These words spoken by Christ to Peter: "Get thee behind me, satan" (Matt. 4:10) – testify that it was not on Peter himself that Christ founded His Church, but on the rock of faith of the chosen Apostles.
compiled by V. Vasiliev, G. Alekseev
Questions and Answers
Contents
Introduction
I. The Most Important Innovations of Roman Catholicism Before Vatican II
The Doctrine of Papal Supremacy
On Papal Infallibility
The Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit
The Doctrine of Original Sin
The Doctrine of the Supererogatory Merits of the Saints and of Indulgences
The Dogmas of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and Her Bodily Assumption
- Deviations in the Administration of the Holy SacramentsII. Statements of the Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church about Roman CatholicismIII. The New Dogmatic Teaching of the Roman Catholics Adopted by the Second Vatican Council
The Essence of the New Dogma and Its General Justification
The "Spiritual Kinship" of Christians and Jews
On the Spiritual Proximity of Christians and Muslims
On the Spiritual Proximity of Christians and Pagans
On Salvation in Non-Christianity
The Innovations of the Second Vatican Council and Their Contradictions with Christianity
- Roman Catholicism After the Second Vatican CouncilIV. On Salvation and Spiritual Life in Roman CatholicismV. On the "Reunification" of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches
Unions and Uniatism
Ecumenism
Conclusion
Appendices
- Some Materials of the Second Vatican Councila. Dogmatic Constitution on the Churchb. Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions
Literature
This publication sets forth the main differences of modern Roman Catholicism that arose during the past millennium after its fall from Orthodoxy. Special attention is given to the new dogmatic teaching of Roman Catholics about God, salvation, Divine Revelation, and the Church, adopted at the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965).
Introduction
Question. What is the nature of this publication?
Answer. It is a presentation, in the form of questions and answers, of the main distinctive features of the Roman Catholic faith in the second half of the 20th century and their critique based on the Orthodox position.
Q. How significant are the existing differences between the Orthodox and Catholic faiths?
A. The differences touch the very essence of Christian doctrine and are so serious that modern Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy are two different religions.
Q. Why did such deep discrepancies arise between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism?
A. Due to the different paths they follow. Orthodoxy preserves the Christian faith in the form in which it was given by the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by the apostles, expounded by the Ecumenical Councils and the holy fathers and teachers of the Church, while Catholicism follows the path of introducing additions, changes, and new teachings into its faith that contradict the apostolic Christian faith.
Q. Can Christianity be modernized and changed, adapting it to changing historical, social, religious, philosophical, and other conditions and teachings?
A. No, it cannot. Christianity is the true, divinely revealed religion, and introducing changes into it according to human understanding, contrary to Divine Revelation, "correcting" God, replaces the truth given by God with a lie invented by man, transforming a religion from true to false. Jesus Christ commanded His disciples to preserve the teaching He gave unchanged: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age" (Matt. 28:19–20). And the Apostle Paul says: "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:8).
Q. What is the reason for Rome's course of changing Christian doctrine?
A. The main reason for the innovations of Roman Catholicism is the desire of Rome-Vatican to occupy a leading and guiding role in the entire Christian world and to subjugate all Christians, primarily the Orthodox, and since the second half of the 20th century – to become the "spiritual" leader of believers of all major religions of the world.
Q. What consequences did the path of introducing changes to the Christian faith lead for Roman Catholics?
A. The consequence of the chosen path was the adoption by the Second Vatican Council of 1962–1965 of a fundamentally new teaching on the Church, God, Divine Revelation, and the salvation of man, expressing the complete transformation of Roman Catholicism from a heretical Christian faith into a new anti-Christian pagan religion.
Q. What goals and objectives does this publication pursue?
A. Its goals and objectives are to reasonably, relying on Divine Revelation – Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, and the teaching of the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church – show in a concise form and bring to the broad circles of Orthodox laity and clergy the falsity of the innovations and the pagan essence of modern Roman Catholicism, its incompatibility with Orthodoxy, and the untenability of attempts to "reunite" with the Orthodox Church.
I. The Most Important Innovations of Roman Catholicism Before Vatican II
Q. What are the most serious innovations adopted by Roman Catholics before the Second Vatican Council?
A. The most significant innovations include the following dogmas and teachings:
On Papal Supremacy,
On Papal Infallibility,
On the Procession of the Holy Spirit,
On Original Sin,
On the Supererogatory Merits of the Saints and on Indulgences,
On the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and on Her Bodily Assumption, and also
Significant deviations in the administration of the holy sacraments.
1. The Doctrine of Papal Supremacy
Q. What does the Roman Catholic teaching on papal supremacy consist of?
A. According to this teaching, the pope is proclaimed the "Vicar of Christ and visible head of the whole Church," of all Christians, "the ruler of the house of the living God," possessing the fullness of power, which he has the right to exercise freely at all times.
Q. Is this teaching of the Catholics correct?
A. No, it is incorrect. The Head of the Church is only the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, as the Apostle Paul teaches, saying that God "has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all" (Eph. 1:22–23), "He is the head of the body, the church" (Col. 1:18). Therefore, there is no second "visible head of the whole Church," which is the body of Christ, nor a "vicar of Christ on earth."
Q. Did the ancient Christians recognize the Roman pope as the head of the whole Church?
A. No, they did not. The local Churches and their high priests had authority only within their own administrative divisions and, when listed, occupied the order: Roman, Constantinople (their bishops bore the title of "Ecumenical Patriarchs"), Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem. The order of succession corresponded only to their honor according to their cultural and civil status, but not to the height of administrative authority of one Church over others – all were equal, equal in grace, and each represented only a part of the single body of the Church of Christ. The Church did not allow autocracy of the foremost bishops or absolutism. Following the example of the Apostolic Council of 51 AD (see Acts 15:6–29), the highest authority for resolving the most important questions of the Church and the life of the local Churches was established as the Local Council of Bishops, and for the entire Orthodox Church – the Ecumenical Council.
Q. Did the Ecumenical Councils perhaps grant the popes supreme authority over the entire Church?
A. No, the Ecumenical Councils only confirmed the authority of any high priest only within his own region. The First Ecumenical Council decreed by Canon 6: "Let the ancient customs be maintained, which are in Egypt and Libya and Pentapolis, according to which the Alexandrian bishop has authority over all these. For this is also customary for the Roman bishop. Likewise in Antioch and in the other provinces, let the privileges of the Churches be preserved," and by Canon 7 commanded also to honor the bishop of Jerusalem, preserving the dignity assigned to the metropolis.
The Second Ecumenical Council established by Canon 3: "The bishop of Constantinople shall have the prerogative of honor after the bishop of Rome, because that city is the new Rome." These decisions were confirmed by Canon 28 of the Fourth and Canon 36 of the Sixth Ecumenical Councils.
Q. When did the Roman Catholic teaching on papal supremacy arise?
A. Individual attempts by popes to assume supremacy over the entire Church were made as early as the time of the Ecumenical Councils (325–787 AD) and shortly after them, but they were rejected. For example, Pope Nicholas I declared himself head of the whole Church and possessor of the right of monarchical dominion on earth, and at the Roman Council of 863 anathematized those who did not recognize his universal authority, which was rejected by the Council of Constantinople. As an official teaching, papal supremacy was set forth at the uniate Council of Florence (1439) and repeated in dogmas at the First (1870) and Second (1962–1965) Vatican Councils.
Q. How do Roman Catholics justify this teaching of theirs?
A. Roman Catholics assert that Jesus Christ Himself left supreme authority over the Church to the Apostle Peter, giving him special privileges over the other apostles, the high quality of infallibility, the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, making him, as it were, the prince of the apostles – the monarch of the entire Christian world, and that Peter by succession passed these qualities on to the popes.
Q. Did the ancient Church recognize the Apostle Peter as the vicar of Christ, the head of the whole Church, and over the other apostles?
A. No, it did not recognize this. The Apostle Peter, along with the Apostle Paul, is called the foremost as first among equals, in view of his fervent faith, the primacy in confessing the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and his great services to the Church, but this did not add any additional ruling rights or privileges to him compared to the other apostles. None of the holy fathers and teachers of the Church recognized the Apostle Peter as the head of the apostles and vicar of Christ.
Q. What arguments do Roman Catholics use to prove that the Apostle Peter received supremacy over the Church and the other apostles from Jesus Christ?
A. Roman Catholics mainly refer to three places in the Gospel, supposedly confirming this. The first of them is the following. When Jesus Christ asked His disciples who they thought He was, Peter, the first of the apostles, answering, said: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Then Jesus answered him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven'" (Matt. 16:16–19). According to Catholic theologians, the words of Jesus Christ "on this rock" refer to the Apostle Peter and confirm that he was appointed by the Savior as the head of the Church and the vicar of God on earth.
Q. What do the Savior's words "on this rock" in this passage actually refer to?
A. According to the unanimous opinion of the holy fathers and teachers of the Church, these words refer to the confession of faith: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." St. John Chrysostom, in the fifty-third homily of his commentary on the holy Evangelist Matthew, says: "On this rock I will build My Church, that is, on the faith of the confession. And what is the apostle's confession? It is this: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Blessed Augustine, in the second treatise on the first epistle of the Apostle John, writes: "What do the words mean: I will build My Church on this rock? They mean: on this faith, – on the words: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Blessed Theophylact of Bulgaria, in his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, says: "Since Peter confessed Christ as the Son of God, He says: this confession, which you have confessed, will be the foundation of believers, so that everyone who intends to build the edifice of faith will lay this confession as the foundation."
Q. But how should we understand that the Savior here gives Simon Bar-Jona the name Peter (rock)?
A. Here Jesus Christ speaks of Peter as the first stone of faith, but other apostles are also called foundations of faith (Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:14), and all believing Christians are also called stones, from which the great edifice of the Church is built (1 Pet. 2:5). (These distinctions in the meaning of the word "rock" are more evident in the Greek original of the Gospel, where the Savior uses one word (Πετροσ) for the name "Peter," and another (Πετρά) when saying "on this rock." However, the cornerstone, the foundation on which the edifice of the Church is established, is Jesus Christ Himself, as He Himself says and the apostles testify (see Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Eph. 2:20–22; 1 Pet. 2:6–7; 1 Cor. 3:11), and "every one who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; but when it falls on any one, it will crush him" (Luke 20:18).
Q. Were the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven given to the Apostle Peter alone?
A. To Peter, who by the grace given to him was the first to confess faith in Christ, the high authority to bind and loose sins was given first. But to the other apostles as well, the grace of faith was later given, and the Lord also said to them: "whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 18:18). This authority was given to them by the Lord Himself, not by the Apostle Peter, and they passed it on to the pastors of the Church. So this passage in the Gospel speaks of the primacy of the Apostle Peter, but not of his exclusivity or authority over the other apostles.
Q. What other place in the Gospel do Roman theologians refer to in order to prove the supremacy of the Apostle Peter over all the apostles and the whole Church?
A. They cite the Savior's words to Peter: "Simon, Simon, behold, satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren" (Luke 22:31–32) – where Catholics see Peter's advantage over the other apostles and the Savior's injunction to strengthen them in the faith.
Q. What do these words of the Lord mean according to the subsequent text of the Gospel?
A. With these words, the Lord warns the Apostle Peter about his impending fall, his denial of Christ, which is how Peter understood it, as he began to assure Him: "Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death" (Luke 22:33), to which the Lord replies directly: "I tell you, Peter, the cock will not crow this day, until you three times deny that you know me" (Luke 22:34). But the Savior also supports Peter, predicting the temporariness of his fall, the continuation of his apostolic service, and his strengthening of his Christian brothers in the faith with a greater understanding of their weakness, as one who himself experienced a severe temptation. Nowhere further in the New Testament does it speak of Peter strengthening the apostles. The unwavering faith was given to them all by the Lord God Himself, who sent the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, and they, along with the Apostle Peter, brought many countries and peoples to Christ and strengthened them in the faith.
Q. What third place in the Gospel do Catholic theologians point to as confirming the supremacy of the Apostle Peter over the other apostles and the whole Church?
A. Roman Catholics point to the conversation of Jesus Christ with the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, which took place after the Resurrection of the Lord:
"When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, 'Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?' He said to him, 'Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.' He said to him, 'Feed my lambs.' A second time he said to him, 'Simon, son of John, do you love me?' He said to him, 'Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.' He said to him, 'Tend my sheep.' He said to him the third time, 'Simon, son of John, do you love me?' Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, 'Do you love me?' And he said to him, 'Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.' Jesus said to him, 'Feed my sheep'" (John 21:15–17). In this conversation, Roman theologians see special privileges given by the Lord to Peter in the form of authority over the whole Church, both over the simple believers – the lambs, and over the shepherds – the sheep.
Q. What is the actual meaning of this conversation?
A. As the Gospel narrates, the Apostle Peter, who had fervently assured: "Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away" (Matt. 26:33; Mark 14:29), was permitted by the Lord to fall in the form of a threefold denial of Him (Matt. 26:69–75; Mark 14:66–72; Luke 22:56–62; John 18:17, 25–27). Now, to the Lord's question, pointedly calling Peter Simon, whether he loved Him more than others, Peter humbly answers that he loves Him. By the threefold question "Do you love me?" the Lord reminded Peter of his threefold denial, which Peter understood and which grieved him, and by the threefold repetition of feeding His lambs and sheep, the Lord assured Peter of the restoration of his apostolic dignity. Only an arbitrary scholastic interpretation can assert that by lambs Christ here meant simple believers, and by sheep, the shepherds and apostles themselves.
Q. Is there any indication in any part of Holy Scripture that the Apostle Peter received supremacy and authority over the other apostles and the whole Church?
A. There is no confirmation in the Gospel of the idea that Jesus Christ gave such supremacy and authority to the Apostle Peter. This idea contradicts the whole spirit of the Gospel narrative. The Lord rebuked His disciples for nothing so strongly, and warned against nothing so zealously, as against exaltation, the desire for advantage, and even more so for the authority of one apostle over others (see Matt. 20:25–28; Mark 9:33–35; 10:42–45; Luke 9:46–48; 22:24–27; John 13:14–15). As is evident from the Acts of the Holy Apostles and the apostolic epistles, the Lord did not grant the Apostle Peter such supremacy even after His ascension. The other apostles received no coordination, instructions, or authority from the Apostle Peter, but were guided directly by the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ.
Q. What other attempts did Rome make to justify its claims to domination?
A. Through many forged documents and canonical collections compiled in the 9th – 12th centuries, among which the most famous are the so-called "Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals" (829–957), containing papal "documents" from the very first times of the Roman Church (from the year 77). According to the decretals, the pope supposedly received the fullness of supreme authority in the Universal Church from the Apostle Peter, and the primates of the Local Churches used authority received by them from the pope. However, during the Reformation era, it became clear that all these "documents" were either forged or distorted, indicating the compilers' ignorance of history and its gross falsification. For example, persons separated by whole centuries are presented as being in correspondence (Pope Victor I (189–199) writes to Theophilus of Alexandria (around 400); the most ancient bishops of Rome quote Holy Scripture according to the translation of Blessed Jerome (405); some bishops, living still in the time of pagan Rome, complain about the encroachment of the laity on church property).
Canonical collections are based on the same fiction and forgeries: the "Collectorium" or "Decretum," compiled by Burchard, Bishop of Worms (1025); the collection of Anselm of Lucca (1086); the "Compendium" or "Collectio Canonum" (1086–1087) of Cardinal Deusdedit; the "Decretum Gratiani" (12th c.) of the monk Gratian, and others.
Q. What consequences did Rome's power-hungry ambitions have for the Christian Church?
A. The popes' claims to supreme authority over the whole Church, as well as their unilateral change to the Creed (on the procession of the Holy Spirit "and from the Son" – "filioque") became the main reason for the fall of the Western Church from Orthodoxy in 1054. The immediate occasion for the fall was the actions of the Roman legates, who, appearing in Constantinople, demanded that the Patriarch recognize the legitimacy of the popes' claims to universal authority and the "filioque," but, receiving a refusal, composed an act of excommunication of the Patriarch and the entire Greek Church and, after solemnly reading it during a church service, left it on the altar of the Hagia Sophia and departed from Constantinople. Rome did not condemn the action of the legates, after which the unity of the Churches was finally broken. Subsequently, the recognition of papal supremacy was placed by Rome as a mandatory condition for any attempts to "reunite" the Western and Eastern Churches.
Q. Based on the foregoing, what can be said about the Roman Catholic teaching on papal supremacy?
A. This teaching contradicts Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, and historical facts, and is therefore absolutely false and heretical. Attempts at its practical implementation led to the most grievous consequences for Christianity – the fall of Catholicism from Orthodoxy.
2. On Papal Infallibility
Q. What does the Roman Catholic teaching on papal infallibility consist of?
A. According to this teaching, the Roman pontiff, as the vicar of Christ and head of the whole Church, possesses inerrancy in his teaching office in matters of faith and morals by virtue of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in him.
Q. When did this teaching appear?
A. The teaching infallibility of the Roman pontiff was always considered by Catholics as a natural consequence of the teaching on papal supremacy, as the successor of Peter and vicar of Christ, and was mentioned at the Roman Local Council of 863 under Pope Nicholas I and other councils, but as an official dogma, the teaching on papal infallibility was adopted in 1870 by the First Vatican Council and repeated by the Second Vatican Council.
Q. Did the undivided Orthodox Church recognize the infallibility of the Roman popes?
A. No, it did not: Ecumenical Councils were convened to decide important questions of faith, at which papal legates were not even always present, and the pope presided at none of them.
Q. But perhaps the popes actually possessed infallibility in matters of faith?
A. No, they did not. Numerous cases are known when popes fell into heretical teachings and apostasy, or revoked or changed the teachings of their predecessors. Thus, Pope Victor (192) approved the Montanist heresy; Pope Marcellinus (296–303) entered the temple of Vesta and sacrificed to the goddess; Liberius (358) agreed to the excommunication of Athanasius the Great and decided to accept Arianism in order to be released from exile and returned to his former see; Zosimus (417–418) approved the Pelagian heresy; Honorius (625) adhered to the Monothelite heresy, for which he was condemned by the Sixth Ecumenical Council; Leo III (809) rejected the teaching of the "filioque" and commanded Catholics never to accept it; Benedict VIII (1014) introduced it into the Creed; Gregory the Great (590–604) rejected papal supremacy, arguing that the desire of one of its primates for power over the whole Church could shake the Universal Church in its foundations, while Boniface VIII (1302), Eugene IV (1439), and Paul IV (1559) asserted it in their bulls; Sixtus V (1585–1590) published an edition of the Bible and approved its reading by his bull, while Pius VII (1800–1823) condemned those who read it; Clement XIV (1769–1774) abolished the Jesuit order, allowed by Paul III (1534–1549), and Pius VII restored it. This list is far from complete.
Q. What was the attitude of the Roman bishops themselves towards the dogma of papal infallibility?
A. The dogma caused great controversy and was adopted by the First Vatican Council only as a result of pressure on its participants from the pope. The Catholic Archbishop J. G. Strossmayer spoke at the council with devastating criticism of the dogma. Citing dozens of examples when popes "ex cathedra" adopted and revoked decisions of their own and their predecessors, as well as examples of the most grievous sins committed by many popes, he said: "If you define the infallibility of the present Roman bishop, you must recognize the infallibility of all his predecessors without exception... Can you do this and prove that the covetous, incestuous, murderous, simoniacal popes – were vicars of Jesus Christ?"
Q. Based on the foregoing, what assessment should be given to the Roman Catholic teaching on papal infallibility?
A. This teaching is heretical, contradicting Holy Tradition and historical reality.
3. The Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit
Q. What does the patristic teaching say about the procession of the Holy Spirit?
A. In the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (325 and 381) – the unshakable foundation of the faith of Orthodox Christians – it is said: (I believe) "and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father." The teaching on the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father was delivered to His Church by Jesus Christ Himself, witnessed by the apostles, and affirmed by the Ecumenical Councils.
Q. How does Roman Catholicism confess the procession of the Holy Spirit?
A. The Catholic Church confesses that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father and from the Son." The addition "and from the Son" – "filioque" – was officially introduced into the Creed by Pope Benedict VIII in 1014 unilaterally, without discussion at an Ecumenical Council.
Q. What was the reason for Rome's adoption of the "filioque" – a new teaching on the procession of the Holy Spirit?
A. The adoption of the addition "and from the Son" was preceded by prolonged pressure on the popes from secular authorities, including the Emperor Charlemagne, who wished to emphasize his independence from Byzantium, and King Henry I, as well as the independent introduction of the "filioque" into the Creed by individual Western churches in the 6th-10th centuries, and the desire of the popes themselves to occupy a leading teaching role in the Christian world.
Q. How do Roman Catholics motivate their teaching?
A. Proponents of the "filioque" justify their teaching by the fact that the Son is consubstantial with the Father and, consequently, everything inherent in the Father is also proper to the Son.
Q. What does Holy Scripture say about the procession of the Holy Spirit?
A. Jesus Christ Himself directly speaks of the procession of the Holy Spirit only from the Father when He foretells to the apostles: "But when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me" (John 15:26).
Q. How serious a change for Christian teaching is the introduction of the "filioque"?
A. The "filioque" serves not only as a precedent opening the door for the acceptance of other innovations contradicting Divine Revelation into the very essence of the Christian faith, but it also has important dogmatic significance. The "filioque" violates the sole sovereignty of God the Father, i.e., the Father as the sole principle (in Their hierarchical position, all Three Persons of the Holy Trinity are equal) and leads to dualism and a violation of the Indivisibility of the Holy Trinity. (The Indivisibility of the Holy Trinity was rejected by the Catholics at the Second Vatican Council by singling out the "Father" as an independent "God" and identifying him with the "Supreme Deities" of the pagans – see below, ch. III).
Q. What practical consequence for Christianity did the adoption of the "filioque" by Roman Catholics have?
A. The "filioque" was one of the main reasons for the fall of the Western Church from Orthodoxy in 1054, and its acceptance by Christians, following the recognition of the universal supremacy of the pope, was used by Roman Catholics before the Second Vatican Council as a mandatory condition for the drafting and practical implementation of unions (agreements on the "reunification" of the Western and Eastern Churches), which in reality meant the believers' renunciation of Orthodoxy and acceptance of Catholicism.
Q. According to the foregoing, what should be said about the Roman Catholic teaching on the procession of the Holy Spirit "from the Father and from the Son"?
A. This teaching contradicts the words of the Lord God Himself, causes irreparable harm to Christianity, and is false and heretical.
4. The Doctrine of Original Sin
Q. What is the Orthodox teaching on original sin?
A. According to Holy Scripture and the teaching of the Orthodox Church, God created man in His image and likeness (Gen. 1:26), perfect in soul and body, sinless by nature and free in will, but he was susceptible to sin, and whether to sin or not depended on his free will. The fall, which occurred as a result of the rejection of God's will, entailed the deprivation of man of God's grace and the corruption of human nature: the impairment of the powers of the human soul (Gen. 3:7–13), the change of his nature (Gen. 3:21), and the darkening of the image of God in him. As a result of the rejection of God's will and commandments by rational beings (fallen spirits and man), sin and evil entered the world.
Q. How do Catholics teach about original sin?
A. Catholics began to teach that God created man from two opposing parts, incapable of not opposing each other (soul and body, reason and sensuality), and that before the fall, man's being was held in harmony by the supernatural gift of "grace-given righteousness," given by God to the forefathers. With the fall, man lost grace and harmony, but his nature remained undamaged. Catholics do not explain why, despite the supernatural gift of grace, the lower powers prevailed over the higher ones.
Q. What follows from the teaching of the Catholics?
A. From the Catholic teaching it follows that either God could not save man by His grace, or He took away His grace from man before his fall. Consequently, either God does not possess omnipotence, or He Himself is the source of sin and evil in the world, which contradicts the Christian teaching about God.
Q. What can be said about the Roman Catholic teaching on original sin?
A. This teaching contradicts Divine Revelation and is false and heretical.
5. The Doctrine of the Supererogatory Merits of the Saints and of Indulgences
Q. What does the Roman Catholic teaching on the supererogatory merits of the saints consist of?
A. According to Catholic teaching, which arose in the 13th – 14th centuries, a person needs a certain sum of good works for his salvation, depending on the number of his sins. The holy saints performed far more good works than needed for their salvation, so that their surplus forms a certain "treasury of good works," and the pope has the authority to impute this surplus to people who have a deficiency in good works.
Q. And what are indulgences?
A. They are the remission of sinners from punishment by covering their sins at the expense of the supererogatory merits of the saints.
Q. To whom and for what are indulgences granted?
A. Initially, indulgences were granted for some service to the church, but then they began to be sold for money, becoming a source of income for the popes. They were sold not only for remission of sins already committed, but even for future ones. Indulgences served as the direct cause of the split in the Catholic Church and the emergence of Protestantism in the 16th century. Currently, indulgences are granted for participation in works of mercy, making pilgrimages, reciting a certain number of prayers, etc., as well as for fixed donations to the church and other ecclesiastical needs.
Q. Is this teaching correct, and should a Christian, when doing good works, expect to receive remission of sins and eternal life as something due?
A. No, this teaching is fundamentally incorrect, because good works are an inalienable duty of a Christian, not subject to mandatory reward, as the Savior teaches the apostles: "When you have done all that is commanded you, say, 'We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty'" (Luke 17:10). And the Apostle Paul says: "We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" (Eph. 2:10). In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, Jesus Christ speaks of equal payment to all who worked, regardless of the time they worked (Matt. 20:1–15). This indicates that the Kingdom of God is given not for the quantity of good works, as something due, but as an ineffable gift of God's mercy. That is why the Apostle Paul says: "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 6:23).
Q. Is it possible to redistribute good works to obtain salvation?
A. No, it is impossible, for in the parable of the ten virgins, Jesus Christ relates: "But the foolish said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.' But the wise replied, 'Perhaps there will not be enough for us and for you; go rather to the dealers and buy for yourselves'" (Matt. 25:8–9). Every Christian must himself constantly do good works according to his strength and ability.
Q. And what frees a Christian from punishment for sins committed?
A. The sincere and deep repentance for his sins, with the firm intention not to commit them further, which he performs in the sacrament of penance, frees him from punishment.
Q. Does the teaching on the supererogatory merits of the saints and indulgences contribute to a person's repentance?
A. No, it does not contribute. On the contrary, it distracts from repentance, because it draws him into a formal bookkeeping of his good works and sins, which gives nothing for salvation, develops in him a tendency to do good works with calculation, creates an illusion of covering sins with good, and moreover others', works, and of forgiving sins for fixed monetary contributions, when the rich gain an advantage over the poor.
Q. How should the Catholic teaching on the supererogatory merits of the saints and indulgences be assessed overall?
A. The teaching is heretical and causes great harm to believers, because it contradicts Divine Revelation in everything and directs a person along a false path that hinders his salvation.
6. The Dogmas of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and Her Bodily Assumption
Q. What does the teaching on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary consist of?
A. The dogma of the Catholic Church, adopted in 1854, says: "The Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, preserved free from all stain of original sin."
Q. Is this teaching correct?
A. No, it is incorrect. From Holy Scripture we know that the guilt of our forefather Adam passes to all people: "Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned," writes the Apostle Paul (Rom. 5:12). Consequently, every person as a descendant of Adam, born in a natural way, is born in sin.
Q. Could not the Most Holy Theotokos have been an exception to this rule?
A. No, she could not. The only exception is the Lord, the God-man Jesus Christ. Of Him Holy Scripture says: "In him there is no sin" (1 John 3:5), "one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15), "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21). Nothing similar is said in Holy Scripture about the Most Holy Theotokos.
Q. Do we not diminish the glory of the Most Holy Theotokos by rejecting the immaculateness of her conception?
A. No, for we venerate the Most Holy Theotokos as more honorable than the Cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, but she had this glory not from the beginning, but from the time when she herself immaculately conceived the Son of God.
Q. From where is this evident?
A. From her own words, for only after the conception of the Lord Jesus Christ did she say: "Henceforth (i.e., from this day) all generations will call me blessed" (Luke 1:48).
Q. What does the Roman Catholic teaching on the bodily assumption of the Mother of God consist of?
A. The dogma, adopted by the Catholic Church in 1950, states: "The Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, after completing her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory."
Q. What is the difference between this dogma and the Orthodox teaching and Holy Tradition, which, at first glance, say the same thing: that the Most Holy Theotokos, after her death (dormition), which was a consequence of original sin, was taken up to heaven in soul and her most pure body and abides in heaven in her already glorified flesh?
A. The difference is that the question of the death of the Most Holy Theotokos is avoided by the Catholics. This allows them to say (and they do say) either that the Most Holy Theotokos was taken up to heaven without dying, alive, which directly contradicts Holy Tradition, or that her death was voluntary, i.e., redemptive, and to call the Mother of God "co-redemptrix" of the human race. This also contradicts Divine Revelation, according to which the only Redeemer and Mediator between God and men is the Son of God, the God-man Jesus Christ.
Q. What should be said about these dogmas of the Roman Catholics?
A. They contradict Divine Revelation, and therefore are false – heretical.
7. Deviations in the Administration of the Holy Sacraments
Q. What are the most significant deviations of the Roman Catholics from the ancient tradition in the administration of the holy sacraments?
A. The most significant deviations include the following innovations, which arose in the Roman Catholic Church after its fall from Orthodoxy:
– Depriving infants of the sacrament of chrismation, which is performed over children only after reaching adolescence (from 7 to 12 years);
– Depriving infants of the sacrament of communion also until they reach adolescence;
– Depriving the laity of communion of the Holy Blood of Christ (currently not universally practiced).
Q. How do Roman Catholics motivate depriving infants of the sacraments of chrismation and communion?
A. They explain this by saying that children, until they reach adolescence, do not have their own sins imputed to them or conscious faith, therefore these sacraments cannot bring them any benefit.
Q. And what was the attitude of the ancient Christian Church to these questions, and what is the attitude of modern Orthodoxy?
A. In the ancient Christian Church, these sacraments were performed, and in the modern Orthodox Church they are performed, over children based on the faith of the adults who bring or present them, and it is believed that receiving the sacraments imparts the grace of the Holy Spirit to children, contributing to their spiritual strengthening and growth.
Q. And in what form did Jesus Christ command the sacrament of communion to be administered?
A. The Lord established to administer this sacrament by communion of His Body and His Blood. The Gospel narrates this as follows: "Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, 'Take, eat; this is my body.' And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, 'Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins'" (Matt. 26:26–28).
Q. If Jesus Christ Himself gave communion to the apostles under both kinds, why do Catholics not follow His example and deprive the laity of communion of the Savior's Blood?
A. They say that the example of the Savior giving communion to the apostles does not apply to the laity, but only to priests, as successors of the apostles.
Q. Are there direct indications in the Gospel that communion of the Lord's Blood should apply not only to the apostles, but to all without exception?
A. Yes, there are. The Lord says, addressing all the people listening to Him: "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day... He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–54, 56).
Q. How then did the apostles act, and how did the ancient Church follow in giving communion to the faithful?
A. The Apostle Paul says, addressing all the Corinthians: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup" (1 Cor. 11:26–28). And the ancient Christian Church followed the instructions of the Lord and the apostles.
Q. What can be said about the changes made by Roman Catholics in the administration of the holy sacraments?
A. These changes contradict the tradition of the ancient Christian Church and Holy Scripture and, being false and unfounded, lead to the exclusion of infants and the laity from the influence of the grace of the Holy Spirit.
Q. Based on the foregoing, how should the most important innovations of Roman Catholicism, introduced before the Second Vatican Council, be assessed in general?
A. All of them are absolutely false, heretical, because they completely contradict Divine Revelation, Holy Scripture, and Holy Tradition, are built on the ambitious, completely unfounded claims of the Vatican to supreme authority and sinless teaching office in the Universal Church, and express the ever-increasing distance of Roman Catholicism from the true Christian faith.
II. Statements of the Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church about Roman Catholicism
Q. What characterizes the statements of the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church about Roman Catholicism?
A. These statements (made even before the Second Vatican Council) were uttered by the holy fathers under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and therefore reflect the true essence of the Roman Catholic faith. They unanimously characterize papism and Roman Catholicism as a whole as a completely false, heretical faith, torn away from true apostolic Christianity, and denounce the innovations and new teachings of the Vatican that contradict Divine Revelation.
Q. Which of these statements are most relevant in our time?
A. For the present day, the words of St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov), which reveal mainly the essence of the "spiritual" heritage and "asceticism" of Catholicism, and the statements of the holy righteous John of Kronstadt, who characterize the papacy of the early 20th century from various angles, are of the greatest importance.
St. Photius of Constantinople (†891): "The Latins not only introduced other iniquities, but reached such an excess of audacity that they even dared to introduce a lie into the holy Symbol of Faith, which by all conciliar decrees is commanded to be kept unchanged (O the cunning of the evil one!), pretending that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father, but also from the Son, and thereby distorted the fundamental dogma of the Holy Trinity."
St. Gregory Palamas (†c. 1360): "We will not accept you into communion as long as you say that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son."
St. Mark of Ephesus (†1457): "We have separated the Latins from ourselves for no other reason than that they are heretics. Therefore it is completely wrong to unite with them... The Latins are not only schismatics, but also heretics. The Church was silent about this because their tribe is much larger and stronger than ours."
"If they (the Latins) have completely deviated, and that in regard to theology of the Holy Spirit, blasphemy against whom is the greatest of all dangers, then it is clear that they are heretics, and we cut them off as heretics."
"Therefore, brethren, flee from Latin innovations and their introducers and rooters, and bound to each other by love, gather into our one head – Christ."
Venerable Theodosius of the Kiev Caves (†1074): "With the multitude of their heresies they (the Latins) have dishonored all the earth... There is no eternal life in the Latin faith."
Venerable Maximus the Greek (†1556): "In my writings I denounce every Latin heresy and every Jewish and pagan blasphemy..."
Venerable Paisius (Velichkovsky) (†1794) writes of Latinism that it broke away from the Church and "fell... into the abyss of heresies and errors... and lies in them without any hope of rising." And below: the Latins – "are not Christians."
St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov) (†1867): "Papism – so called is the heresy that embraced the West, from which various Protestant teachings originated, like branches from a tree. Papism ascribes to the pope the properties of Christ and thereby denies Christ. Some Western writers have almost openly uttered this denial, saying that it is far less a sin to deny Christ than to deny the pope. The pope is the idol of the papists; he is their deity. Because of this terrible error, God's grace has departed from the papists; they are given over to themselves and to satan – the inventor and father of all heresies, including papism. In this state of darkness, they distorted some dogmas and sacraments, and deprived the Divine Liturgy of its essential meaning, casting out from it the invocation of the Holy Spirit and the blessing of the offered bread and wine, by which they are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ... No heresy expresses so openly and insolently its immeasurable pride, its cruel contempt for men, and its hatred for them."
"Do not play with your salvation, do not play! Otherwise you will weep forever. Engage in reading the New Testament and the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church (by no means Teresa, Francis, and other Western madmen, whom their heretical church passes off as saints!), study in the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church how to correctly understand Scripture, what manner of life, what thoughts and feelings befit a Christian."
"The ascetics of the Western church and its writers on asceticism received a different direction from the time of that church's separation from the Eastern and its fall into the pernicious darkness of heresies... From this state (delusion) a multitude of books have been written by Western writers. It is upon these that the blind and proud world eagerly seizes; it is these that it preaches, especially as holy and spiritual, worthy to stand beside Holy Scripture... The works of Western writers, written from a state of self-delusion, find numerous readers, are translated more than once into Russian, printed, and reprinted."
"Among other deceitful, corrupting zephyrs that waft upon the heart this terrible stillness, this calamitous, pernicious enjoyment, is also wafted upon it by the reading of the well-known little book of Thomas à Kempis, a Western monk who was in demonic delusion, the book 'The Imitation.'"
"As an example of an ascetic book written from a state of delusion, called opinion, one can cite the work of Thomas à Kempis entitled 'The Imitation of Jesus Christ.' It breathes refined voluptuousness and haughtiness, which in people blinded and filled with passions produces an enjoyment that they recognize as the tasting of Divine grace... Like Malpas, Francis of Assisi, Ignatius Loyola, and other ascetics of Latinism (after the fall of the Western Church from the Eastern), recognized as saints in its bosom, attained in seclusion the strongest demonic delusion."
"By the name of papal propaganda is meant the dissemination of that concept of the pope which the pope wishes to instill in humanity about himself, that is, the concept of the supreme, autocratic, unlimited power of the pope over the world. Propaganda, having this goal, pays little attention to the quality of the teaching it imparts; for it, everything that serves its purpose is acceptable – even faith in Christ without abandoning faith in idols."
Venerable Ambrose of Optina (†1891): "The Orthodox Eastern Church, from apostolic times until now, has kept unchanged and uncorrupted by innovations both the evangelical and apostolic teaching, and the tradition of the holy fathers, and the decrees of the Ecumenical Councils... The Roman Church, however, long ago deviated into heresy and innovation..." And further: "The Roman Church... because it does not piously keep the conciliar and apostolic decrees, but has deviated into innovations and unrighteous wisdom, does not belong at all to the One, Holy, and Apostolic Church."
"Truth testifies that the Roman Church has fallen away from Orthodoxy."
St. Theophan the Recluse (†1894): "There was one Church on earth with one faith. But temptation came – the pope with his followers was carried away by self-wisdom and fell away from the one Church and faith."
"To believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds from God the Father is a mandatory dogma, but to believe in the Latin way that He proceeds also from the Son is a deviation from the Church, a heresy."
Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt (†1908): "Until now we all have unanimously and with one mind believed in this Symbol of Faith and do not add a single iota to it, so as not to lose salvation for a false addition, like the Catholics, Lutherans, and Anglicans."
"If any of the Orthodox wished to unite with the Catholics or Lutherans and be one with them – in Christ, one Church, one society of believers! But who of the members of these so-called churches, especially of the primates, called popes, patriarchs, metropolitans, archbishops and bishops or else priests, padres – would agree to renounce their errors? No one. And we cannot agree with their heretical teaching without harm to our soul's salvation... Is it possible to unite the un-unitable – lies with truth?"
"Catholic Jesuits, to please the pope and their own selfish lower views and goals, have perverted the law of conscience and the law of the Gospel, asserting that for the achievement of self-serving goals or religious purposes, Catholics may use any unlawful means; therefore also kill... and burn the Orthodox at the stake."
"The words of our Savior Jesus Christ are true: he who is not with me is against me (Matt. 12:30). Catholics, Lutherans, and Reformers have fallen away from the Church of Christ... they are clearly going against Christ and His Church... they do not respect fasts, they pervert the saving dogmas of the faith. They are not with us, they are against us and against Christ."
"The popes imagined themselves to be heads of the Church and its foundation and even vicars of Christ, which is absurd and incongruous. Hence all the arrogance of the Roman popes and their long-standing claim to supremacy and arbitrary rule over the entire Universal Church. Well, the popes have concocted all sorts of tricks in their papal church, all sorts of false dogmas leading to falsity in both faith and life. This is fully a heretical church."
"If Jesus Christ had intended to give His Church, after His ascension into heaven, another head instead of Himself, or a vicar, as the popes say, considering themselves vicars of Christ on earth, then He would have clearly declared this before His ascension, for this is such an important dogma for the salvation of human souls; and the apostles would have declared it, or one of them would have called himself a vicar; but none of them let slip a word, remembering the Lord's words: whoever would be great among you must be your servant (Matt. 20:26); you are all brethren (Matt. 23:8)."
"The papists, having recognized the pope as head of the church, have elevated him to the throne instead of Christ and deified him, and placed Christ in the background. They made the pope the vicar of Christ, while Christ abides with us always, to the close of the age (Matt. 28:20). But look how many errors have been admitted into the papal (and not Christ's) faith, strange errors, blasphemous – and you will turn away from it with indignation and horror! – O human pride! O satanic pride! The pope supposedly infallible! O Jesuitism!"
"The one head of the Church in heaven, on earth, and under the earth is Christ God. Can a man, the pope, be the head of the Church that is in heaven? He cannot. And in general, can a sinful man, the pope, be the head of the whole earthly Church and dispose of earthly and afterlife destiny?.. Read the history of the popes: what were they like? How many of them were worthy of their seat? Only in the first centuries were there a few worthy ones, but in subsequent centuries how many were unworthy and vicious, to the shame of the whole Roman Church! Are these the heads of churches?"
"The Catholics have perverted the teaching of the Most Wise Christ Himself, the heavenly Teacher, without whom no one knows the Father, but only He – the Son. Christ says that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, yet the Catholics and Lutherans with the Anglicans say that He proceeds from the Father and the Son. Do stop finally blaspheming the Holy Spirit and raising a lie against Him: those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. And you have forgotten the words of the apostle: even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:8). Is this word fearful or not? – Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away (Matt. 24:35)."
"The popes and Catholics have rejected this all-mediating Blood concerning the laity and do not give it to them, probably out of economy, so that less wine would be used! And with what frantic zeal they draw the Orthodox into Catholicism, into their pernicious faith! Protect, O Lord, Orthodoxy from fierce Catholicism, in which everything is subject to the will of the pope and the Jesuits."
"It is precisely in his dogma of infallibility that the greatest error lies, for the pope is a sinful man and – trouble if he imagines himself infallible. How many greatest errors, pernicious for human souls, has the Catholic, papal church invented in dogmas, in rites, in canonical rules, in worship, in the deadening, malicious relations of Catholics to the Orthodox, in blasphemies and slanders against the Orthodox Church, in abuses directed at the Orthodox Church and Orthodox Christians! And for all this, the supposedly infallible pope is to blame, as well as his and the Jesuits' doctrine, their spirit of lies, duplicity, and all sorts of improper means ad maiorem Dei gloriam (for the supposedly greater glory of God)."
"Hatred of Orthodoxy, fanaticism and persecution of the Orthodox, murders – run like a red thread through all the centuries of Catholicism's life. By their fruits you shall know them. Is such the spirit commanded us by Christ? If to anyone, then to Catholics, Lutherans, and Reformers one can say: 'You do not know what manner of spirit you are of' (Luke 9:55)."
"The pope and the papists have become so proud and exalted themselves that they took it upon themselves to criticize Christ Himself, the Hypostatic Wisdom of God, and have extended (under the pretext of the development of dogmas) their pride to the point of distorting some of His words, commandments, and institutions, which must 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, of which they have deprived the laity, they have set at naught the words of the Apostle Paul: 'For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes' (1 Cor. 11:26); instead of leavened bread they use unleavened bread in the liturgy."
"The Catholics have fallen away from the head of the whole Church – Christ, having chosen an earthly head – the erring pope."
"Come to us, you who call yourselves Catholics, and who reproach us as schismatics, and let us be tried, let us impartially examine, according to God's truth, according to God's judgment, your saints, glorified by the pope, not by God, and compare them with our saints, witnessed by God Himself through countless miracles of healings and various consolations for the Orthodox who have recourse to them with faith! What a difference! How the truth of our faith shines and with its light darkens your faith, darkened by heresies and false wisdom."
"O human vanity! O deceit, O subtle weaving of lies! The papists have deprived the laity of the Blood of Christ, shed for the cleansing of sins. O headless headship, acting contrary to the true head – Christ God!"
Q. Indeed, reading these statements, which quite unambiguously denounce Roman Catholicism as papism – a false, anti-Christian faith incompatible with Orthodoxy – how can it be explained that some modern Orthodox theologians, contrary to the words of the saints, assert that Catholics are our brothers in the faith, that the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are sisters, and that God's grace operates in Catholicism?
A. According to Divine Revelation, one of the main properties of God is His all-righteousness; therefore, the Holy Spirit cannot say one thing to the holy saints of God and another to these theologians. Consequently, their assertions, contradicting the Lord's own view of papism, show their misunderstanding of the essence of Roman Catholicism and reflect their own opinion and that of the one who led them away "through philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ" (Col. 2:8).
III. The New Dogmatic Teaching of the Roman Catholics Adopted by the Second Vatican Council
1. The Essence of the New Dogma and Its General Justification
Q. Why should the Second Vatican Council be considered a dividing line in the history of Roman Catholicism, radically changing the essence of the Catholic faith?
A. At the Second Vatican Council of 1962–1965, called the "modernist" and "ecumenical" council, on the one hand, the commitment of Roman Catholics to traditional Catholic teaching was declared, to which the direction of Christian ecumenism was given (see below, ch. V); on the other hand, a new dogmatic teaching on the Church, God, the salvation of man, and Divine Revelation was adopted, expressing the interreligious ecumenical (or super-ecumenical) policy of Roman Catholicism and its transformation from Christianity into neo-paganism.
Q. What is the main meaning of the new teaching reflecting the interreligious ecumenism of the Roman Catholics?
A. The Second Vatican Council declared and "justified" the position of a single universal church, into which both all Christians and believers of non-Christian religions are and should enter in different ways, where salvation can occur by various paths, according to a person's faith.
Q. How is this revolutionary teaching expressed by the council?
A. It is contained in the "Dogmatic Constitution on the Church" – the main document of the council – and the "Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions." According to the Dogma on the Church (sections 13–16), the council declares that to the "catholic unity of the people of God" (i.e., to the Universal Church) "belong or are destined in different ways" all who are "called to salvation by God's grace": both all Christians, and those who have not yet received the Gospel, "by various paths," Jews, Muslims, and others who acknowledge the Creator, and those who are only seeking God – all are embraced by God's Providence, and they can "attain eternal salvation" (the end of section 13, parts of sections 14 and 15, and section 16 of the Dogma on the Church and the main provisions of the Declaration on Non-Christian Religions are given in the appendix of this publication. – Note of compilers).
This teaching of the council is repeated by the Catholic Catechism (1992) and Pope John Paul II in his book "Crossing the Threshold of Hope" (1994), which express the official position of the Vatican.
Q. So, do the Roman Catholics renounce Jesus Christ as the One Savior of the world?
A. No, they still continue to say that Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, is the only Savior of the world, the Deliverer and Redeemer of humanity, the one Mediator between God and men, and without Him there can be no salvation: "Christ alone is the Mediator and Way of salvation, and He is present to us in His Body, which is the Church (... ), into which, as through a door, people enter through baptism. Therefore, people who know that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Jesus Christ, yet are unwilling either to enter it or to remain in it, cannot be saved (see appendix, Dogma on the Church, section 14).
Q. Consequently, do Roman Catholics consider it a mandatory condition for the salvation of Jews, Muslims, and other non-Christians to renounce their faith, accept Christianity, and be baptized?
A. No, this is not stated anywhere. On the contrary, different paths of salvation are emphasized.
Q. How then is faith in Jesus Christ as the one Savior of the world compatible (which seems utterly incredible) with the belief in salvation within non-Christian religions?
A. In the aforementioned book, Pope John Paul II explains it this way, referring to the decisions of the Second Vatican Council. He says that in the tradition (of the Catholic Church) the idea of "the so-called semina Verbi (seeds of the Word) has long been rooted. These seeds are present in all religions." That is, all religions are, to some extent, divinely revealed, and Jesus Christ as the Son of God, God the Word (Logos), is already present in them. Of course, there are no "seeds of the Word," nor any share of divine revelation, in non-Christian religions. They contain only human fabrications and "seeds" sown by the evil one (see also below, section 5 – Note of compilers). "One can say," the pope declares, "that the council's position is truly inspired by concern for all. The Church is guided by the faith that God the Creator wants to save all in Jesus Christ, the one Mediator between God and men, because He has redeemed all." Therefore, "the Holy Spirit acts fruitfully also outside the visible organism of the Church (cf. LG – Lumen Gentium, 13). He acts, relying precisely on those semina Verbi, which form, as it were, the common soteriological root of all religions."
Q. However, it has always been considered that Christianity and non-Christian religions are completely incompatible with each other, and the possibility of the saving power of the Holy Spirit acting in non-Christianity causes, to say the least, bewilderment. What does the council say about this?
A. The council, on the contrary, emphasizing the calling of non-Christians by God's grace to salvation by various paths, "proves" the existence of spiritual closeness to Christians of Jews, Muslims, and some pagans, their faith in the "Creator" and "God," which, in its opinion, means the possibility of salvation within the framework of their religions.
2. The "Spiritual Kinship" of Christians and Jews
Q. What does the council say about the "spiritual kinship" of Christians and Jews?
A. About the Jews, it is said that they are "a people to whom the covenants and promises were given, and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4–5), a people beloved for the sake of the fathers for the sake of election, for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable (cf. Rom. 11:28–29)" (Dogma on the Church, section 16, paragraph I). "The council remembers the bonds spiritually uniting the people of the New Covenant with Abraham's offspring... The Church cannot forget... that it is nourished from the root of that cultivated olive tree onto which the wild olive branches, the Gentiles, have been grafted (cf. Rom. 11:17–24). For the Church believes that Christ, our peace, reconciled Jews and Gentiles on the cross, and made them both one in Himself (cf. Eph. 2:14–16)" (section "The Jewish Religion" of the Declaration on Non-Christian Religions).
Pope John Paul II speaks of the Jews as "our elder brothers in the faith. These words, however, express both what the council said and what the Church is deeply convinced of."
And the Catholic Catechism, speaking of the spiritual closeness of modern Judaism and Christianity, declares that "the people of God of the Old Covenant and the new people of God are directed towards similar goals: the expectation of the coming (or return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the second coming of the Messiah, who died and rose, acknowledged as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden."
Q. Does the council's assertion of the spiritual closeness of Christians and Jews – "the bonds spiritually uniting the people of the New Covenant with Abraham's offspring" – correspond to Holy Scripture?
A. No, it does not correspond. As is known, Abraham received a promise from God that a great nation would come from him and that all the families of the earth would be blessed in Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3), and his descendants, through Isaac and Jacob, would become God's chosen people. This promise was fulfilled in the Jewish people in Old Testament times. However, when the Jews did not accept Jesus Christ, He foretold: "I tell you, many will come from east and west and sit at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth" (Matt. 8:11–12). Or again: "Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it" (Matt. 21:43), which was fulfilled after the crucifixion of Christ by the Jews.
Q. Do the cited references to the Apostle Paul's epistle to the Romans not speak of the spiritual kinship of Christians and Jews?
A. No, taken in the context of the epistle, they testify to the opposite: the spiritual separation of Christians and Jews, the deprivation of the Kingdom of Heaven from the Jews and its transfer to the Gentiles. We read after the reference indicated by the council (Rom. 9:4–5): "But it is not that the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his descendants... it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants" (Rom. 9:6–8), and further, referring to the prophet Hosea: "Those who were not my people I will call 'my people,' and her who was not beloved I will call 'beloved'... in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living God'" (Rom. 9:25–26). The Apostle says not only that the Gentiles became heirs of Abraham according to the promise, but also that the Jews who do not believe in Christ have been deprived of the Kingdom of God: "Some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place... They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith" (Rom. 11:17, 20). In the epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 2:14–15), the Apostle Paul says that Christ reconciled on the cross, by His Flesh and Blood, the Gentiles and Jews who believe in Him, i.e., Christians, but there is not a word about the reconciliation of unbelievers.
Q. But perhaps the existing beliefs of Christians and Jews are actually spiritually close to each other?
A. No, in reality, the faiths of Christians and Jews have no spiritual kinship: Jews reject the New Covenant and all Christian spiritual truths: about the Holy Trinity, about Jesus Christ as the God-man, Son of God, Savior and Judge, considering Him an ordinary man without a father; about the Most Holy Theotokos, raising malicious blasphemy against Her and Her Son, and others.
Q. And what then are the differences and the commonality of worship: Christians – to the True God, the Holy Trinity; ancient Jews – to the True God Yahweh; and modern Jews – to the false god Yahweh?
A. Of course, the One and the Same True God, whom Christians worship – the Holy Trinity – created the world (see Gen. 1), and He was worshiped by the ancient Jews, which is confirmed by the fact that He appeared to Abraham in the form of Three Strangers (see Gen. 18:1–5); however, for the Old Testament man this was a mystery, which Jesus Christ revealed to people in the Gospel. But since the Jews did not accept the True God (Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity) and were themselves rejected by Him, this mystery remained hidden from them under seven seals, and they now worship a false god, who, although bearing the ancient Hebrew name of the True God – Yahweh or Jehovah, is a non-existent, non-tri-hypostatic god-idol.
Q. How should we regard the statement of the Catholic Catechism concerning modern Jews, that the people of God of the Old Covenant and the new people of God are directed towards similar goals and each in its own way awaits the coming of the Messiah (see above)?
A. Here precisely there is an attempt to substitute the absolutely false religion of modern Judaism for the divinely revealed Old Testament religion. Indeed, Old Testament Jews awaited the coming of the Messiah, the Savior of the Jewish people. But now, after their rejection of Jesus Christ, they await the coming of another "Messiah," who, according to Christian faith, will be the antichrist. So the assertion of "similar goals" and the Jews' expectation of the Messiah is completely false, for it presents the antichrist as the Messiah and equates the life of the future age – the Heavenly Kingdom of God, awaited by Christians – with the kingdom of the antichrist on earth, awaited by the Jews.
Q. And how should we assess the declaration by Roman Catholics of modern Jews as our "elder brothers in the faith"!
A. It is perfectly obvious that such a declaration completely contradicts the foundations of the Christian and Jewish faiths, and it can be made, knowing the judgment of Judaism about Jesus Christ and His Most Pure Mother (raising malicious blasphemy against Them), only if one renounces the immutability of Christian truths about Jesus Christ as the God-man, the one Savior of the human race, His incarnation from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and about His Most Pure Mother as the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin, that is, to commit a betrayal of Jesus Christ and the Most Holy Theotokos in favor of the Jews.
Q. Is the council correct in declaring that "the Jews should not be presented as rejected by God or accursed, as if this followed from Holy Scripture," because one must not "teach anything that is not in accord with the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ" (Declaration on Non-Christian Religions, section "The Jewish Religion")?
A. No, it is incorrect. Holy Scripture says the opposite. For example: the parable of Jesus Christ about the wicked tenants (see Matt. 21:33–45; Mark 12:1–12; Luke 20:9–19) or His prophecy: "that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation" (Matt. 23:35–36 and Luke 11:50–51), or similar prophecies (see Matt. 8:11–12; 12:41–42; 12:43–45; Luke 11:31–32; 21:23–24). And also the words of the Jews themselves: "And all the people answered, 'His blood be on us and on our children!'" (Matt. 27:25). The council's declaration denies the presence of all these verses in the Gospel and presents a deliberate falsehood.
Q. Based on the foregoing, what can be said about the council's assertion of the "spiritual closeness" of Jews to Christians?
A. It is absolutely false, because it completely contradicts the fundamental tenets of Christianity and Judaism, leads to the recognition of the non-tri-hypostatic god-idol Yahweh, whom modern Jews worship, as the "true God," to the rejection of the truth about Jesus Christ as the one Messiah, to the denial of the immutability of truths about the future age as the Heavenly Kingdom of God, about Jesus Christ as the God-man, His incarnation from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and about His Most Pure Mother as the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin; it contradicts numerous verses of the New Testament that prove the opposite, and its justification is built on the perversion of their meaning to the opposite and on direct lies.
3. On the Spiritual Proximity of Christians and Muslims
Q. What does the council say about the faith of Muslims and their spiritual closeness to Christians?
A. The Dogma on the Church asserts: "But the salvific plan embraces those who acknowledge the Creator, and among them, first of all, Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us worship the one, merciful God, who will judge men on the last day" (section 16, paragraph 2). And in the Declaration on Non-Christian Religions it is said: "The Church also regards with esteem the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men" (section "The Muslim Religion").
Q. Do Muslims indeed worship the same God as Christians, as the council asserts, saying "along with us worship the one God"?
A. No, the God of Christians and the false god of the Muslims are completely different: Christians worship the One Tri-hypostatic (Triune) True God – the Consubstantial and Indivisible Holy Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); for Christians, the Only Begotten Son of God the Father, Jesus Christ, is True God and True Man (God-man), the Savior and Judge of the human race. Muslims, however, reject the Triune God and worship a single non-tri-hypostatic, and therefore false, god-idol Allah, and deny Jesus Christ as God, considering Him a created being, along with Adam, the prophets Noah, Abraham, Moses, and others; they recognize Muhammad as the chief prophet.
Q. How are these differences in Muslim worship from Christian worship expressed?
A. These differences are proclaimed by the holy scripture of the Muslims, the Quran, which asserts: "Unbelievers are those who say that God is the third of three, whereas there is no god but the one God"; "Unbelievers are those who say that the Messiah, son of Mary, is God"; "Believe in God and His messengers, and do not say Trinity. Desist, it is better for you. God is only one God, to whom worship is due. Praise be to Him: it cannot be that He has children"; "The Messiah, son of Mary, is only a messenger, like those who were before him" (verses 5:76; 5:77; 5:79; 4:169), which is repeated by other verses of the Quran (3:52–53; 3:78; 5:19; 9:30–31; 17:111; 25:2). The Quran denies the crucifixion and death on the cross of Jesus Christ, claiming that instead of Him it was only a semblance (verse 4:154). Furthermore, the Quran contains many references to the Gospel and the words of Jesus Christ, but practically all of them are either distorted beyond recognition or contain fiction. For example, it quotes words supposedly spoken by Jesus Christ that confirm the authenticity of the Quran and predict the coming of the prophet Muhammad (verse 61:6). Nothing of the sort, of course, exists in the New Testament.
Q. But perhaps the same True God simply gave different revelations and Holy Scriptures to Christians and Muslims, if the Catholics assert that the god of the Muslims "has spoken to men"?
A. No, such an assumption is absolutely incompatible with the Christian concept of the True God, because the Bible and the Quran, Christianity and Islam, contradict each other in their fundamental, main tenets of faith. By recognizing the truth of Islam, Catholics recognize that God spoke opposite truths about Himself, disputed Himself, contradicted Himself, renounced His words, and lied. This denies one of the main properties of the True God – His all-righteousness – and, endowing Him with the qualities of the "father of lies" (see John 8:44), raises blasphemy against the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit.
Q. How then should we assess the Catholics' assertions that Muslims worship "the one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty God, the Creator of heaven and earth," "who will judge men on the last day"?
A. This shows that the Roman Catholics consider the non-tri-hypostatic god-idol Allah, whom Muslims worship, to be the Living True God, equate him with the True God, the Holy Trinity, "share" the functions that belong only to the True God, and "bestow" them upon Allah.
Q. Based on the foregoing, what can be said about the council's assertion of the supposed spiritual proximity of Christians and Muslims?
A. It is absolutely false, because it contradicts both the fundamental Christian truths and the tenets of Islam; it is based on the Roman Catholics' renunciation of the Holy Trinity as the One God and the recognition of the non-tri-hypostatic god-idol Allah as true and living, the rejection of Jesus Christ as the one Judge of humanity, of Divine Revelation as the only true one, and the recognition of Muslim "revelation" as truth; it "shares" the functions of the Holy Trinity and Christ with Allah, denies the all-righteousness of the True God, attributing to Him the function of a liar – the evil one – and raises blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
4. On the Spiritual Proximity of Christians and Pagans
Q. What does the council say about pagans and their spiritual proximity to Christians?
A. The council classifies pagans among those who, like Muslims, "acknowledge the Creator" (Dogma on the Church, section 16, paragraph 2), and considers that among pagans there sometimes exists "a recognition of a Supreme Deity or even of the Father"; "in Hinduism, men explore the divine mystery... resorting to God with love and trust"; Buddhism "teaches a path by which men... can attain the highest illumination either by their own efforts or with the help from above" (Declaration on Non-Christian Religions, section "Various Non-Christian Religions").
Q. Is it true that pagans acknowledge the Creator and resort to God, as the Roman Catholics believe?
A. No, it is not true, for the Creator, the True God, is only the Holy Trinity, and pagans deny the Holy Trinity as the One God and worship various created gods, the products of human hands, reason, philosophy, myths, and demonic fabrications.
Q. But perhaps in paganism one can indeed achieve "the highest illumination" and receive "help from above"?
A. No, one cannot, for behind the gods in paganism stand fallen spirits, and demonic forces are at work, which give people "illuminations" and help "from above." "The pagans," says the Apostle, "offer sacrifices to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons" (1 Cor. 10:20). Therefore, by equating the actions of demons with God's grace, the Roman Catholics raise blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
Q. And what does the council's comparison of the pagan "Supreme Deity" with the "Father" indicate?
A. By identifying the supreme deities of the pagans with the "Father," the Catholics present the "Father" as a God independent of the Son and the Holy Spirit, i.e., they "divide" the Indivisible Holy Trinity and create a new idol – an independent god the "Father."
Q. How should the council's teaching on the "spirituality" of pagans be assessed?
A. It is also absolutely false, because it completely contradicts Christian teaching, is based on the Roman Catholics' recognition of the "Gods" and "Deities" worshipped by pagans as true, equates them and the action of the demonic forces behind them with the True God and God's grace; it rejects the Holy Trinity as the One and Indivisible God and, by "dividing" Him, creates a new idol – an independent god the "Father," and also raises blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
Q. Based on the foregoing, is the Catholics' statement about non-Christians "acknowledging the Creator" correct?
A. No, it is incorrect, for in non-Christian beliefs they acknowledge as real created gods and worship the creature, while they reject the True God – the Holy Trinity.
Q. What can be said in general about the "spiritual closeness" to Christians of Jews, Muslims, and pagans, preached by the council?
A. This position is absolutely false, because it completely contradicts the fundamental truths of Christianity and the tenets of non-Christian religions, rejects Divine Revelation as the only true one and the Holy Trinity as the One and Indivisible God, recognizes as true and living "Gods" the non-tri-hypostatic god-idols Allah of the Muslims and Yahweh worshipped by modern Jews, the gods and supreme deities of the pagans and the demonic forces behind them, endowing them with the properties of the True God, denies the all-righteousness of the True God, and raises blasphemy against the Holy Spirit; its justification is built on the distortion and direct falsification of a number of passages and provisions of the apostolic epistles and the Gospel.
5. On Salvation in Non-Christianity
Q. Did the council rightly proclaim that salvation can be obtained by various paths by Christians, Jews, Muslims, and pagans?
A. No, it is incorrect, for only Christianity offers man the true path of salvation, and in this single path, which man must follow to come to God, obtain the Kingdom of God, and inherit eternal life, lies the whole meaning and content of the Christian faith and Divine Revelation.
Q. And are the Roman Catholics correct in saying that all religions, both Christianity and non-Christian, are to some extent divinely revealed, that they contain, according to the tradition of the Catholic Church, "seeds of the Word," as well as faith in the "Creator" and "God"?
A. No, this new teaching and position of the Catholic Church are absolutely incorrect, for the only divinely revealed religion, based on the Word of God – Holy Scripture and Holy Patristic Tradition, the decisions of the seven Ecumenical Councils, and the teaching of the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church – is Christianity, and only in it is the True God and Creator, the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ, worshipped. All non-Christian religions (apart from the Old Testament one) are completely false, not divinely revealed (invented by someone); any words and phrases outwardly similar to the true ones have a completely different, distorted meaning in them; they contain not "seeds of the Word," but only tares, imitating the wheat (cf. Matt. 13:24–28), and faith and worship in them are directed not to the Creator and True God, whom they reject, but to the creature – false god-idols and demons (see above, ch. III, sec. 2–4).
Q. In that case, what can be said about the Catholic teaching that the Holy Spirit acts fruitfully outside the visible organism of the Christian Church, relying on the "seeds of the Word," which form the "common soteriological root of all religions"?
A. This is also a completely false position, for there is no "Holy Spirit" "acting fruitfully" in idolatry and demon worship (the Holy Spirit cannot act in separation from the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ, who are rejected by non-Christians) – for the spirit at work in them is completely different. In non-Christian religions, any communion with God, union with God, or movement towards God is completely absent in principle, and the paths they propose lead not to God in the Heavenly Kingdom, but to perdition. Numerous verses of the New Testament and direct indications of the Savior speak of this, for example: "No one comes to the Father, but by me" (John 14:6), "No one who denies the Son has the Father; he who confesses the Son has the Father also" (1 John 2:23), "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him" (John 3:36), "He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already" (John 3:18), and others. So the Vatican's declaration about the common soteriological root of all religions is an attempt to equate lies with truth and to justify super-ecumenism.
Q. Are the Roman Catholics correct in asserting that Muslims, Jews, and other non-Christians are called to salvation by God's grace (sections 13 and 16 of the Dogma on the Church)?
A. No, it is incorrect. If they were called to salvation, they would take the only path leading to it – renounce their faith and accept Christianity. By saying that God's grace, or the grace of the Holy Spirit, called them to "be saved" by false paths (to worship idols and demons, rejecting the True God), the Roman Catholics raise wicked blasphemy against the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit. In non-Christianity, only prevenient, but not saving, grace can act.
Q. And what can be said about God's Providence for salvation, to which the Roman Catholics refer, attempting to justify the teaching on the salvation of non-Christians by various paths?
A. Indeed, the saving Providence embraces all humanity and is revealed in the Bible from the moment of Adam's fall. The Old Testament contains hundreds of prophecies about the future coming into the world of the Savior, the Son of God, and His actual coming to earth, incarnation as the God-man Jesus Christ, public ministry, and sacrifice of Himself for the redemption of our sins opened the way of salvation to men. But to take this path, a person must repent of his sins, believe in the Gospel (see Mark 1:15), in Jesus Christ, and follow Christ. Only by faith in Christ and adherence to His teaching can one come to God and be saved – obtain the Kingdom of Heaven and eternal life.
Q. How then should we assess the Roman Catholic teaching on salvation, which, on the one hand, does not deny but asserts that one can be saved only through Jesus Christ, the one Mediator between God and men, and on the other hand, proclaims the salvation by various paths of non-Christians, those who reject the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ and worship the creature: god-idols, supreme deities, and demons?
A. This teaching and its justification reveal the duplicity, the Jesuit essence of Roman Catholicism. The devotion to Divine Revelation, apostolic Christian faith, and the Church of Christ, declared by Catholics, serves only as a verbal cover for their gross perversion of Christianity in its foundation, of the whole Providence of God for the salvation of humanity and the mission of the incarnate Son of God, and as a justification for the interreligious ecumenism of Roman Catholics, who are in fact betraying Christianity – Jesus Christ, the Holy Trinity, and Divine Revelation, both the New and the Old Testaments.
Q. Based on the foregoing, what can be said in general about the doctrine put forward by Roman Catholics of the possibility of salvation by "various paths" for Christians, Jews, Muslims, pagans, and even those only seeking the Creator?
A. This new doctrine is absolutely false, anti-Christian, because it is based on the completely untrue statements of Roman Catholics about the supposed spiritual closeness of non-Christians to Christians, their faith in the "Creator" and "God," built on the distortion and direct falsification of the essence of the Gospel and Divine Revelation as a whole and of the fundamental tenets of non-Christian religions, and leads to the denial of most of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith.
6. The Innovations of the Second Vatican Council and Their Contradictions with Christianity
Q. What are the innovations of the Second Vatican Council reflecting the interreligious ecumenism (super-ecumenism) of the Roman Catholics, and what are their contradictions and incompatibility with the Christian faith?
A. In the teaching adopted by the Second Vatican Council of 1962–1965, in its main document – the "Dogmatic Constitution on the Church" and the "Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions," confirmed and developed by the Catholic Catechism of 1992 and the work of Pope John Paul II of 1994, which express the official teaching of the Vatican, the Roman Catholics:
Declared and "justified" the position of a universal church, into which Christians of all confessions and all believers in the "Creator" – Jews, Muslims, and pagans who acknowledge "God" and "Supreme Deities" – are called to enter in different ways, thereby rejecting the truth about the Church of Christ.
Declared and "justified" the possibility of salvation for Christians, Jews, Muslims, and pagans by various paths, which contradicts the foundations of Christianity and Divine Revelation, perverts the entire Providence of God for the salvation of humanity and the mission of the incarnate Son of God.
Recognized as true "Living Creators" the non-tri-hypostatic god-idols worshipped by Muslims and modern Jews – Allah and Yahweh – and the "Supreme Deities" and "Gods" of the pagans, thereby renouncing the fundamental truth about the One God, the Holy Trinity (including the first commandment of God's Law).
Identified the "Supreme Deity" of the pagans with God the Father, considering Him as an independent "God" independent of the Son and the Holy Spirit, which "divides" the Indivisible Holy Trinity, creating a new god-idol, the "Father."
Extended the function of Judge of humanity to Allah, rejecting the truth about the one Judge – Jesus Christ.
Recognized as true the "illuminations" and "help from above" of the pagans, equating the demonic influences of paganism with the grace of the Holy Spirit and raising blasphemy against Him.
Recognized as true the "revelations" received from Allah (the Quran), thereby renouncing Divine Revelation as the only true one, and rejected the all-righteousness of God, equating Him with the "father of lies" and raising blasphemy against the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit.
Declared that Jews, Muslims, and some pagans are called to salvation by God's grace, thereby recognizing that God's grace directs them to be saved by a deliberately false path, again raising blasphemy against the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit.
Declared similar goals for Christianity and modern Judaism and that the Jews await the "Messiah," thereby rejecting the truths about Jesus Christ as the one Savior, about the antichrist as the false "Messiah," and the immutability of the truth about the life of the future age as the Heavenly Kingdom of God.
Declared the presence of "seeds of the Word" and the fruitful saving action of the Holy Spirit in all religions, again rejecting Divine Revelation as the only true one, equating the words of the Son of God with the fabrications of men and the evil one, and raising blasphemy against the Holy Trinity and the Holy Spirit, as well as presenting the Holy Spirit acting independently of the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ, rejected by non-Christians, and creating a new god-idol, the "Holy Spirit."
Declared modern Jews "our elder brothers in the faith," thereby denying, in addition to what has been said above, the immutability of truths about Jesus Christ as the God-man, His incarnation from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and about His Most Pure Mother as the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin.
Built the justification of their teaching on the distortion and direct falsification of the text and meaning of a number of passages of the Gospel and apostolic epistles.
Q. Summarizing what has been said, to the denial of which fundamental truths of the Christian faith did the new teaching of the Roman Catholics lead?
A. The new teaching of Roman Catholicism has led it to the denial and perversion of the following fundamental truths of the Christian faith: it has rejected
– the Holy Trinity as the One (i.e., the Only) True God;
– the first commandment of God's Law;
– Jesus Christ as the one Savior of the world and Judge of humanity;
– Divine Revelation;
– the indivisibility of the Holy Trinity;
– the all-righteousness of God;
– the truth about the Church of Christ;
– the antichrist as the false Messiah;
it has perverted
– the Providence of God for the salvation of humanity and the mission of the incarnate Son of God;
it has led to the renunciation of the immutability of the truth
– about the life of the future age as the Heavenly Kingdom of God;
– about Jesus Christ as the God-man;
– about His incarnation from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary;
– about His Most Pure Mother as the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin.
Q. What can be said in general about the contradictions of Roman Catholicism with the foundations of the Christian faith after the innovations adopted at the Second Vatican Council?
A. Having embarked on the path of super-ecumenism and declaring in words their adherence to the apostolic Christian faith and the Church, the Roman Catholics have in fact come to the rejection, perversion, or denial of the immutability of practically all the fundamental truths of Christianity, committing a complete betrayal of the True God, the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ, and the Christian faith.
7. Roman Catholicism After the Second Vatican Council
Q. Can Roman Catholicism be considered a heretical Christian faith after the Second Vatican Council?
A. No, it cannot: after the Second Vatican Council, Roman Catholicism became a non-divinely revealed, neo-pagan, anti-Christian religion.
Q. And in what is the neo-paganism of the Roman Catholics expressed?
A. The neo-paganism of the Catholics is expressed in the fact that, having rejected the One God, they recognize as true "living gods" the non-tri-hypostatic god-idols of the Jews and Muslims, the "Gods" and "Supreme Deities" of the pagans, equating them with the True God, the Holy Trinity, and attributing to them the functions of creation, judgment, and other properties of the True God, and consider worship of them as leading to salvation.
Q. Do the Roman Catholics consider the "gods" worshipped by non-Christians and the Holy Trinity as different "Living Gods," or do they regard "them" as different names, manifestations, or incarnations of the same "True God"?
A. Judging by the statements contained in the council documents, it is a matter of their recognition of a "One God" with many names and manifestations.
Q. But in that case, are the Roman Catholics pagans, considering all gods and the Holy Trinity as different names, manifestations, and incarnations of the "One God"?
A. Yes, they are, because faith in one changing "God" does not eliminate the worship of created gods in non-Christianity, but is merely supplemented by the Roman Catholics' belief in the existence of a certain new god-idol that "unites" all these gods and the Holy Trinity.
Q. However, do the Roman Catholics themselves still worship the True God – the Holy Trinity – or not?
A. No, the Roman Catholics worship a false god created by them, which only bears the name of the True God, the Holy Trinity. This is a false god from whom, compared to the One and Indivisible Holy Trinity, the Catholics have taken away unity, indivisibility, and all-righteousness; they have divided the sole functions of creation, judgment, revelation, and others with other "gods" and "deities," and have made Him himself one of many names and transformations of a single god-idol, calling Him the "Creator."
Q. Is the faith of the Roman Catholics a completely new form of paganism, or does it have analogies?
A. Modern Roman Catholicism has as its direct predecessor neo-Hinduism, which arose in the mid-19th century, being its variant. Neo-Hinduism believes that Hindus, Mohammedans, Christians, and believers of all other religions worship the same "God," who has many names, that all modern scriptures of the world speak of the same "God," who in various religions is called either Absolute Being, or Shiva, or Krishna, or Allah, or Christ, etc. Neo-Hindus compare "God" to a chameleon on a tree, appearing in various religions in changing forms. In 1893, at the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago, Swami Vivekananda put forward the idea of creating a universal religion, which became the basis of interreligious ecumenism and the new dogmatic teaching of the Roman Catholics, who assigned to the chameleon the name of the "Creator," or "Father" (or "Universal Christ," as one of the main Vatican ideologues of the universal religion, the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin, called him).
Q. Why is Roman Catholicism an anti-Christian religion, and not simply "non-Christian"?
A. Because, while rejecting and perverting the fundamental meaning of Christianity and Divine Revelation – the Providence of God for the salvation of humanity, the mission of the incarnate Son of God, the truths about the One God, the Holy Trinity, and the Church of Christ, and others – and replacing them with new pagan concepts, yet maintaining the appearance of the Christian faith, Roman Catholicism actively destroys Christianity from within and fights against the True God (the Holy Trinity and Jesus Christ) and His Revelation much more effectively than other non-Christian religions.
Q. What is the true goal pursued by the new teaching of the Second Vatican Council?
A. The true goal of the innovations of Roman Catholicism is the creation of a universal religion, laying the foundation for the religion of the antichrist, representing a generalized conglomerate of all the main beliefs of the world, with a universal church under the primacy of the pope, where worship will be directed to various false gods, representing different names and manifestations of a single god-idol, the "Creator" (or "Father," "Universal Christ," etc.).
Q. Based on the foregoing, what is Roman Catholicism after the Second Vatican Council?
A. After the Second Vatican Council, ROMAN CATHOLICISM HAS REVEALED ITSELF TO BE A FALSE ANTI-CHRISTIAN NEO-PAGAN RELIGION, CONDUCTING AN ACTIVE, CONCEALED STRUGGLE, COVERED BY CHRISTIAN PHRASEOLOGY, AGAINST GOD (THE HOLY TRINITY AND CHRIST) AND HIS REVELATION (THE NEW TESTAMENT AND REVELATION IN GENERAL), LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS FOR THE CREATION OF A UNIVERSAL RELIGION AND CHURCH.
IV. On Salvation and Spiritual Life in Roman Catholicism
Q. Does Roman Catholicism lead to salvation?
A. No, Roman Catholicism does not lead to union with God and salvation, because it is a neo-pagan religion (see above, ch. III, sections 6 and 7), in which worship is directed to a pagan false god created by Catholics, bearing only the name of the Holy Trinity, but being only one of many manifestations, incarnations, and designations of a single god-idol, the so-called "Creator" ("Father," "Universal Christ").
Q. Does the saving grace of God operate in Roman Catholicism?
A. No, it does not, as in any pagan religion. In Roman Catholicism, God's general Providence for creation and its salvation operates, and the prevenient grace of the Holy Spirit may act. The statements of the holy fathers of Orthodoxy, made even before the Second Vatican Council, unanimously testify to Catholicism as a religion without grace. The holy righteous John of Kronstadt calls it a "pernicious faith" and says of Catholics that they "have fallen away from the head of the whole Church – Christ" (see above, ch. II). The absolute certainty of the popes in their infallibility, the unparalleled passion for power and grandeur, monstrous vanity and pride, to which pagan idolatry has been added – all of this, covered by hypocritical humility, are the most grievous sins in Christianity and leave not the slightest doubt about the complete gracelessness of papism.
Q. In that case, what is the spiritual life of Roman Catholics, extolled by many Catholic ascetics?
A. Unlike Orthodoxy, which relies on the two-thousand-year feat of the holy fathers of the apostolic Church, Roman Catholicism, after its fall from Orthodoxy and deprivation of God's grace, went in its "spiritual" life along two false paths: on the one hand, formalism and bookishness, as in the case of counting sins and good works and granting indulgences; on the other hand, extreme emotional exaltation, replacing spirituality with so-called "delusion" (prelest).
Q. What is "prelest"?
A. Prelest is the name for false spirituality, which substitutes the action of God's grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit with the emotional-psychic states of a person caused by self-conceit, auto-suggestion, and the action of fallen spirits. A person may begin to receive various kinds of visions, pleasures, "revelations," converse with "saints," the "Mother of God," "Christ"; this may be abundant tears, heating of the blood, bodily movements, sensual punishments and rewards, supernatural abilities, etc.; or he acquires confidence in his chosenness, infallibility, holiness, worthiness to interpret or change Holy Scripture in his own way, etc. Demons cunningly arrange and maintain all this. Prelest, being a terrible evil, is characterized by direct contact with fallen spirits and leads to submission to their will, to spiritual, and sometimes physical, death of the person.
Q. But obviously, all this is well known to Catholics as well?
A. Quite the opposite. According to Orthodox ascetics [St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov), Hieromonk Seraphim (Rose)], the concept of prelest, which is key in Orthodox ascetic teaching, is completely absent in the Protestant-Catholic world, which accepts all this demonic activity as "genuine."
Q. But one cannot deny, however, that the works of a number of Catholic ascetics of piety have been translated into Russian as examples and instructions for imitation?
A. As St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov) notes, only the works of Western Christians written before the fall of the Western Church from the Eastern (1054) are truly spiritual; but already the works of Bernard (1090–1153) bear traces of the author's obvious delusion, which increases in later Western "ascetics." Numerous works of Catholics were written from a state of deep delusion, including "The Imitation of Christ" by Thomas à Kempis, the writings of Francis of Assisi, Ignatius Loyola, Teresa of Avila, and others, which represent a "deadly poison" for the reader. An example of this is the "revelations" of St. Blessed Angela (†1309) and the great Catholic "saint," "doctor of the church" Teresa of Avila (1515–1582), containing descriptions of purely erotic, flat, emotional experiences of "divine" love, clearly evoked by the demon of fornication.
The elevation of all these Catholics, deeply deluded by demons and under their power, to the rank of saints clearly illustrates the absolute spiritual ignorance of papism and its profound spiritual fall, of which St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov) and the holy righteous John of Kronstadt speak (see above, ch. II).
Q. And what then can be said about "Unseen Warfare" – a work of Christian asceticism, the origin of which is attributed to the West by some ecumenist theologians?
A. Indeed, among Orthodox liberals, there is an opinion that "Unseen Warfare" has a Latin origin (according to the most common Western version, it was composed by the monk Laurence Scupoli, who transmitted it around 1520 to the French writer Francis de Sales). However, as research convincingly shows, there is every reason to assert that it was originally written by an unknown Greek monk in the Hellenic-Greek language, and its manuscript, having reached the West, was translated into Italian and other languages. At that time, some chapters were omitted and substantially altered from it, and it underwent reworking in the Latin style.
At the same time, the Greek text, from which the widely known Russian authorized translation by St. Theophan the Recluse was made, was produced by the Venerable Nicodemus the Hagiorite (as he himself notes) precisely on the basis of the Hellenic-Greek original, preserving its content and the spirit of Eastern asceticism.
Q. What distinctive features from Orthodoxy characterize the modern "spiritual" life of Catholics?
A. In modern Catholicism, various methods of meditation are widespread, including those borrowed from Eastern pagan beliefs, "charismatic" experiences – modern Pentecostalism, etc. Instead of protecting Christians from the influence of satan and demons and drawing them closer to God, these methods lead to direct contact with fallen spirits and worship of them.
Q. According to the foregoing, what should be said about salvation and spiritual life in Roman Catholicism?
A. In Roman Catholicism, which is a completely graceless neo-pagan religion, there can be no question of any union with God and salvation, because worship in it is directed to the pope and invented god-idols bearing only the name of the Holy Trinity and Christ, and the proposed "spiritual" life is absolutely false and, as in any paganism, is aimed not at protecting believers from the action of fallen spirits, but at establishing close contact with them, becoming dependent on them, and being enslaved by them.
V. On the "Reunification" of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches
Q. As is known, attempts to reunite the Orthodox and Catholic Churches have been made repeatedly in the history of the outgoing millennium. By what methods were they resolved?
A. One of the main methods of "solving" this problem is unions.
1. Unions and Uniatism
Q. What is a union?
A. A union (from Lat. unio – unification, alliance) is a contractually sealed "unification" of some part of the Orthodox Church with the Catholic one under the authority of the pope. The unconditional recognition of the pope's authority has always been an integral requirement for a union on the part of the Vatican, which viewed it as a political instrument for compelling the Orthodox to accept Catholicism, and Uniatism as a transitional stage towards complete Catholicization. On the part of the Orthodox, unions were accepted under pressure from secular authorities, who saw in Rome, Catholicism, and Uniatism a support for their rule.
Q. What is the "legal" status of churches that united with the Vatican?
A. A church that unites with the Vatican loses its Orthodoxy and becomes a Uniate church, which, depending on national or local characteristics, may be called Greek Catholic (RCC), Ukrainian Greek Catholic (UGCC), etc. There are quite a few such churches, although some of them consist of only a few thousand people. Uniate churches are completely dependent on the Vatican, which classifies them as the so-called "Eastern Catholic Churches"; however, Orthodoxy has never recognized the legitimacy of Uniatism, viewing the Uniats as Orthodox people forcibly and deceitfully torn away from their ancestral faith, and has sought to return them to the bosom of its Church.
Q. Which unions are the most famous?
A. Among the many attempts at "unification," the three most famous unions are the Union of Lyon (1274), as the first in history, the Union of Florence (1439), and the Union of Brest (1596), as having brought the greatest harm to Orthodoxy.
The Union of Lyon was accepted by the Greeks under pressure from Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos, who had recaptured Constantinople from the Latins and restored the Byzantine Empire after the Crusaders' capture of Constantinople and the establishment of the Latin Empire there (1203–1261), and who sought to strengthen his power and enlist the pope's support. However, the overwhelming majority of the Greek clergy and people did not accept the union, despite Palaiologos' persuasions and violence (exiles, prisons, blinding, amputation of hands, etc.), and with his death in 1282, it ceased to exist.
Q. What was the Union of Florence?
A. The union was carried out on the initiative and under pressure from the Greek Emperor John VI Palaiologos, who hoped, with the help of the union, to gain the pope's support and the aid of Western states in the fight against the Turks, who had finally squeezed the Byzantine Empire. At the council, which first met in Ferrara and was then transferred to Florence, the pope with the Catholics and Palaiologos with the Patriarch of Constantinople and several Greek metropolitans and bishops were present, the majority of whom – mostly under duress – signed the union with the introduction of the "filioque" into the Creed. Only St. Mark, Metropolitan of Ephesus, refused to sign, and he led the struggle against the union. In practice, the union advanced extremely slowly, as the overwhelming majority of the Greek clergy and laity rejected it; moreover, aid from the West did not follow. Twice, at the Councils of Jerusalem (1443) and Constantinople (1450), the Eastern Patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem anathematized the union and excommunicated its adherents. After the capture of Constantinople by the Turks (1453), the union ceased, leaving an insignificant number of its followers. But the main thing – it gave Rome a basis for the forcible conversion of the Orthodox to the union and Catholicization in the territories formerly belonging to Byzantium.
Q. What are the features and fate of the Union of Brest?
A. The Union of Brest took place in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth under the Catholic King Sigismund III Vasa. In 1595, the Jesuits managed to persuade the Metropolitan of Kiev, Rohoza, to secretly send two bishops to Rome and sign an act of union with the pope (recognizing the universal authority of the pope and the "filioque"), which, in Rohoza's opinion, was supposed to improve the position of the Orthodox, who were suffering oppression from the authorities and Catholics. The Orthodox considered this act a betrayal and condemned it at a council. However, Sigismund III confirmed the act of acceptance of the union, after which Orthodoxy in Poland was outlawed, new brutal persecutions of believers followed, and more than 700 churches and 128 Orthodox monasteries were handed over to the Uniats. All the dioceses of Belarus, Western and Central Ukraine, including the Kiev diocese, were forcibly joined to the union.
After the return of its western lands to Russia, the Uniats began to return to Orthodoxy, and the main mass of Uniats (1.5 million) in 1839 and the remaining ones (50 thousand) in 1874 were finally reunited with it. Uniatism survived only in Galicia, which had passed to Austria, and in other parts of Carpathian Rus' that were outside Russia.
Q. What was the situation of the union and Uniatism in the 20th century?
A. After World War I, in the western regions of Ukraine and Belarus torn from Russia and given to Poland, Uniatism was revived. Again, the authorities began forcibly taking churches away from the Orthodox, and subjecting priests and laity unwilling to convert to the union to physical reprisals and persecution. In total, 718 churches were confiscated. After World War II, in the western regions returned to the USSR, Uniatism went underground as a result of Soviet persecution, but in 1989 it was legalized under the name Ukrainian Catholic Church (UCC), later renamed the Greek Catholic Church (UGCC). In the same year, with the connivance of the authorities, seizures of churches by Uniats began, along with beatings and abuse of priests and laity. The once largest Lviv diocese suffered especially, with fewer than forty parishes remaining out of more than a thousand.
To be more attractive in Left-Bank Ukraine and for Russia, the UGCC is simply called GCC, preaching and publishing are conducted in Russian, and both the Latin and Eastern rites of worship operate simultaneously.
Q. What is the "Eastern Rite"?
A. The Eastern Rite is a form of conversion to the union and Catholicism of the Orthodox, mainly Russians, developed by the Jesuits, where, for the sake of attractiveness, the Orthodox ritual form of worship is completely preserved, including the Orthodox vestments of the priest with his appearance and manners, the invocation of Orthodox saints, etc., and even the Creed is read without the "filioque." The only condition is unquestioning submission to the supreme authority of the pope. In the Vatican, immediately after the establishment of Soviet power in Russia, the department for propaganda of the Eastern Rite was urgently reorganized, and the Eastern Congregation, of which it was a part, was made directly subordinate to the pope, and a missionary college for Russia, "Russicum," was created by the Jesuits in Rome, which is still active today. The Eastern Rite existed until World War II and was tested on the Orthodox in Poland, but it was not possible to introduce it in the USSR. However, the Second Vatican Council declared its firm intention to continue the policy of the Eastern Rite, and now, with the revival of Uniatism, it is also being revived.
Q. Based on the foregoing, what can be said in general about Uniatism?
A. Unions and Uniatism are one of the main methods of converting the Orthodox to Catholicism, based on coercion, violence, and deception, carried out under pressure from secular authorities, Catholics, and the pro-Catholic part of the "Orthodox" clergy, and they serve the Vatican's main task – the destruction and absorption of Orthodoxy. Currently, the main instrument of these papal aspirations is ecumenism.
2. Ecumenism
Q. What is ecumenism?
A. Ecumenism (from Greek oikoumene – the whole inhabited world) is a movement aimed at establishing mutual understanding, rapprochement, and unification either of Christians of various confessions and denominations ("Christian" ecumenism), or of Christians and believers of non-Christian religions ("interreligious" ecumenism). Ecumenism arose in the late 19th century in a Protestant environment; in 1948, its governing body, the World Council of Churches (WCC), was established, which included numerous Protestant denominations and sects; and in 1961, under pressure from the Soviet authorities, the Russian, and subsequently other Local Orthodox Churches of the socialist bloc countries, joined. Initially Christian, ecumenism turned into interreligious ecumenism (or "super-ecumenism") in the second half of the 20th century. The Vatican is not officially a member of the WCC, but is a member of its various organizations and conducts its own independent Christian and interreligious (see above, ch. III) ecumenical policy.
Q. What are the true goals and objectives of ecumenism?
A. The main true goals and objectives of ecumenism, both of the WCC and the Vatican, are the same: the main goal is the creation of a universal pagan religion and the church of the antichrist, and one of the main tasks is the destruction of the unity and absorption of Orthodoxy, its dissolution in heresies and paganism, and its subjugation. The difference lies only in the fact that in one case, some council aspires to be the head, and in the other, the pope.
Q. What is the Vatican's vision of ecumenical policy towards Orthodoxy?
A. This vision was expressed by the Second Vatican Council in its "Decree on Ecumenism." Catholics consider the Orthodox their "separated brethren," and the ecumenical movement as a response to the Lord's call "that they may all be one" (John 17:21) and as an action of the grace of the Holy Spirit. They do not deny the validity of the holy sacraments, apostolic succession of the priesthood, etc., in Orthodoxy; however, they believe that, since the pope is the vicar of God on earth, the union of Catholics with Orthodox can only take place within the bosom of the Catholic Church, "for only through the Catholic Church of Christ, which is the universal instrument of salvation, can one obtain the fullness of the means of salvation."
The council calls upon all Catholics to actively promote ecumenism through dialogue between Churches, participation in common prayers, considers communion in the sacraments desirable, and warns that "for the restoration or preservation of communion and unity, no further burden should be imposed 'than these necessary things' (Acts 15:28)" (that is, unconditional submission to the authority of the pope). The council generously "declares that the Churches of the East, mindful of the need for the unity of the whole Church, may be governed by their own laws, as more suited to the character of their faithful and... the good of their souls." The council "is also pleased to declare the various theological ways of presenting doctrine."
Q. And what is the ecumenical policy of the Orthodox Churches towards the Vatican?
A. In the last forty years, the Orthodox Churches have conducted an active ecumenical policy with the Vatican as "equal" "sister Churches," with the aim of "attaining that full communion" and "restoring full unity" that existed between them in the first millennium through dialogue "in truth and love" and the rapprochement of church positions. Visits were paid to the pope by Orthodox patriarchs and metropolitans; there were even joint services and participation in a common liturgy by Orthodox and Catholics. The leader of this ecumenical policy is the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople.
Q. The question arises: is it possible in principle to have a union or that communion between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches which would at least to some extent approach that which existed in the first millennium?
A. For such a union to be possible, it is first necessary to bring the Orthodox and Catholics to one faith, i.e., either the Vatican must renounce its main innovations of the second millennium, and first of all, the doctrine of the universal (sinless) dominion of the pope, as the vicar of God on earth, and the neo-paganism adopted at the Second Vatican Council, or Orthodoxy must recognize and accept this paganism and vicarship.
Q. But is it possible for the Vatican to renounce these innovations and for Catholicism to effectively turn into Orthodoxy?
A. This is utterly improbable – the whole history of the Catholic Church testifies to this; however, it is also completely impossible for Orthodoxy to recognize these innovations without its destruction and transformation into pagan papism.
Q. What can be said about the call for the parties to offer their churches to those of other faiths?
A. This is an unprecedented proposal, because the Orthodox, after the services of the pagan Catholics, would have to reconsecrate the church each time.
Q. What can be said about the assertion of the equal saving effect of the holy sacraments and salvation in Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
A. This assertion also has nothing to do with reality, as confirmed by numerous statements of the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church, for, having fallen away from Orthodoxy, Catholicism lost God's grace, and especially after the Second Vatican Council, its sacraments have no grace-filled power; and instead of salvation, like any paganism, it leads to the worship of god-idols and union with the demons behind them.
Conclusion
Q. Summarizing what has been said, what can be said in general about Roman Catholicism?
A. Roman Catholicism, having taken as the foundation of its faith the doctrine of the universal dominion of the pope as the vicar of God on earth, fell away from Orthodoxy and, deprived of God's grace, went down the path of introducing innovations into Christianity that contradict Divine Revelation, which led it to the adoption at the Second Vatican Council of a new dogmatic teaching expressing the Vatican's super-ecumenical policy, and to the rejection and profound perversion of the overwhelming majority of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith (the Holy Trinity as the One God, the first commandment of God's Law, the Providence of God for the salvation of humanity and the mission of the incarnate Son of God, the truth about the Church of Christ, etc. – see above, ch. III, sections 6 and 7). Present-day papism is an anti-Christian neo-pagan religion, in which worship is directed to the pope and god-idols invented by the Catholics. Covering itself with Christian phraseology, papism conducts a concealed struggle against God (the Holy Trinity and Christ) and His Revelation and sets as its goal the creation of a universal religion and church under the leadership of the pope, and its main task – the destruction and absorption of Orthodoxy, as the main obstacle to the establishment of the universal "spiritual" dominion of the pope.
Q. What do the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church say about Roman Catholicism?
A. These statements, made (even before the Second Vatican Council) by the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church under the influence of the Holy Spirit, reflect the true essence of Roman Catholicism and unanimously characterize it as a completely false, anti-Christian, heretical faith, its complete gracelessness, and its incompatibility with Orthodoxy.
Q. Does Roman Catholicism lead to salvation?
A. In Roman Catholicism, which after the Second Vatican Council is a graceless neo-pagan religion, there can be no union with God and salvation, because worship in it is directed to the pope and invented god-idols bearing only the name of the Holy Trinity and Christ, and the proposed "spiritual" life, as in any paganism, is aimed at establishing close contact with fallen spirits, becoming dependent on them, and being enslaved by them.
Q. What can be said about attempts to reunite the Orthodox and Catholic Churches?
A. One of the main methods of "reunification" is unions and Uniatism, based on the conversion of the Orthodox to Catholicism through coercion, violence, and deception, carried out by Catholics and secular authorities. Uniate churches and Uniats lose their belonging to Orthodoxy and turn into "Greek Catholic Churches" (RCC), completely dependent on the Vatican and governed by it under the name of "Eastern Catholic Churches." Currently, ecumenism occupies the main place in the policy of "reunification."
Q. What should be said about ecumenism and ecumenical contacts with the Vatican?
A. The main true goals and objectives of ecumenism and the Vatican coincide: the construction of a universal religion, laying the foundation for the religion of the antichrist and his church (for the Vatican, under the primacy of the pope), the destruction and absorption of Orthodoxy, as the main obstacle to the antichrist. Ecumenical contacts also serve these same goals in reality; they are built on the absolutely false notions of "sister Churches" and the efficacy of saving grace in Catholicism, on hiding from the Orthodox the true essence of modern Catholicism and presenting it in a completely false image. They are designed for the internal decomposition of Orthodoxy by educating a mass of pro-Catholic-ecumenical clergy and laity, and are covered by the call for the reunification of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches.
Q. How should we relate to Catholics?
A. With sympathy and compassion, we should pray for them as for idolaters who have fallen away from the Christian faith – victims of papism, trying, if the Lord wills, to explain to them their errors "in a spirit of gentleness, looking to yourself, lest you also be tempted" (Gal. 6:1), without entering into fruitless disputes and remembering the apostle's instruction: "Conduct yourselves wisely toward outsiders, making the most of the time" (Col. 4:5).
Q. Can Orthodox Christians go to Catholic churches for prayer, partake of Catholic sacraments, or participate in Catholic prayer outside the church?
A. They cannot under any circumstances: "Canon 64 of the Holy Apostles says: concerning those who go to worship, i.e., to pray in their so-called churches (barbaric or heretical), which are also called assemblies: if it is a priest, let him be deposed; if a layman, let him be excommunicated." "And Canon 10 of the Holy Apostles commands: that he who prays with the excommunicated, even if not in the church, but in a house, let him also be excommunicated." (Nomocanon, canons 154, 157).
Q. Looking at the tragic, terrible picture for the whole Christian world and humanity as a whole of the fall, the betrayal of God by papism, which has dragged hundreds of millions of Catholics into the abyss, what must we, the Orthodox, do so as not to follow their example?
A. First, we must all come to a clear understanding of the neo-pagan essence of modern Roman Catholicism and ecumenism, their true goals – the construction of the universal religion of the antichrist and his church – and their main task – the destruction and absorption of Orthodoxy by any methods and means; therefore, we must renounce all forms of ecumenical cooperation with the Vatican (and the WCC), which is aimed – in all cases – at the destruction of the Orthodox Church.
And second, and this is the main thing from which everything follows, – to hold unwaveringly to our holy apostolic Orthodox faith, firmly knowing that among the multitude of religions and faiths, ONLY ORTHODOXY LEADS TO THE HIGH.
Lord, preserve us! Grant us understanding and strength!
Appendices
1. Some Materials of the Second Vatican Council
a. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
"13 (end). Therefore, all men are called to this catholic unity of the people of God, which prefigures and promotes universal peace; and in different ways belong to it or are ordered to it: the faithful Catholics, and others who believe in Christ, and finally all men without exception, who are called to salvation by the grace of God.
14. The Sacred Council therefore turns its gaze first to the faithful Catholics. It teaches, based on Sacred Scripture and Tradition, that this pilgrim Church is necessary for salvation. Christ alone is the Mediator and the way of salvation, and He is present to us in His Body, which is the Church; in precise words, insisting on the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:10; John 3:5), He at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which, as through a door, people enter through baptism. Therefore, people who know that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Jesus Christ, yet are unwilling either to enter it or to remain in it, cannot be saved...
15. For various reasons, the Church is aware that it is bound to those who are baptized and bear the name of Christian, but do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion under the primacy of the Successor of Peter...
16. 1) Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are ordered to the people of God in various ways. First, that people to whom the covenants and promises were given, and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4–5), a people beloved for the sake of the fathers for the sake of election, for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable (cf. Rom. 11:28–29).
2) But the salvific plan embraces those who acknowledge the Creator, and among them, first of all, Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us worship the one, merciful God, who will judge men on the last day.
3) But God is not far from others, who through shadows and images seek the unknown God, for He Himself gives to all men life and breath and everything (cf. Acts 17:25–28), and because the Savior wills that all men be saved (cf. 1 Tim. 2:4). And those who, without fault on their part, do not know the Gospel of Christ and His Church, yet seek God with a sincere heart and, under the influence of grace, strive to do His will, known through the voice of conscience, can attain eternal salvation. Divine Providence does not deny the necessary help for salvation to those who, without fault of their own, have not yet arrived at a clear knowledge of God and strive, by God's grace, to lead a right life. For whatever good and truth is found among them, the Church considers as a preparation for the Gospel and a gift from Him who enlightens every man, that he may finally have life.
4) But it often happens that men, deceived by the evil one, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie and serve the creature rather than the Creator (cf. Rom. 1:21–25), or, living and dying without God, are exposed to ultimate despair. Therefore, to promote the glory of God and the salvation of all these people, the Church, mindful of the Lord's command who said 'preach the Gospel to every creature' (cf. Mark 16:10), earnestly cares for the development of the missionary cause."
b. Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions
Various Non-Christian Religions
"From ancient times down to the present, there has existed among various peoples a certain perception of that mysterious power which is present in the course of things and in the events of human life, and sometimes even a recognition of a Supreme Deity or even of the Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a deep religious sense. The religions which are bound up with the progress of culture strive to answer the same questions with more refined concepts and a more perfected language. Thus, in Hinduism, men explore the divine mystery and express it in the inexhaustible fruitfulness of myths and the penetrating efforts of philosophy; they seek liberation from the anxieties of our existence either in forms of ascetical life, or through deep meditation, or by resorting to God with love and trust. Buddhism, in its various forms, knows the radical insufficiency of this changing world and teaches a path by which men, with a devout and trusting soul, can either acquire a state of perfect liberation or attain the highest illumination either by their own efforts or with the help from above...
The Muslim Religion
3. The Church also regards with esteem the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men. They strive to submit themselves with all their soul to His decrees, even the hidden ones, as did Abraham, to whom the Islamic faith readily relates itself. Although they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they nevertheless revere Him as a prophet and honor His virgin Mother, Mary, sometimes even piously invoke Her. Furthermore, they await the day of judgment, when God will render to all risen men their due. Therefore they value the moral life and worship God especially in prayer, almsgiving, and fasting...
The Jewish Religion
4. As the Sacred Council investigates the mystery of the Church, it remembers the bonds spiritually uniting the people of the New Covenant with Abraham's offspring.
For the Church of Christ acknowledges that the beginnings of her faith and election are found, according to God's saving mystery, already in the Patriarchs, Moses, and the Prophets. She professes that all who believe in Christ, sons of Abraham by faith (cf. Gal. 3:7), are included in the calling of this Patriarch, and that the salvation of the Church was mysterically prefigured in the exodus of the chosen people from the land of bondage. Therefore, the Church cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom God, in His ineffable mercy, deigned to establish the ancient covenant, and that she is nourished from the root of that cultivated olive tree onto which the wild olive branches, the Gentiles, have been grafted (cf. Rom. 11:17–24). For the Church believes that Christ, our peace, reconciled Jews and Gentiles on the cross, and made them both one in Himself (cf. Eph. 2:14–16)...
Although the Church is the new people of God, yet the Jews should not be presented as rejected by God or accursed, as if this followed from Holy Scripture. Therefore, all should take care, in catechetical instruction and in the preaching of the word of God, not to teach anything that is not in accord with the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ..."
No comments:
Post a Comment