spiritual experience in a particularly clear, deep and convincing form.
The doctrinal authority of the Fathers and teachers of the Church is recognized in the Orthodox, Catholic, Nestorian and Monophysite traditions (although the list of Fathers and teachers of the Church may be different). Protestantism rejects it, considering the Holy Scripture to be the only source of doctrine. The scientific and theological discipline that studies the life, works and teachings of the Fathers and teachers of the Church, as well as church writers, is patrolology (see Patristics).
The title “father” in relation to a spiritual director is found both in the Old Testament (2 Kings 13:14) and in the New Testament (1 Cor. 4:15). It was used in the same meaning by early Christian authors (Clement of Alexandria, Saint Irenaeus of Lyons and others). In Christian antiquity, the successors to the authority of the apostles were called the Fathers of the Church. Initially, almost exclusively bishops were called fathers of the Church, since it was they who carried out the teaching ministry in the ancient Church. From the 4th-5th centuries, church teachers who did not have episcopal rank (however, as a rule, monastics) began to be called fathers. In the 5th century, the Monk Vincent of Lerins, in his essay “Memoirs,” put forward 3 criteria for belonging to the category of Church Fathers: Orthodox teaching (orthodoxy), personal holiness, and antiquity. Subsequently, a 4th criterion was added in church science - recognition by the Church. Authors who did not meet one or more of these criteria, but nevertheless belonged to the Church (Eusebius of Caesarea, Lactantius and many others), are usually classified as “church writers.”
The first list of 13 Church Fathers (3 Eastern and 10 Western) is contained in a letter of Pseudo-Gelasius (5th-6th centuries). Among all the Fathers of the Church, Sacred Tradition over time began to highlight some particularly outstanding, or “chosen fathers.” One of the first lists of outstanding Church Fathers was presented by Emperor Justinian I at the meeting of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (553) and approved by this council. It included 12 Church Fathers (8 Eastern and 4 Western): Saints Athanasius the Great, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Hilary of Pictavia, Ambrose of Milan, Leo I the Great, Augustine, as well as Theophilus of Alexandria and Proclus of Constantinople.
The concept of “teacher of the Church” is used both as a synonym for the phrase “father of the Church” and in other meanings. In the pathological literature of the 19th and early 20th centuries, it was customary to refer to church authors as teachers of the Church who, according to some criteria, were not classified as church fathers, but either served as didaskals in the ancient Church (for example, Clement of Alexandria, Origen), or had a significant influence on development of theology (for example, Tertullian). Sometimes especially prominent and chosen Fathers of the Church are called teachers of the Church. Thus, in the Orthodox Church, Saints Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom are called “great universal teachers and saints.” In the Roman Catholic Church in 1298, Pope Boniface VIII approved a list of 8 “great teachers of the Church”: 4 Latin (Saints Ambrose of Milan, Jerome the Blessed, Augustine, Gregory I the Great) and 4 Greek (Saints Athanasius the Great, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom). At the same time, in the Catholic tradition there is a tendency, based on the criterion of antiquity, to limit the era of the Fathers of the Church to the 1st-8th centuries (the last Father of the Church in the West is considered to be Saint Isidore of Seville, in the East - Saint John of Damascus). After them comes the era of teachers of the Church (Catholic), who meet all the criteria of patristic authority, except antiquity. Only the Ecumenical Council or the Pope can classify a theologian as a teacher of the Roman Catholic Church. In the Orthodox tradition, the criterion of antiquity is not of decisive importance, since it is believed that the grace of the Holy Spirit, which inspires the Fathers of the Church, operates in any era of the Church’s existence. Therefore, in Orthodox theology, those church leaders who lived much later than the 8th century (Rev. Simeon the New Theologian, St. Gregory Palamas and others) are also recognized as the Fathers of the Church.
For the Church, the written heritage of the Fathers and teachers of the Church is of great importance: it primarily contains the Holy Tradition and gives the interpretation of the Holy Scripture generally recognized in the Church (see Biblical Exegesis). Therefore, according to the Christian tradition, all questions about faith, the rules of piety and church structure should be resolved in the light of the teachings of the Fathers and teachers of the Church. It is believed that the works of the Fathers and teachers of the Church were written under the influence of the grace of the Holy Spirit, but at the same time, they also contain the human element characteristic of the fathers, as bearers of individuality and as representatives of a certain era, culture, and so on. In the church tradition, an important role is played by the principle of “consent of the fathers” (lat. consensus patrum), according to which all the Fathers and teachers of the Church cannot be mistaken in the same issue of doctrine. Theological opinions that differ from the doctrinal definitions of all or the majority of the Fathers and teachers of the Church, which agree with each other, but are not recognized as clearly heretical, are usually called theologumena, which do not have generally binding authority.
(6 votes: 5.0 out of 5)Patrol course. Introduction
In early Christian usage, the concept of "father" was usually associated with the term "teacher." Already the holy Apostle Paul hints at this, saying: “Although you have a thousand mentors, you have not many fathers; I have begotten you in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (). The saint also says: “For if anyone is taught by anyone, he is called the son of a teacher, and this one is his father.” Finally, he says: “Words are products of the soul. Therefore we call those who instruct us fathers.”
A similar inextricable connection between the two concepts, reaching almost to identification, can then be traced in early monasticism, where the word “abba” simultaneously implied the meaning of “spiritual father” and “teacher.” This usage has been partially preserved among us, for we are talking not just about “fathers of the Church,” but about “fathers and teachers of the Church.” At the same time, these concepts have acquired some shades of difference in modern Orthodox usage, which I would like to dwell on.
Among all church writers, the Fathers of the Church occupy a special place. For example, the Right Reverend speaks about this clearly: “Christ’s kingdom of truth and holiness, founded by Christ the Lord and by the power of the Holy Spirit acting through his chosen ones, is always alive in its members...; and the high honor of being chosen instruments of the Spirit of God is given to the Fathers of the Church.” They are continuers of the work of Sts. Apostles: “these are those successors of the apostolic spirit who, by the gifts of a God-enlightened mind and who, by the grace-filled purity of their souls, wanted to offer and offered in the scriptures the pure truth of Christ, the seed of God, working for salvation.”
Naturally, the following question arises: which of the Christian writers should be classified as the actual “fathers of the Church”? Catholic scholars and theologians put forward four main criteria for defining the concept of “Church Fathers”: 1) orthodoxy of teaching, 2) holiness of life, 3) recognition of the Church and 4) antiquity. These criteria, with the exception of the last one, are also recognized by Orthodox patrolologists. However, it should be noted that none of the above criteria can be considered from a narrow formal point of view. For example, if we take the first criterion, then it is necessary to take into account that, although the Divinely revealed truths of Christianity are immutable and are given to us in their unshakable completeness, their perception and disclosure on the part of man occurred over time and gradually. In the course of history, the human mind seems to have gradually moved (and is moving) towards an ever greater completeness of knowledge and conceptual expression of these truths. As Archimandrite Sylvester writes: “God gradually accustomed people to comprehend Revelation, just as they accustom those living in darkness to the light.” And therefore, in the course of his earthly history, he “extracts known truths from Revelation and puts them before the eyes of believers, raising them to the level of dogma, i.e. the truth is already indisputable." As a result, the activity of the Church “is, one might say, a kind of internal, continuous dialectical work, tending, with the desire to protect the truths of faith from all kinds of errors, towards a more and more accurate explanation and definition of them for a more lasting establishment in the minds of believers.” This process can be conditionally called the process of “dogmatization.” The graduality of such dialectical work of the conciliar mind of the Church forces us to be careful in assessing the views of this or that father and teacher of the Church, warning against “anachronism of judgments.” For example, if we consider the triadology of the Ante-Nicene fathers from the point of view of a clearly formulated doctrine of the Holy Trinity (which found classical expression in the famous “Nicene-Constantinopolitan symbol”), then we can state that many of these fathers clearly gravitated towards subordinationism. Similarly, in the Christology of St. There are some inaccurate formulations that can be interpreted, so to speak, in a “Monophysite” way. In addition, the criterion of “orthodoxy” cannot be applied narrowly formally and in the sense that everything said by one or another father is the ultimate truth. For “the writings of the fathers are human works and differ significantly from the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, which are inspired by God, compiled under the special influence of the Holy Spirit. Spirit and therefore should be considered and revered as Sacred and Divine Scripture. With very rare exceptions, no one mixed the works of the Church Fathers with the inspired writings of the prophets and apostles, and such mixing should not be allowed without the danger of getting entangled in hopeless contradictions. From here, with constant submission to the always living, always infallible authority of the Church, which is the faithful custodian of the divine promises and the universal and continuous Tradition, a certain freedom follows for us in the study of the fatherly works and the teaching contained in them; from here, without diminishing the importance of the fathers, we get the opportunity and the right to make the necessary differences in the assessment of their teaching.” Therefore, according to the opinion of one of the first Russian patrolologists, a distinction should be made between “errors” and “misconceptions,” because they “are not the same thing. It is another thing to sin in such truths that, not being defined by the Church, could be explained one way or another - and quite another thing to persist against the clear definition of the entire Church. The first type of error can often be found in St. fathers, but not errors of the second kind. Errors of St. One should not approve of husbands and stubbornly adhere to them, just as one should not reproach them for them, remembering the truth that a holy man, as a person, could sometimes make mistakes.”
As for the second criterion - the holiness of life, here one should beware of identifying the concepts of “holiness” and “sinlessness,” for, as is known, there is only one God without sin. Therefore, we must not forget that the fathers of the Church were people: in their lives there could have been falls, misdeeds, etc., but through their feat of repentance, prayer and good deeds they redeemed them before the Lord and the Church unanimously recognizes them as saints. On the other hand, some heretics, for example, Nestorius, in the outer aspect of their personal lives approached the ideal of holiness, but this does not allow them to be canonized, because the formal application of only one criterion is not allowed by the conciliar reason of the Church. As a result, “holiness must be sealed by a blessed death in communion with the Church or even martyrdom for Christ. The holiness of the life of St. fathers serves:
a) guarantee of their spiritual experience as leaders in the holy Christian life,
b) the basis of their deep penetration into the truths of Christian doctrine, according to the principle,
c) a guarantee of their boundless devotion to the truth and the Church, as church teachers and defenders of the interests of the Church.”
Therefore, the third criterion – recognition of the Church – is the main and decisive factor in determining the boundaries of the concept “fathers of the Church.” However, here, too, recognition of the Church cannot be completely identified with canonization. The host of saints in heaven is countless and not all the saints of the Church above, who were “the secret workers of the Kingdom of God,” are known to us, since we know only in part and it is not possible for us, who are in the “vale of sorrow,” to penetrate into the innermost essence of the great mystery of the Church. The canonization of saints only outlines the contours of this great mystery. For “in relation to some persons of the Church, not enough time has passed to find out the will of God about them, glorifying his saints at his own discretion. Therefore, if the high qualities of famous persons, their high education and ascetic life, are not subject to doubt and they enjoy the respect of the Church, although not among the saints: then, without allowing yourself to call them saints without the will of the Spirit of God. fathers, we must recognize them as the most famous teachers of the Church, otherwise, following the example of the Church, we must call them blessed teachers, blessed fathers and place them after St. fathers. Such, for example, are Patriarch Photius, "
The fourth criterion (antiquity), put forward by Catholic theologians, is not recognized, as noted above, by Orthodox patrolologists. Based on it, Catholic scientists complete the actual patrolology in the Greek East of St. (beginning of the 8th century), and in the Latin West - (7th century). The Orthodox point of view on this matter was clearly expressed by the late father: “Our Church teaches that Divine Revelation is not limited by any chronological framework. The Holy Spirit acts through people of all times, and the Church “recognizes” its “holy fathers” in people not because of antiquity, but guided by its inner intuition, on the basis of which Tradition is formed.” As a result, the science of patrolology, strictly speaking, does not have a final chronological limit, or, to be more precise, this limit is established by the coming end of the existence of this created world and humanity.
Thus, the holy fathers of the Church are “the most reliable leaders in the matter of religious knowledge; their writings contain the Apostolic Tradition, therefore all disputes about faith, about the rules of piety and church decorum must necessarily be resolved in the light of the patristic writings; but only their unanimous and consistent teaching serves as an undoubted proof of truth; only this teaching should be accepted by everyone as an undoubted rule, and not every private thought of theirs and not every assumption and research of theirs. The Church at all times has had and has the need to indicate to her children such works that can serve as protection against unbelief, error and moral failures; and at all times she carefully distinguished those shepherds whom God especially rewarded with the gifts of His grace, prepared for the fight against heretics and bestowed with the gifts of wisdom and knowledge; she received their writings with special respect and offered them as a guide for future times.”
The principle of “consent of the fathers” (consensuspatrum) noted in this statement by Archimandrite Porfiry is of utmost importance for patrolology. Back in the 5th century. it was formulated quite clearly by St. : “But we must bear the judgment only of those fathers who, living, teaching and abiding in the faith and in Catholic communion, holy, wisely, constantly, were deemed worthy either to rest with faith in Christ, or to die blessedly for Christ. And one must believe them according to the following rule: that only either all of them, or the majority of them unanimously accepted, supported, transmitted openly, often unshakably, as if by some prior agreement among the teachers, then be considered undoubted, faithful and indisputable; and what anyone, whether he is a saint or a scientist, a confessor and a martyr, thought about, not in agreement with everyone or even contrary to everyone, is attributed to personal, secret, private opinions, different (secretum) from the authority of the general, open and popular belief; so that, leaving the ancient truth of the universal dogma, according to the wicked custom of heretics and schismatics, with the greatest danger regarding eternal salvation, we do not follow the new error of one person.”
It is precisely this “consent of the fathers” that makes them authoritative exponents of Sacred Tradition. And “Tradition is the Spirit of Christ, animating the Church and constituting its inner essence. Just as the human body is quickened by the soul, the Body of Christ is quickened by the Spirit of Christ living in It.” Naturally, the patristic works do not embrace the entirety of Church Tradition, but represent only part of it, along with the decrees of ecumenical councils, worship, church customs, etc. In addition, the works of the holy fathers are monuments of church writing, and in the Church written Tradition is always secondary, but in relation to oral Tradition. After all, “Christ’s Tradition, living and preached in the Church by pastors and teachers, is only written down little by little, for which in the Bible there is, as it were, an ideally perfect beginning, a prototype. The Orthodox Ecumenical Church, as the grace-filled mystery of the truth of Christ, inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit, always creates a special written language, a whole and complete series of verbal monuments of the infallible Tradition, rooted in its religious-Orthodox self-awareness. Thus, in the Church and by the Church only some part of what constitutes the religious essence of its existence and the life of all true believing Christians is always recorded. It is obvious that not all revealed teaching, not all religious life, not all, so to speak, dogmatic-canonical “material of faith,” found and living in the Church, is fully and completely expressed and imprinted in written works and verbal monuments of the church.” Of course, this does not at all detract from the significance of these creations, since written Tradition is an essential and integral part of the entire Sacred Tradition.
The situation is more complicated and confusing with the designation “teachers of the Church.” In the Catholic West in 1298, by decree of Pope Boniface, four were singled out from among the other fathers - Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine and Pope; they received the honorary title of “highly revered teachers of the Church” (egregii doctores ecclesiae), “doctors of the Church par excellence” (doctores ecclesiae pereminentiam) or “great fathers of the Church.” Then four more Eastern fathers were counted among these “primary teachers of the Church”: , and . Later, the title simply “teachers of the Church” (doctores ecclesiae) was adopted by a number of both Eastern (,) and Western church writers (Thomas Aquinas, Bernard of Clairvaux, Peter Damian, etc.). And “in the Orthodox Church and among Orthodox patrolologists, the title “teacher of the Church” does not have a stable and strictly defined meaning. Sometimes it is attached, as a particularly honorable title (“great universal teacher”), to the most famous of the Church Fathers (, and); for the most part it is used in relation to the most outstanding of church writers who are not awarded by the Church the honorary title of “fathers of the Church,” but are known for their high qualities, exceptional education, ascetic life and are respected in the Church, although not among the saints (for example, Jerome, Augustine, ), and in their significance are close to the fathers, standing in close connection with them. However, no definite instructions have been developed in this regard, why in our country the Fathers of the Church are opposed simply by church writers, i.e. such writers who do not have some patristic properties - did not imprint in their lives and writings in perfect purity and integrity the devoted faith of the Church, but until the end of their lives remained in spiritual communion with the Church, etc., such as, for example, those named Clement of Alexandria , Origen, Jerome, Augustine, etc. Some of them were singled out by the Church itself for some reason from a number of fathers (Eusebius of Caesarea at the VII Ecumenical Council), the errors of others were clarified with the precise formulation of church teaching (for example, opinions), about others The Church did not express its judgment or recognize them as saints and glorified.”
It is the absence of clear criteria in the definition of the concept of “teachers of the Church” that sometimes leads to some difference of opinion among Orthodox patrolologists. For example, in contrast to, on this score it is expressed as follows:
“It should be noted that we incorrectly call “teachers” church writers who have sinned in history and are not honored with the name of St. fathers, while the title “teacher of the Church” is more respectable than “father of the Church” and was adopted by a few of them, who were luminaries and leaders in the fight against heresies. It is therefore much more correct to call all those who are not canonized among the fathers “ecclesiastical writers” (ecclesiasticiscriptores). The signs of the Fathers of the Church do not apply to them, visually due to the lack of Orthodoxy in their views on some points of teaching and, consequently, due to the lack of communication with the Church. The Church does not recognize their authority, and this non-recognition of them is expressed either in the form of leaving them without attention in the list of witnesses of the Holy Tradition and not being accepted into the calendar, or in the form of open rejection.” However, in our opinion, such a point of view represents a certain extreme, especially in relation to the ancient period of church writing. The fact is that some of the named Christian writers (Clement of Alexandria, Origen) performed a special church service as “didaskals” and were perceived by the Church precisely as “teachers.” Taking into account this specificity of the most ancient period of church literature (which, it should be noted, appeared quite often in later eras up to the present day), we consider it possible to apply the title “teacher of the Church” to those Christian writers who labored in the great field of church teaching.
In general, it is necessary to emphasize that “church writers who do not have church authority equal to the patristic one should also be the subject of careful and detailed study in pathological science. And the need for this is based, first of all, on the fact that the division into the Fathers of the Church and simply church writers is possible only in abstraction, when a church writer is assessed as a person, isolated from the general course of church life and especially considered in relation to her personal merits, firmness in the faith and unwavering devotion to the teachings of the Church; but such a division cannot be made if one vividly imagines the wide, often stormy, course of the life of the ancient Church; here the fathers of the Church are constantly replaced by church writers, some influence others, everyone takes an active part in the life of the Church, in its struggle against external and internal enemies of the faith, in the disclosure and substantiation of Christian truth, but there is no way to accurately calculate what should be attributed to literary the activities of the recognized fathers of the Church, on the one hand, and church writers, on the other. It is enough to recall the influence that the church writer had on the Father of the Church Cyprian, Origen on the outstanding fathers of the Church of the 4th century, Bl. Augustine - on the theologians of the Western Church. Further, church writers - theologians and the most educated men of Christian antiquity - had a strong and very important influence on the disclosure of the inner content of Christianity, the deepening and formation of church teaching; in confirmation of this, one can point to Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Augustine, Theodoret of Cyrus. Finally, as historical witnesses about the faith and life of the Church of their time, church writers are very important. As for, so to speak, the legal right to involve in the study the works of church writers who were not proclaimed by the Church as “fathers,” it is sufficiently based on the historical fact that the Orthodox Church has never set out as its deliberate task to determine the ecclesiastical significance of all church writers and the degree of accuracy in their expression of church teaching.” Therefore, “patrological science should not establish in advance a definite choice between the works of ancient church writing, and study some and reject others; all surviving monuments of ancient church writing, all literary and historical material left by members of the ancient Church, must be studied with the detail and thoroughness required by the significance of it in general and in individual parts. »
An international scientific and practical conference took place in St. Petersburg
In the apostasy time we are experiencing today, when the so-called “new world order” is being coordinatedly implanted throughout the world, when so many crafty calls are heard about the so-called “unification of all equal Christian churches,” when the so-called “pan-ecumenical movement” is expanding and strengthening, the true goal which is the construction of a new “global Tower of Babel”, on which it is supposed to ascend the Antichrist, it will be timely and opportune for all true Orthodox Christians to be reminded what opinion about Roman Catholic papism was expressed and professed by our great Russian Orthodox saints: St. right John of Kronstadt, St. Theodosius of Kiev-Pechersk, St. Ambrose Optinsky.
NE. RIGHTEOUS JOHN OF KRONSTADT
In his work "Thoughts on the Church" St. Righteous John of Kronstadt writes:
“No confession of the Christian Faith, except the Orthodox, can lead a Christian to the perfection of Christian life or holiness and to the complete cleansing of sins and to incorruption, because other non-Orthodox confessions “contain truth in untruth” (Rom. 1, 18), mixed with superstition and lies to the truth and do not possess those God-given means for purification, sanctification, revival, renewal, which the Orthodox Church possesses. The experiences of centuries, or the history of the Orthodox Church and other churches have shown and show this with amazing clarity. Remember the many saints of our Church, former and modern times - and their absence, due to the division of churches, in other, non-Orthodox churches: Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican."
But the spiritual thoughts of St. right John of Kronstadt, directed against ecumenical provisions: “There are many separate faiths of Christianity, with different external and internal structures, with different opinions and teachings, often contrary to the divine truth of the Gospel and the teaching of the Holy Apostles, Ecumenical and Local Councils and Holy Fathers. It cannot be considered they are all true and saving: indifference in faith, or the recognition of all faith as equally saving, leads to unbelief or cooling towards faith, to negligence about the fulfillment of the rules and regulations of the faith, to cooling of Christians towards each other. "Simone, Simone, behold Satan asks you to sow like wheat" (Luke 22:31). This is what he, Satan, did and is doing, that is, he gave birth to schisms and heresies. Strictly adhere to the One True Faith and Church: "One faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all" (Eph. 4:5).
What is the immeasurable superiority of our St. Orthodox Church?
“The Orthodox Church surpasses all non-Orthodox churches, firstly, in its truth, its Orthodoxy, preserved and won by the blood of the apostles, hierarchs, martyrs, saints and all saints; secondly, in that it most surely leads to salvation (even, direct and the right way), which truly cleanses, sanctifies, renews through the hierarchy, Divine services, sacraments, fasting; thirdly, which best teaches to please God and save one’s soul, best guides to repentance, correction, prayer, thanksgiving, glorification. Where are there such prayers, praises, thanksgivings and petitions, such wonderful divine services as in the Orthodox Church? - Nowhere."
How powerfully, expressively and convincingly St. speaks. right John of Kronstadt about all the absurdity of the cornerstone of the dogmatic system of Catholicism - the false teaching about the primacy of the Pope as the infallible “Vicar of Christ.” Here are his words:
"I am with you always, even to the end of the age"(Matt. 28:20). The Lord Himself is always inherent in His Church - why is the Pope the vicar? And can a sinful person be the Lord’s vicegerent? - Can not. The vicegerent of the Tsar, the vicegerent of the Patriarch in any city can and does exist, but no one can be the vicegerent, the deputy of the Lord, the Beginningless King and the Head of the Church. Right. Catholics are wrong. Instill in them, Lord, that those who assert such things are absurd and are surrounded by pride like a necklace.”
From this harmful false “dogma,” according to Fr. John, traces its origin as from its root, and all the evil and distortion of the truth in Catholicism:
“The most harmful thing in Christianity,” he says, in this revealed, heavenly religion is the primacy of a person in the Church, for example, the pope and his supposed infallibility. It is precisely in the dogma of his infallibility that the greatest fallibility lies., for the pope is a sinful man, and it will be a disaster if he thinks of himself that he is infallible. How many great errors, disastrous for human souls, the Catholic, papal Church has invented - in dogmas, in rituals, in canonical rules, in worship, in the malicious attitudes of Catholics towards the Orthodox, in blasphemies and slander against the Orthodox Church, in curses addressed to the Orthodox Church and to Orthodox Christians! And the supposedly infallible Pope, his and the Jesuits’ doctrine, their spirit of lies, double-mindedness and all sorts of wrong means “ad majorem Dei gloriam” (to the great glory of God) are to blame for all this.”
“It is necessary to belong to the Church of Christ, whose Head is the Almighty King, the Conqueror of hell, Jesus Christ. His kingdom is a church militant with the principalities and powers and rulers of the darkness of this age, with the spirits of evil in high places, who make up a skillfully organized kingdom and fight with extreme experience, intelligence and strong with all people, having well studied all their passions and inclinations. One Man here in the field is not a warrior; and a great society, but non-Orthodox and without a Head - Christ - cannot do anything with such enemies, cunning, subtle, constantly awake, excellent who have studied the science of their war. An Orthodox Christian needs strong support from above from God and from the holy soldiers of Christ, who defeated the enemies of salvation by the power of Christ's grace, and from the earthly Orthodox Church, from pastors and teachers, then - public prayer and sacraments. This is such a helper a Christian man in the fight against invisible and visible enemies is precisely the Church of Christ, to which, by God’s grace, we belong. Catholics invented a new chapter, humiliating the One true head of the Church - Christ; the Lutherans fell away and were left without a Head; Anglicans too: they don’t have a Church, the alliance with the Head is broken, there is no omnipotent help, and Belial fights with all his strength, cunning and keeps everyone in his charm and destruction. There are many who perish in godlessness and debauchery."
The “dogma” of the primacy of the pope, as St. repeatedly emphasizes. Righteous John of Kronstadt, put a suffocating stamp of pride and falsehood on all the activities of the papists:
“The reason for all the falsehoods of the Roman Catholic Church is pride and recognition of the Pope as the real head of the Church, and even infallible. Hence all the oppression of the Western Church, the oppression of thought and faith, the deprivation of true freedom in faith and life. The Pope laid his heavy hand on everything; hence - false dogmas, hence - duality and deceit in thought, word and deed; hence - various false rules and regulations in the confession of sins; hence - indulgences; hence - the distortion of dogmas; hence - the fabrication of saints of the Western Church and non-existent relics not glorified by God; hence - “and all exaltation that rises up against the knowledge of God” (2 Cor. 10:5) and all opposition to God under the guise of piety and zeal for the greater glory of God.”
“The pope and the papists became so proud and exalted themselves that they decided to criticize Christ Himself, the very Hypostatic Wisdom of God, and extended their pride (under the pretext of developing dogmas) to the point that they perverted some of His words, commandments and institutions, which should not be changed until the end of the age, for example, the word about the Holy Spirit, the commandment about the cup of His most pure Blood, which they deprived the laity of, they put into nothing the words of the Apostle Paul: “As often as you eat this Bread and drink this Cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until He comes” (1 Cor. 11:26); instead of leavened bread, unleavened bread is used at the Liturgy."
"Hatred of Orthodoxy, fanaticism and persecution of the Orthodox, murders - run like a red thread through all the centuries of the life of Catholicism. From their fruits you will know them. Is this the spirit commanded to us by Christ? If to anyone, then to Catholics, Lutherans and Reformers you can always say: “You don’t know whose spirit you are" (Luke 12:51-52)."
“For Catholics, the head of the Church is not Christ, but the Pope, and Catholics are jealous of the Pope, and not of Christ, they fight for the Pope, and not for Christ, and their zeal for faith always turns into passionate, misanthropic, frenzied fanaticism, fanaticism of blood and sword (bonfires), intransigence, double-mindedness, lies, cunning."
In our Orthodox Church, according to St. Righteous John of Kronstadt, even the divine service itself constantly reminds us of our spiritual unity under the common Head for all of us, Christians - Christ, which is completely violated by both Roman Catholics and Protestants, who have distorted the very idea of the Church.
“At every church service,” says St. John, “at home, private and public, the spiritual gaze of an Orthodox Christian is presented with the thought, the idea of a single spiritual body, which is the Church of Christ, the pillar and affirmation of the truth, the Head of which is Christ God Himself This Church of Christ, or the spiritual Body of Christ, consists of three tribes - heavenly, earthly and underworld, therefore the Holy Church of the earth (or the earthly tribe) daily intercedes before its Head for the forgiveness of the sins of those who have fallen asleep in faith and repentance and for their establishment in the Kingdom of Heaven And as mediators of his intercession he calls on the members of the Heavenly Church and the Head of the Church’s mental edification herself - the Mother of God, so that with their prayers the Lord will cover their sins and not deprive the Kingdom of Heaven. It is very gratifying and comforting for us, living on earth as members of the Church of God, to always believe, to know and hope that our spiritual Mother, the Holy Church, constantly prays secretly day and night for us, that we are always under the gracious protection of the Lord Himself, the Mother of God, St. Angels, forerunners and all saints. For Catholics, the head of the Church is the pope, a man who sins (although he is incorrectly proclaimed infallible) and, as such, he has made many errors in the Church of Christ, and by his very deeds he has shown himself to be such, and he has distorted and fettered the very concept of the Church of God and shackled the spiritual freedom and conscience of Christians. Catholics, while at the same time subjecting St. to the wrong blasphemy and hostility of Catholics. The Orthodox Church, the pillar and foundation of the truth. Protestants - the Germans and the English - have a completely distorted concept of the Church, for they do not have the grace of the legal priesthood, there are no sacraments, there is no tribe of heaven - the Heavenly Church: they do not recognize saints; there is no tribe of the underworld - the dead are not recognized and they do not pray for them, considering this unnecessary. Glory to the Orthodox Church! Glory to Christ God ~ the Most Holy Head, the only Head of the Church of God on earth! Glory to God in the Trinity that we did not fall into blasphemy against God, did not recognize and will not forever recognize a holy sinful man as the head of the Church!”
And this is how St. looked. right John of Kronstadt against everyone who does not belong to our St. Orthodox Church:
“I thank the Lord, who listened and is listening to my prayers in the sight of the all-saving and terrible Sacrifice (the Body and Blood of Christ) for the great societies that have lost in the faith, called Christian, but in essence apostate: Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican and others.”
"The rite of conversion from different faiths and confessions and joining the Orthodox Church - what does it show? The need for - abandonment of false faiths and confessions, denial of errors, confession of the True Faith and - repentance for all previous sins and promises to God to preserve and firmly confess the immaculate faith, to beware of sins and live in virtue."
Here is a clear and unambiguous assessment of St. right John of Kronstadt, the now so fashionable “ecumenism” that has already captured many local Christian churches, here is a strong and decisive answer to all “ecumenists” who propagandize, under the pretext of imaginary “love,” the equivalence and equality of all faiths and confessions!
In conclusion, we need to mention, as a clear and colorful illustration of the words of St. our righteous father John of Kronstadt about the “spirit of lies” in Roman Catholic papism, how Catholic priests intensively spread slander against St. right John, that he allegedly converted to Catholicism and therefore became so famous for his clairvoyance and miracles. This is how St. himself responds to such a shameless lie. Righteous John of Kronstadt in his word spoken in Vitebsk in the Peter and Paul Church on April 7, 1906:
“I strongly desired, dear fathers, brothers and sisters, to talk with you here in our city and church, for the glory of God and the holy, immaculate faith and Church, and for your confirmation on the path of salvation. Why did I want with a special desire to talk with you? And here's why. Living and serving as a priest in Kronstadt for the fifty-first year, I have recently received many letters from the western Polish region, especially the Grodno and Vilna provinces, written, so to speak, in tears of blood with bitter complaints about Catholic priests and their minions of lay Catholics, to persecute Orthodox Christians from them and to force them by all sorts of violent measures to convert to Catholicism, and the priests, without any twinge of conscience, slandered me that I allegedly converted to the Catholic faith, and the Tsar himself allegedly became a Catholic and everything orders to accept the Catholic faith. By so shamelessly slandering me and the Tsar, the Catholics forced many Orthodox peasants to accept Catholicism and impose an alien faith on them. Is this the spirit of Christ? Do not the priests prove by the way of their actions that the Catholic faith does not have in itself the vital force that conquers the mind, heart and will of a person to voluntarily follow it, and that its followers lure right-thinking people only through violence and deception?
Dear fathers and brothers! You know my firm presence and service in the Orthodox Church for fifty years now, you know, perhaps, my everlasting zeal for the right faith, you know about my numerous writings for the glory of God and the Orthodox Church and about the numerous signs of the power of God shown not only over Orthodox Christians, but also over Catholics and Lutherans and even Jews and Mohammedans, when they turned with faith through my prayers. Newspaper chronicles and untruthful, truthful eyewitness testimony testified and testify to this. I now testify before all of you and before the All-Seeing God that to this day miracles of healing do not fail among us. Does this mean that the Orthodox Faith is a dead faith, as Catholics slander? Doesn’t she constantly testify to her vitality and saving power, to her pleasingness to God?
I do not want to cite impartial thousand-year-old history as witness to any Catholic untruth: it is quite well known to the entire educated world. The memory of the ill-fated union of the seventeenth century is still fresh here in Russia: the memory of the fanatical hatred with which Catholics destroyed Orthodox churches in the western region is still fresh; We remember all the terrible insults and curses with which the Orthodox faith and the Orthodox Church and the unfortunate Orthodox Christians were called names. Now the times of union have resumed again. And when is this? When Catholics are given complete freedom, freedom, of course, not for the persecution of Orthodoxy and the Orthodox, but for mutual, peaceful, fraternal coexistence with Orthodox fellow citizens.
I quoted at the beginning the words of the Apostle Paul about the church as the Body of Jesus Christ. And about Christ as the Head of the Church, “Which is the fullness of Him who fills all in all” (Eph. 1:23).
We firmly believe in this single head of the Church, and we cannot recognize another, visible head as infallible, for two masters cannot work. It is quite enough for us to have a single Head, omnirighteous, omniscient, omnipotent, all-filling (the fullness of the One who fills everything in everything). This Head governs us, protects us and strengthens us in faith with the Holy Spirit, acts sacredly, enlightens, saves, and leads to perfection.
And if you want to see the glorious and God-pleasing fruits of our Orthodox faith, then we will point out to our enemies the multitude of heavenly eagles that have soared from our land into the sky towards the Sun of Truth Himself - all our saints, ancient and new, glorified by their equal angelic life, incorruption of relics and countless miracles .
In conclusion, I will say that the truth of our faith lies in itself, in its very essence: in it - “Yes”, and in it itself - “Amen”.
For everyone who honors the great saint of the Orthodox Church, the saint of God, the Russian Land, St. righteous father John of Kronstadt, his above words are more than enough for you to accept and fulfill in all their fullness, integrity and purity the dogmas of the Orthodox Faith with your spirit, heart, mind and whole life.
TESTAMENT OF REVEREND THEODOSIUSKIEV-PECHERSKY
“Lord, bless! I - Theodosius, the poor servant of the Most Holy Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit - was born in a pure and faithful faith and raised in good teaching by an Orthodox father and mother.
Do not join the Latin / Catholic / faith, do not adhere to their customs, avoid their communion and avoid all their teachings and abhor their morals.
Beware, children, of crooked believers and all their conversations, for our land is filled with them. If anyone saves his soul, it will be only by living in the Orthodox Faith, for there is no other faith better than our pure and holy Orthodox Faith.
By living in this faith, you will not only get rid of sins and eternal torment, but you will also become a partaker of eternal life and rejoice endlessly with the saints. And those living in a different faith: Catholic, or Muslim, or Armenian - will not see eternal life.
It is also not appropriate, child, to praise someone else’s faith. He who praises someone else's faith is the same as blaspheming his own. If anyone begins to praise both his own and someone else’s, then he is double-faithful and close to heresy. You, child, beware of such people, and constantly praise your faith. Do not fraternize with them, but flee from them and strive for your faith with good works. Give alms not only to those of your own faith, but also to strangers. If you see someone naked or hungry, or in trouble, be it a Jew or a Turk or a Latin, be merciful to everyone, deliver him from trouble as best you can, and you will not be deprived of a reward from God, for God Himself is in the present age pours out His mercies not only on Christians, but also on infidels. God cares for pagans and non-believers in this age, but in the future they will be strangers to eternal blessings. We, who live in the Orthodox Faith, receive all the benefits from God here, and in the next century our Lord Jesus Christ will save us.
Child, if you even need to die for your holy Faith, go to your death with boldness. Likewise, the Saints died for the faith, and now live in Christ. You, child, if you see people of other faiths arguing with the faithful, trying to lead them away from the right faith with flattery, help the Orthodox. This is like delivering a sheep from the lion's mouth. But if you remain silent and leave them without help, then it is the same as if you took a redeemed soul from Christ and sold it to Satan.
If someone who opposes you says to you: “Your faith and our faith are from God,” then you, child, answer like this: “You are a crooked believer! Or do you consider God to be of two faiths! Don’t you hear, corrupted by evil faith, how the Scripture says: “One God, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:5).
Don’t you hear the Apostle Paul saying: “If an angel comes from heaven and brings you good news, let him not be cursed as we bring good news” (Gal. 1:8).
But you (Catholics), who rejected the preaching of the Apostles and the Holy Fathers, adopted an unjust and corrupt faith, full of destruction. That is why you are rejected by us. Therefore, it is not appropriate for you and me to serve and to approach the Divine Mysteries together, not for you to ours, not for us to yours, because you are dead and offer a dead sacrifice, and we offer a pure, immaculate sacrifice to the living God, in order to inherit eternal life.
This is what is written: “Everyone will be rewarded according to his work” about Christ Jesus our Lord. Glory to him. Amen".
Orthodox, firm, clear, unequivocal position of Rev. Theodosius of Kiev-Pechersk on papism (the Latin faith) does not need comment, so clear and soulful is the spirit, thoughts and feelings embedded in this divinely inspired creation of the great Christian ascetic, the founder and pillar of Russian monasticism, one of the greatest Saints, glorified during his lifetime by abundant gifts of the Holy Spirit.
RESPONSE OF THE REVEREND AMBROSY THE ELDER OF OPTIA TO BE BLESSED TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
It is in vain that some of the Orthodox are surprised by the existing propaganda of the Roman Church, the imaginary self-assertion and activity of its missionaries and the zeal of the Catholic sisters of mercy, and incorrectly attribute such importance to the Catholic Church that, as if, after it fell away from the Orthodox Church, this latter did not remain the same, but has the need to seek connection with it. According to strict research, this opinion turns out to be false, and the energetic Latin activity not only does not arouse surprise, but, on the contrary, arouses deep regret in the hearts of right-thinking people who understand the truth.
From Apostolic times and to this day, the Orthodox Eastern Church has observed, unchanged and undamaged by innovations, both the teachings of the Gospel and the Apostles, as well as the tradition of St. fathers and the resolutions of the Ecumenical Councils, at which God-bearing men, having gathered from the entire Universe, collectively compiled the Divine Symbol of the Orthodox Faith and, proclaiming it aloud to the entire Universe in all respects perfect and complete, forbade with terrible punishments any addition to it or subtraction, or change, or rearrangement of even one iota in it... The Roman Church has long deviated into heresy and innovation. Basil the Great also denounced some of the bishops of Rome for this in his letter to Eusebius of Samosata: “They do not know the truth, and they do not want to know; they argue with those who proclaim the truth, and they themselves affirm heresy.”(District ate. paragraph 7).
The Apostle Paul commands to move away from those damaged by heresy, and not to seek union with them, saying: “A heretic of a man, deny the first and second punishment: he who knows that he is corrupted also sins and is self-condemned” (Titus 3: 10, 11).
The Conciliar Orthodox Church admonished the private Roman Church not twice, but repeatedly; but the latter, despite all the fair convictions of the former, remained stubborn in her erroneous way of thinking and acting.
Back in the seventh century, an incorrect wisdom arose in Western churches that the Holy Spirit also comes from the Son.
At first, some popes rebelled against this new thinking, calling it heretical. Pope Damasus speaks about him this way in the conciliar definition: “Whoever thinks right about the Father and the Son, but wrongly about the Holy Spirit, is a heretic” (District, last paragraph 5). The same was confirmed by other popes, Leo III and John VIII. But most of their successors, seduced by the rights to predominance and finding many worldly benefits for themselves, dared to change the Orthodox dogma of the procession of the Holy Spirit, contrary to the decrees of the seven Ecumenical Councils, and also contrary to the clear words of the Lord himself in the Gospel: “Who is from the Father proceeds" (John 15:26).
But just as one mistake, which is not considered a mistake, always entails another, and one evil gives rise to another, so it happened with the Roman Church. As soon as this incorrect wisdom appeared in the West, that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son, it itself gave birth to other similar offspring and introduced little by little other novelties, mostly contradicting the commandments of our Savior clearly depicted in the Gospel, such as: sprinkling instead of immersion in the Sacrament of Baptism, taking away the Divine Chalice from the laity and communion with only one type of bread, eating wafers and unleavened bread instead of leavened bread, excluding from the Liturgy the Divine invocation of the All-Holy and Life-Giving and All-Accomplishing Spirit. It also introduced novelties that violated the ancient Apostolic rites of the Catholic Church, such as: the exclusion of baptized infants from Confirmation and the reception of the Most Pure Mysteries, the exclusion of married persons from the Priesthood, the recognition of the pope as an infallible person and as the locum tenens of Christ, etc. Thus, perverted the entire ancient Apostolic rite for the celebration of almost all the Sacraments and all Church institutions, - an order that was maintained by the ancient, holy and Orthodox Church of Rome, which was then the most honorable member of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (District 5, paragraph 12).
But the main heresy of the Roman Church, not in essence, but in effect, is the invented dogma of supremacy, or rather the proud search for the predominance of the bishops of Rome over the other four Eastern Patriarchs. For the sake of this predominance, adherents of the Roman Church placed their pope above the rules and institutions of the Ecumenical Councils, believing in his infallibility. But what this papal infallibility is is not testified by false history. About Pope John XIII it is said in the definition of the Council of Constance, which deposed this pope: “It is known that Mr. Pope John is an inveterate and incorrigible sinner, he was and is a lawless man, rightly accused of murder, poisoning and other serious atrocities, who often and persistently before various dignitaries asserted and proved that the human soul dies and extinguishes along with the human body, like the soul of animals and cattle, and the dead will by no means be resurrected on the last day.” The iniquities of Pope Alexander VI and his sons were so monstrous that, according to contemporaries, this pope was concerned about establishing the kingdom of Satan on earth, and not the Kingdom of God. Pope Julius II reveled in Christian blood, constantly arming Christian peoples against each other for his own purposes (Spiritual Conversation 1858 N41). There are many other examples testifying to the great errors of the popes; but now is not the time to talk about them. With such historical evidence of damage by heresy and the errors of the popes, are the papists rightly exalted (extolled) by the imaginary dignity of the Roman Church? Is it fair to disparage the Orthodox Eastern Church, which bases its infallibility not on any one person, but on the teachings of the Gospel and Apostles and on the rules and decrees of seven Ecumenical and nine local Councils? At these Councils there were God-inspired and holy men from all over the universe, and they established everything related to the needs and spiritual needs of the Church, in accordance with Holy Scripture. Therefore, do Catholics act thoroughly if, for the sake of worldly goals, they put the person of their pope above the rules of the Ecumenical Councils, considering their pope more infallible?
For all the reasons stated, the Conciliar Eastern Church stopped communication with the private Roman Church, as having fallen away from the truth and from the rules of the Conciliar Orthodox Church. The Roman bishops began with pride and end with pride. They are trying to prove that the Orthodox Catholic Church has fallen away from their private church. But this is unfair and even ridiculous. The truth testifies that the Roman Church fell away from the Orthodox Church. Although Catholics, for the sake of imaginary correctness, pretend that their pope, during the unity with the Catholic Church, was among the five patriarchs the first and eldest, but this is for the sake of royal Rome, and not for any spiritual dignity or power over other patriarchates. They also unfairly called their church Catholic, i.e. cathedral A part can never be called a whole; and the Roman Church, before its fall from Orthodoxy, constituted only a fifth of the Catholic Church. Especially because the Roman Church should not be called a conciliar, because it rejected the decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, following its own incorrect speculations. Some are struck by the number and ubiquity of adherents of the Catholic Church, and therefore those who unreliably understand the truth think that for this reason should not the Latin Church be called Universal or Catholic? But this opinion is very erroneous, because nowhere in Holy Scripture is a special spiritual right attributed to multitudes and numbers. The Lord clearly showed that the sign of the true Catholic Church does not consist in multitudes and numbers when He says in the Gospel: “Fear not, little flock: for it has been your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom” (Luke 12:32). There is also an example in Holy Scripture that is not in favor of the multitude. After the death of Solomon, under his son, the kingdom of Israel was divided, and Holy Scripture presents the ten tribes as having fallen away, and the two tribes, which were faithful to their duty, as not falling away. Therefore, in vain does the Catholic Church try to prove that it is right by its multitude and numbers and everywhere.
Sign of the Universal Church at the Ecumenical Councils of St. The Fathers meant something completely different, i.e. It is conciliarly decreed: to believe in the One, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and not just in the universal, or universal Church. Although the Roman Church has its followers everywhere in the universe, since it does not preserve the holy conciliar and Apostolic decrees, but has deviated into innovations and incorrect wisdom, it does not at all belong to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
It is also very erroneous for those who are supportive of Catholics to think, firstly, that since Westerners have fallen away from Orthodoxy, there is something missing in the Catholic Church. This damage was replaced long ago by wise Providence ~ the foundation of the Russian Orthodox Church in the North. Secondly, as if for the sake of the former eldership and for the sake of the number of the Roman Church, the Orthodox Church has a need to unite with it. But there is human judgment, and there is God’s judgment. The Apostle Paul clearly says: “What fellowship has light with darkness? (2 Cor. 6:14), that is, what the light of the truth of Christ can never be combined with the darkness of heresy. Catholics do not want to stop their heresy and persist, as the words of Basil the Great, which have actually been fulfilled for so many centuries, testify to them: “They do not know the truth, and do not want to know; they argue with those who proclaim the truth to them, but they themselves affirm heresy," as stated above. Those who are sympathetic to Catholics should instead think better about what is said in the psalms: "I hated the church of the wicked"(Ps. 25:5), and regret those who, for the sake of dominance and love of money, and other worldly goals and benefits, outraged almost the entire universe through inquisitions and crafty Jesuit machinations and still outrage and insult the Orthodox in Turkey through their missionaries . Catholic missionaries do not bother to convert natural Turks to the Christian faith, but try to seduce Orthodox Greeks and Bulgarians from the true path, using all sorts of unpleasing means and tricks for this. Isn’t this wickedness, and isn’t it evil wickedness? Would it be prudent to seek union with such people? For the same reason, is it worth surprising at the imaginary zeal and imaginary selflessness of these figures, i.e. Catholic missionaries and sisters of mercy? These are truly pathetic ascetics. They are not trying to convert and lead people to Christ, but to their dad.
What else can I say to the questions: can the Catholic Church and other religions be called New Israel and the ark of salvation? And what should we understand about the Eucharist of the real Roman Church?
Only a true-believing Church can be called New Israel, but one damaged by heretical wisdom cannot. The Holy Apostle John the Theologian says: “She came forth from us, but was not driven away from us; even though they were from us, they remained with us; but let them be revealed, for they are not all from us” (1 John 2:19). And St. the Apostle Paul says: “there is one Lord, one faith” (Eph. 4:5), i.e. there is one true faith, and not every belief is good, as those who are separated from the one true Church foolishly think, about which St. The Apostle Jude writes: “For in the last time there will be scoffers, walking after their own lusts and ungodliness. These are those who separate themselves from the unity of faith, and are bodily (spiritual), not having the spirit” (Jude 18-19). Therefore, how will alien truths be called the New Israel? Or how will they be a saving haven for anyone, when both cannot be accomplished without the grace of the Holy Spirit?”
With such convincing words, the God-bearing Optina Elder Ambrose, the chosen vessel of the Holy Spirit, the great wonderworker and seer, testifies to the gracelessness of the Catholic Church and all other religious gatherings that falsely call themselves Christian. That is, the saving grace of the Holy Spirit in Catholicism and Protestantism is completely absent, and not partially, as some “scientific Christian modernists” are trying to prove.
Nowadays there is a lot of talk about the need for ecumenical dialogue and the unification of various Christian churches, that in each church there is a share of grace and a share of truth, etc. It's all temptation and lies! Was our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ divided, Who, according to the word of St. Apostle Paul is the head of the Church, which represents the body of Christ?! The Lord established one Church, not two or three or more. “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:5). Orthodox Christians must firmly remember the simple and fundamental Orthodox truth: there is only one Church of Christ in the world - the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, founded by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself on the Day of the Descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles, which will remain one, indestructible and true until the end of time. This is exactly what we believe and confess in our patristic way. Amen.
DyatlovSergey Alekseevich, Doctor of Economics, professor, coordinator of the public organization "Union of Orthodox Scientists", member of the Board of Trustees of the "People's Orthodox University", member of the Scientific Council for Religious and Social Research of the Department of Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Member of the Scientific and Methodological Council of the Interuniversity Association of Spiritual and Moral Education "Pokrov"
LITERATURE:
1. Prot. Mitrofan Znosko-Borovsky. Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Protestantism and sectarianism.
2. The papacy and its struggle with Orthodoxy. M., 1993.
3. Vatican: onslaught on the East. M., 1998.
4. Orthodox evangelist. Kyiv. 2002.