The Imaginary Dignity of the Roman Catholic Church (St. Ambrose of Optina)

It is in vain that some of the Orthodox are surprised by the existing propaganda of the Roman Church, the supposed self-sacrifice and activity of its missionaries, and the zeal of the Latin sisters of mercy. Even though the Latin Church has fallen away from the Orthodox Church, they incorrectly attribute importance to the Latin Church, supposing that the Orthodox did not remain the same, imagining that they have some need to seek connection with Rome.

According to strict research, this opinion turns out to be false; and the energetic Latin activity not only does not arouse surprise, but on the contrary, arouses deep regret in the hearts of people who think well and understand the truth.

From Apostolic times and to this day, the Orthodox Eastern Church has observed, unchanged and undamaged by innovations, both the teachings of the Gospel and the Apostles, and the tradition of the holy Fathers and the resolutions of the Ecumenical Councils, at which God-bearing men, having gathered together from the entire world, collectively compiled the Divine Symbol of the Orthodox Faith (the Nicene Creed), and proclaiming it aloud to the entire world in all respects perfect and complete, forbade with terrible punishments any addition to it, or subtraction, or change, or rearrangement of the least iota in it.

The Roman Church has long deviated into heresy and innovation. St. Basil the Great also accused some of the bishops of Rome of this in his letter to Eusebius of Samosata. “They do not know the truth, and they do not want to know; with those who proclaim the truth to them, they argue, and they themselves affirm heresy” (District, last § 7).

The Apostle Paul commands us to move away from those damaged by heresy, and not to seek union with them, saying: “a heretic of a man, deny after the first and second punishment: knowing that he has become corrupt, he sins and is self-condemned” (Tim. 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, a false "wisdom" arose in Western churches, presuming that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son.

At first, some popes rebelled against this new thinking, calling it heretical. Pope Damasus speaks about it this way in the conciliar definition: “whoever thinks rightly about the Father and the Son, but wrongly about the Holy Spirit, is a heretic” (District, § 5). Other popes, Leo III and John VIII, also confirmed this. But most of their successors, seduced by the rights to predominance, and finding many worldly benefits in this for themselves, dared to change the Orthodox dogma about the procession of the Holy Spirit, contrary to the decrees of the seven Ecumenical Councils, and also contrary to the clear words of the Lord Himself in the Gospel: “He Who proceeds from the Father” (John 15:26).

But just as one mistake, which is not considered a mistake, always entails another, and one evil gives rise to another, so it happened with the Roman Church. As soon as this false wisdom had time to appear in the West, that the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son, it itself gave birth to other similar offspring, and little by little introduced with itself other novelties, for the most part contradicting the commandments of our Savior clearly depicted in the Gospel, such as:

• sprinkling instead of immersion in the sacrament of Baptism
• taking away the Divine Cup from the laity
• using handkerchiefs 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, the entire ancient apostolic rite of the celebration of almost all the Sacraments and all church institutions was subverted — a rite 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 last § 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, true history testifies. About Pope John XXIII it is said in the definition of the Council of Constance, which deposed this pope: “It is known that 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 is often and stubbornly various dignitaries asserted and proved that the human soul dies and extinguishes along with the human body, like the soul of animals and cattle, and that the dead will by no means be resurrected on the last day.”

The iniquities of Pope Alexander VI and his sons were so monstrous that, according to contemporaries, this pope was concerned about establishing the kingdom of Satan on earth, and not the Kingdom of God. Pope Julius II reveled in Christian blood, constantly arming Christian peoples against each other for his own purposes (Spiritual Conversation, 1858, No. 41). 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 the damage of heresy and the errors of the popes, are the papists rightly exalted by the imaginary dignity of the Roman Church? Is it fair to disparage the Orthodox Eastern Church, which bases its infallibility not on any one person, but on the teachings of the Gospel and Apostles and on the rules and decrees of seven Ecumenical and nine Local Councils? At these Councils there were God-inspired and holy men from all over the world, and they established everything related to the spiritual needs of the Church, in accordance with Holy Scripture. Therefore, do the papists act properly when, for the sake of worldly goals, they put the person of their pope above the rules of the Ecumenical Councils, considering their pope more infallible?

For all the reasons stated, the Catholic Eastern Church cut off communication with the private Roman Church, as having fallen away from the truth and from the rules of the Catholic Church. The Roman bishops, just as they began with pride, will end with pride. They are trying to prove that the Orthodox Catholic Church has fallen away from their private Church. But this is unfair and even ridiculous. The truth testifies that the Roman Church fell away from the Orthodox Church.

Although the papists, for the sake of imaginary correctness, pretend that their patriarchate, at the time of unity with the Orthodox Catholic Church, was among the five the first and eldest; but this is for the sake of royal Rome, and not for any spiritual dignity, or power over other patriarchies. They unfairly called their church Catholic... A part can never be called a whole; and the Roman Church, before its fall from Orthodoxy, constituted only a fifth of the united Catholic Church. The Roman Church especially should not be called 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 Latin Church, and therefore those who unreliably understand the truth think that for this reason the Latin Church should be called Ecumenical or Catholic. But this opinion is very erroneous, because nowhere in Holy Scripture is a special spiritual right attributed to multitudes and numbers. The Lord clearly showed that the sign of the true Catholic Church does not lie in multitudes and numbers when He says in the Gospel: “Fear not, little flock, for it has been your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom” (Luke 12:32). There is also an example in Holy Scripture that is not in favor of the multitude. After the death of Solomon, under his son, the kingdom of Israel was divided, and Holy Scripture presents the ten tribes as falling away, and the two tribes, which remained faithful to their duty, as not falling away. Therefore, in vain does the Latin Church try to prove that it is right by its multitude and number and ubiquity.

The holy Fathers at the Ecumenical Councils indicated that the sign of the Universal Church was something completely different, i.e. it was ordered by conciliar decree: to believe in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, and not just in the Catholic (Universal) church. Although the Roman Church has its followers everywhere in the world, since it does not preserve the holy conciliar and apostolic decrees, but has deviated into innovations and false wisdom, it does not at all belong to the One, Holy, and Apostolic Church.

It is also very erroneous for those who are supportive of the Latins to think, firstly, that since the Westerners fell away from Orthodoxy, something is supposedly missing in the Orthodox Catholic Church. This damage was replaced long ago by wise providence — the foundation of the Russian Orthodox Church in the north. Secondly, it is erroneous, as if for the sake of the former seniority and for the sake of the number of the Roman Church, to assume that the Orthodox Church has a need to unite with it. But this sort of judgment is human, and the judgment of God is different. The Apostle Paul clearly says: “What fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Cor. 6:14) - i.e., that the light of the truth of Christ can never be combined with the darkness of heresy. The Latins do not want to abandon their heresy, and they 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 they do not want to know; they argue with those who proclaim the truth to them, and they themselves affirm heresy,” as stated above.

Those who are favorable to the Latins, instead, should better reason about what was 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 all the universe through the inquisitions and crafty Jesuit machinations, and until now they outrage and insult the Orthodox in Turkey through their missionaries. Latin missionaries do not bother to convert natural Turks to the Christian faith, but try to seduce Orthodox Greeks and Bulgarians from the true path, using all sorts of unfavorable means and tricks for this. Is this not deceit, and is it not evil deceit? Would it be prudent to seek union with such people? For the same reason, is it worth surprising at the imaginary zeal and imaginary selflessness of these figures, that is, the Latin missionaries and sisters of mercy? These are truly pathetic ascetics. They are not trying to convert and lead people to Christ, but to their pope.

What else can I say to the questions: can the Latin Church and other faiths be called the New Israel and the ark of salvation? and how should we understand the Eucharist of the Roman Church? Only the Orthodox Church can be called New Israel, but one damaged by heretical wisdom cannot. The Holy Apostle John the Theologian says: “She came forth from us, but was not 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 the Holy Apostle Paul says, “there is one Lord, one faith” (Eph. 4:5), that is, there is one true faith, and not every belief is good, as those who are separated from the one true Church foolishly think, about whom the Holy Apostle Jude writes: “For in the last time there will be scoffers, walking after their own lusts and wickedness: these are separating themselves from the unity of faith and are corporeal (spiritual), not having the spirit” (vv. 18, 19). Therefore, will those who are alien to the spirit of truth be called New Israel? or how will they be a refuge of salvation for anyone, when both cannot be accomplished without the grace of the Holy Spirit?

In the Orthodox Church it is believed that the bread and wine in the sacrament of the Eucharist are transubstantiated by the invocation and action of the Holy Spirit. But the Latins, as stated above, considered this invocation unnecessary and excluded it from their liturgy. So, let him who understands, understand about the Latin Eucharist.

Another question: if, as it has been said, besides the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which the Orthodox Church is called and is, the salvation of other faiths is so doubtful: then why is this truth not openly preached in Russia? The answer to this is very simple and clear. In Russia, religious tolerance is allowed and people of other faiths, along with Orthodox Christians, occupy important positions in our country: the heads of educational institutions are for the most part people of other faiths; the heads of provinces and district towns are often non-religious; regimental and battalion commanders are often non-religious. Wherever a clergyman begins to openly preach that there is no salvation outside the Orthodox Church, high-ranking Gentiles will be offended. From this situation, the Russian Orthodox clergy received, as it were, a skill and an ingrained ability to speak evasively about this subject. And maybe some, for the same reason, and from always dealing with people of other faiths, and more from reading their works, began to think more leniently in relation to the hope of salvation and other faiths.

Despite the spirit of meekness and peacefulness and patience of the Orthodox Church and its shepherds and followers, in the West in previous centuries it was published by followers of various Christian faiths, but mainly in our times so many books are published against the teachings of the Eastern Church that it would be difficult to even count them, much less appreciate them. And although such books are generally filled with slander, fables, reproaches, obvious fabrications, and lies, especially mental poisonous intricacies, with the obvious goal of creating in Europe a spirit hostile to the Eastern Church, especially to our fatherland, and having shaken the doctrine of our Orthodox Church, to seduce its followers from the path of truth: but since they are published under tempting titles, in cozy forms, with such typographic neatness that they seem to involuntarily attract the curiosity of readers, then of course in our fatherland, where these works penetrate through dark paths, there are quite a few who Having a superficial understanding of the subjects of Christian teaching, they cannot help but be carried away by thoughts contrary to the truth.

The writers of the Latin Church are now especially armed against the Orthodox, proclaiming the dominance of their pope and the private Roman Church over all governments and private churches and the peoples of the world; Currently, the Jesuits in France are mainly busy with this, who, taking advantage of the widespread dissemination of the French language, are intensifying with some feverish activity, through writings in this language, to instill everywhere their way of thinking, contrary to the doctrine and hierarchical structure of the Eastern Church - without sparing for this purpose the most monstrous inventions, obvious lies, and shameless distortion of historical truths. Many of the educated Orthodox, reading these works in French, and not reading their own in Russian about Orthodox dogma, can easily believe a cleverly woven lie instead of the truth, which they do not know well.

For anyone who wants to know in detail the reasons why the papists strayed so far from Orthodoxy, it is useful to read the recently published work on the relations of the Roman Church to other churches - Avdiah Vostokov[1]. In this book, in the 2nd part, there are especially remarkable passages about the oath of the Latin bishops to their pope and about the slander of the papists against the Orthodox, pp. 49, 60, and 137.

___________________________________________________________________

[1] On the relationship of the Roman Church to other Christian Churches and to the entire human race. – St. Petersburg, 1857.

Avdiy Vostokov is the pseudonym of the famous spiritual writer, Archbishop of Mogilev and Mstislav Anatoly (Martynovsky) (1793–1872).