A Reply
to the Papal Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII, on Reunion
To the
most Sacred and Most Divinely-beloved Brethren in Christ the Metropolitans and
Bishops, and their sacred and venerable Clergy, and all the godly and orthodox
Laity of the Most Holy Apostolic and Patriarchal Throne of Constantinople.
"Remember them which have the rule over
you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering
the end of their own conversation:
"Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and
today, and for ever. Be not carried about with divers and strange
doctrines." (Heb. xiii. 7, 8).
I. Every godly and orthodox
soul, which has a sincere zeal for the glory of God, is deeply afflicted and
weighed down with great pain upon seeing that he, who detests that which is
good and is a murderer from the beginning, impelled by envy of man's salvation,
never ceases continually to sow divers tares in the field of the Lord, in order
to sift the wheat. From this source indeed, even from the earliest times, there
sprang up in the Church of God heretical tares, which have in many ways made
havoc, and do still make havoc, of the salvation of mankind by Christ; which
moreover, as bad seeds and corrupted members, are rightly cut off from the
sound body of the orthodox catholic Church of Christ. But in these last times
the evil one has rent from the orthodox Church of Christ even whole nations in
the West, having inflated the bishops of Rome with thoughts of excessive
arrogance, which has given birth to divers lawless and anti-evangelical
innovations. And not only so, but furthermore the Popes of Rome from time to
time, pursuing absolutely and without examination modes of union according to
their own fancy, strive by every means to reduce to their own errors the
catholic Church of Christ, which throughout the world walks unshaken in the
orthodoxy of faith transmitted to her by the Fathers.
II. Accordingly the Pope of
Rome, Leo XIII, on the occasion of his episcopal jubilee, published in the
month of June of the year of grace 1895 an encyclical letter, addressed to the
leaders and peoples of the world, by which he also at the same time invites our
orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ to unite with the papal
throne, thinking that such union can only be obtained by acknowledging him as
supreme pontiff and the highest spiritual and temporal ruler of the universal
Church, as the only representative of Christ upon earth and the dispenser of
all grace.
III. No doubt every
Christian heart ought to be filled with longing for union of the Churches, and
especially the whole orthodox world, being inspired by a true spirit of piety,
according to the divine purpose of the establishment of the church by the
God-man our Savior Christ, ardently longs for the unity of the Churches in the
one rule of faith, and on the foundation of the apostolic doctrine handed down
to us through the Fathers, 'Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone.'
[1] Wherefore she also every day, in her public prayers to the Lord, prays for
the gathering together of the scattered and for the return of those who have
gone astray to the right way of the truth, which alone leads to the Life of
all, the only-begotten Son and Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. [2]
Agreeably, therefore, to this sacred longing, our orthodox Church of Christ is
always ready to accept any proposal of union, if only the Bishop of Rome would
shake off once for all the whole series of the many and divers anti-evangelical
novelties that have been 'privily brought in' to his Church, and have provoked
the sad division of the Churches of the East and West, and would return to the
basis of the seven holy Ecumenical Councils, which, having been assembled in
the Holy Spirit, of representatives of all the holy Churches of God, for the
determination of the right teaching of the faith against heretics, have a
universal and perpetual supremacy in the Church of Christ. And this, both by
her writings and encyclical letters, the Orthodox Church has never ceased to
intimate to the Papal Church, having clearly and explicitly set forth that so
long as the latter perseveres in her innovations, and the orthodox Church
adheres to the divine and apostolic traditions of Christianity, during which
the Western Churches were of the same mind and were united with the Churches of
the East, so long is it a vain and empty thing to talk of union. For which
cause we have remained silent until now, and have declined to take into
consideration the papal encyclical in question, esteeming it unprofitable to
speak to the ears of those who do not hear. Since, however, from a certain
period the Papal Church, having abandoned the method of persuasion and
discussion, began, to our general astonishment and perplexity, to lay traps for
the conscience of the more simple orthodox Christians by means of deceitful
workers transformed into apostles of Christ, [3] sending into the East clerics
with the dress and headcovering of orthodox priests, inventing also divers and
other artful means to obtain her proselytizing objects; for this reason, as in
sacred duty bound, we issue this patriarchal and synodical encyclical, for a
safeguard of the orthodox faith and piety, knowing 'that the observance of the
true canons is a duty for every good man, and much more for those who have been
thought worthy by Providence to direct the affairs of others.' [4]
IV. The union of the
separated Churches with herself in one rule of faith is, as has been said
before, a sacred and inward desire of the holy, catholic and orthodox apostolic
Church of Christ; but without such unity in the faith, the desired union of the
Churches becomes impossible. This being the case, we wonder in truth how Pope
Leo XIII, though he himself also acknowledges this truth, falls into a plain
self-contradiction, declaring, on the one hand, that true union lies in the
unity of faith, and, on the other hand, that every Church, even after the
union, can hold her own dogmatic and canonical definitions, even when they
differ from those of the Papal Church, as the Pope declares in a previous
encyclical, dated November 30, 1894. For there is an evident contradiction when
in one and the same Church one believes that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the
Father, and another that He proceeds from the Father and the Son; when one
sprinkles, and another baptizes (immerses) thrice in the water; one uses
leavened bread in the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, and another unleavened;
one imparts to the people of the chalice as well as of the bread, and the other
only of the holy bread; and other things like these. But what this
contradiction signifies, whether respect for the evangelical truths of the holy
Church of Christ and an indirect concession and acknowledgment of them, or
something else, we cannot say.
V. But however that may be,
for the practical realization of the pious longing for the union of the
Churches, a common principle and basis must be settled first of all; and there
can be no such safe common principle and basis other than the teaching of the
Gospel and of the seven holy Ecumenical Councils. Reverting, then, to that
teaching which was common to the Churches of the East and of the West until the
separation, we ought, with a sincere desire to know the truth, to search what
the one holy, catholic and orthodox apostolic Church of Christ, being then 'of
the same body,' throughout the East and West believed, and to hold this fact, entire,
and unaltered. But whatsoever has in later times been added or taken away,
every one has a sacred and indispensable duty, if he sincerely seeks for the
glory of God more than for his own glory, that in a spirit of piety he should
correct it, considering that by arrogantly continuing in the perversion of the
truth he is liable to a heavy account before the impartial judgment-seat of
Christ. In saying this we do not at all refer to the differences regarding the
ritual of the sacred services and the hymns, or the sacred vestments, and the
like, which matters, even though they still vary, as they did of old, do not in
the least injure the substance and unity of the faith; but we refer to those
essential differences which have reference to the divinely transmitted
doctrines of the faith, and the divinely instituted canonical constitution of
the administration of the Churches. 'In cases where the thing disregarded is
not the faith (says also the holy Photius), [5] and is no falling away from any
general and catholic decree, different rites and customs being observed among
different people, a man who knows how to judge rightly would decide that
neither do those who observe them act wrongly, nor do those who have not
received them break the law.' [6]
VI. And indeed for the holy
purpose of union, the Eastern orthodox and catholic Church of Christ is ready
heartily to accept all that which both the Eastern and Western Churches
unanimously professed before the ninth century, if she has perchance perverted
or does not hold it. And if the Westerns prove from the teaching of the holy
Fathers and the divinely assembled Ecumenical Councils that the then orthodox
Roman Church, which was throughout the West, even before the ninth century read
the Creed with the addition, or used unleavened bread, or accepted the doctrine
of a purgatorial fire, or sprinkling instead of baptism, or the immaculate
conception of the ever-Virgin, or the temporal power, or the infallibility and
absolutism of the Bishop of Rome, we have no more to say. But if, on the
contrary, it is plainly demonstrated, as those of the Latins themselves, who
love the truth, also acknowledge, that the Eastern and orthodox catholic Church
of Christ holds fast the anciently transmitted doctrines which were at that time
professed in common both in the East and the West, and that the Western Church
perverted them by divers innovations, then it is clear, even to children, that
the more natural way to union is the return of the Western Church to the
ancient doctrinal and administrative condition of things; for the faith does
not change in any way with time or circumstances, but remains the same always
and everywhere, for 'there is one body and one Spirit,' it is said, 'even as ye
are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one
God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."
[7]
VII. So then the one holy,
catholic and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils believed and
taught in accordance with the words of the Gospel that the Holy Ghost proceeds
from the Father; but in the West, even from the ninth century, the holy Creed,
which was composed and sanctioned by Ecumenical Councils, began to be
falsified, and the idea that the Holy Ghost proceeds 'also from the Son' to be
arbitrarily promulgated. And certainly Pope Leo XIII is not ignorant that his
orthodox predecessor and namesake, the defender of orthodoxy, Leo III, in the
year 809 denounced synodically this anti-evangelical and utterly lawless
addition, 'and from the Son' (filioque); and
engraved on two silver plates, in Greek and Latin, the holy Creed of the first
and second Ecumenical Councils, entire and without any addition; having written
moreover, 'These words I, Leo, have set down for love and as a safeguard of the
orthodox faith' (Haec Leo posui amore et
cautela fidei orthodoxa'). [8]
Likewise he is by no means
ignorant that during the tenth century, or at the beginning of the eleventh,
this anti-evangelical and lawless addition was with difficulty inserted
officially into the holy Creed at Rome also, and that consequently the Roman
Church, in insisting on her innovations, and not coming back to the dogma of
the Ecumenical Councils, renders herself fully responsible before the one holy,
catholic and apostolic Church of Christ, which holds fast that which has been
received from the Fathers, and keeps the deposit of the faith which was
delivered to it unadulterated in all things, in obedience to the Apostolic
injunction: 'That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy
Ghost which dwelleth in us'; 'avoiding profane and vain babblings, and
oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred
concerning the faith." [9]
VIII. The one holy,
catholic and apostolic Church of the first seven Ecumenical Councils baptized
by three immersions in the water, and the Pope Pelagius speaks of the triple
immersion as a command of the Lord, and in the thirteenth century baptism by
immersions still prevailed in the West; and the sacred fonts themselves,
preserved in the more ancient churches in Italy, are eloquent witnesses on this
point; but in later times sprinkling or effusion, being privily brought in,
came to be accepted by the Papal Church, which still holds fast the innovation,
thus also widening the gulf which she has opened; but we Orthodox, remaining
faithful to the apostolic tradition and the practice of the seven Ecumenical
Councils, 'stand fast, contending for the common profession, the paternal
treasure of the sound faith.' [10]
IX. The one holy, catholic
and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils, according to the example
of our Savior, celebrated the divine Eucharist for more than a thousand years
throughout the East and West with leavened bread, as the truth-loving papal
theologians themselves also bear witness; but the Papal Church from the
eleventh century made an innovation also in the sacrament of the divine
Eucharist by introducing unleavened bread.
X. The one holy, catholic
and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils held that the precious
gifts are consecrated after the prayer of the invocation of the Holy Ghost by
the blessing of the priest, as the ancient rituals of Rome and Gaul testify;
nevertheless afterwards the Papal Church made an innovation in this also, by
arbitrarily accepting the consecration of the precious gifts as taking place
along with the utterance of the Lord's words: 'Take, eat; this is my body': and
'Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood.' [11]
XI. The one holy, catholic
and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils, following the Lord's
command, 'Drink ye all of it,' [12] imparted also of the holy chalice to all;
but the Papal Church from the ninth century downwards has made an innovation in
this rite also, by depriving the laity of the holy chalice, contrary to the
Lord's command and the universal practice of the ancient Church, as well as the
express prohibition of many ancient orthodox bishops of Rome.
XII. The one holy, catholic
and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils, walking according to the
divinely inspired teaching of the Holy Scripture and the old apostolic
tradition, prays and invokes the mercy of God for the forgiveness and rest of
those 'which have fallen asleep in the Lord'; [13] but the Papal Church from
the twelfth century downwards has invented and heaped together in the person of
the Pope, as one singularly privileged, a multitude of innovations concerning
purgatorial fire, a superabundance of the virtues of the saints, and the
distribution of them to those who need them, and the like, setting forth also a
full reward for the just before the universal resurrection and judgment.
XIII. The one holy,
catholic and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils teaches that the
supernatural incarnation of the only-begotten Son and Word of God, of the Holy
Ghost and the Virgin Mary, is alone pure and
immaculate; but the Papal Church scarcely forty years ago again made an
innovation by laying down a novel dogma concerning the immaculate conception of
the Mother of God and ever-Virgin Mary, which was unknown to the ancient Church
(and strongly opposed at different times even by the more distinguished among
the papal theologians).
XIV. Passing over, then,
these serious and substantial differences between the two churches respecting
the faith, which differences, as has been said before, were created in the
West, the Pope in his encyclical represents the question of the primacy of the
Roman Pontiff as the principal and, so to speak, only cause of the dissension,
and sends us to the sources, that we may make diligent search as to what our
forefathers believed and what the first age of Christianity delivered to us.
But having recourse to the fathers and the Ecumenical Councils of the Church of
the first nine centuries, we are fully persuaded that the Bishop of Rome was
never considered as the supreme authority and infallible head of the Church,
and that every bishop is head and president of his own particular Church,
subject only to the synodical ordinances and decisions of the Church universal
as being alone infallible, the Bishop of Rome being in no wise excepted from
this rule, as Church history shows. Our Lord Jesus Christ alone is the eternal
Prince and immortal Head of the Church, for 'He is the Head of the body, the
Church," [14] who said also to His divine disciples and apostles at His
ascension into heaven, 'Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the
world.' [15] In the Holy Scripture the Apostle Peter, whom the Papists, relying
on apocryphal books of the second century, the pseudo-Clementines, imagine with
a purpose to be the founder of the Roman Church and their first bishop,
discusses matters as an equal among equals in the apostolic synod of Jerusalem,
and at another time is sharply rebuked by the Apostle Paul, as is evident from
the Epistle to the Galatians. [16] Moreover, the Papists themselves know well
that the very passage of the Gospel to which the Pontiff refers, 'Thou art
Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' [17] is in the first
centuries of the Church interpreted quite differently, in a spirit of
orthodoxy, both by tradition and by all the divine and sacred Fathers without
exception; the fundamental and unshaken rock upon which the Lord has built His
own Church, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, being understood
metaphorically of Peter's true confession concerning the Lord, that 'He is
Christ, the Son of the living God.' [18] Upon this confession and faith the
saving preaching of the Gospel by all the apostles and their successors rests
unshaken. Whence also the Apostle Paul, who had been caught up into heaven,
evidently interpreting this divine passage, declares the divine inspiration,
saying: 'According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise
master-builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. For
other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.' [19]
But it is in another sense that Paul calls all the apostles and prophets
together the foundation of the building up in Christ of the faithful; that is
to say, the members of the body of Christ, which is the Church; [20] when he
writes to the Ephesians: 'Now therefore ye are no more strangers and
foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints and of the house hold of God; and
are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ
Himself being the chief corner stone.' [21] Such, then, being the divinely
inspired teaching of the apostles respecting the foundation and Prince of the
Church of God, of course the sacred Fathers, who held firmly to the apostolic
traditions, could not have or conceive any idea of an absolute primacy of the
Apostle Peter and the bishops of Rome; nor could they give any other
interpretation, totally unknown to the Church, to that passage of the Gospel,
but that which was true and right; nor could they arbitrarily and by themselves
invent a novel doctrine respecting excessive privileges of the Bishop of Rome
as successor, if so be, of Peter; especially whilst the Church of Rome was chiefly
founded, not by Peter, whose apostolic action at Rome is totally unknown to
history, but by the heaven-caught apostle of the Gentiles, Paul, through his
disciples, whose apostolic ministry in Rome is well known to all. [22]
XV. The divine Fathers,
honoring the Bishop of Rome only as the bishop of the capital city of the
Empire, gave him the honorary prerogative of presidency, considering him simply
as the bishop first in order, that is, first among equals; which prerogative
they also assigned afterwards to the Bishop of Constantinople, when that city
became the capital of the Roman Empire, as the twenty-eighth canon of the
fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon bears witness, saying, among other
things, as follows: 'We do also determine and decree the same things respecting
the prerogatives of the most holy Church of the said Constantinople, which is
New Rome. For the Fathers have rightly given the prerogative to the throne of
the elder Rome, because that was the imperial city. And the hundred and fifty most
religious bishops, moved by the same consideration, assigned an equal
prerogative to the most holy throne of New Rome.' From this canon it is very
evident that the Bishop of Rome is equal in honor to the Bishop of the Church
of Constantinople and to those other Churches, and there is no hint given in
any canon or by any of the Fathers that the Bishop of Rome alone has ever been
prince of the universal Church and the infallible judge of the bishops of the
other independent and self-governing Churches, or the successor of the Apostle
Peter and vicar of Jesus Christ on earth.
XVI. Each particular
self-governing Church, both in the East and West, was totally independent and
self-administered in the time of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. And just as the
bishops of the self-governing Churches of the East, so also those of Africa,
Spain, Gaul, Germany and Britain managed the affairs of their own Churches,
each by their local synods, the Bishop of Rome having no right to interfere,
and he himself also was equally subject and obedient to the decrees of synods.
But on important questions which needed the sanction of the universal Church an
appeal was made to an Ecumenical Council, which alone was and is the supreme
tribunal in the universal Church. Such was the ancient constitution of the
Church; but the bishops were independent of each other and each entirely free
within his own bounds, obeying only the syndical decrees, and they sat as equal
one to another in synods. Moreover, none of them ever laid claim to monarchical
rights over the universal Church; and ii sometimes certain ambitious bishops of
Rome raised excessive claims to an absolutism unknown to the Church, such were
duly reproved and rebuked The assertion therefore of Leo XIII, when he says in
his Encyclical that before the period of the great Photius the name of the
Roman throne was holy among all the peoples of the Christian world, and that
the East, like the West, with one accord and without opposition, was subject to
the Roman pontiff as lawful successor, so to say, of the Apostle Peter, and
consequently vicar of Jesus Christ on earth is proved to be inaccurate and a
manifest error.
XVII. During the nine
centuries of the Ecumenical Councils the Eastern Orthodox Church never
recognized the excessive claims of primacy on the part of the bishops of Rome,
nor consequently did she ever submit herself to them, as Church history plainly
bears witness. The independent relation of the East to the West is clearly and
manifestly shown also by those few and most significant words of Basil the
Great, which he writes in a letter to the holy Eusebius, Bishop of Samosata:
'For when haughty characters are courted, it is their nature to become still
more disdainful. For if the Lord be merciful to us, what other assistance do we
need? But if the wrath of God abide on us, what help is there for us from
Western superciliousness? Men who neither know the truth nor can bear to learn
it, but being prejudiced by false suspicions, they act now as they did before
in the case of Marcellus.' [23] The celebrated Photius, therefore, the sacred
Prelate and luminary of Constantinople, defending this independence of the
Church of Constantinople after the middle of the ninth century, and foreseeing
the impending perversion of the ecclesiastical constitution in the West, and
its defection from the orthodox East, at first endeavored in a peaceful manner
to avert the danger; but the Bishop of Rome, Nicholas 1, by his uncanonical
interference with the East, beyond the bounds of his diocese, and by the
attempt which he made to subdue the Church of Constantinople to himself, pushed
maners to the verge of the grievous separation of the Churches. The first seeds
of these claims of a papal absolutism were scattered abroad in the
pseudo-Clementines, and were cultivated, exactly at the epoch of this Nicholas,
in the so-called pseudo-lsidorian
decrees, which are a farrago of spurious and forged royal decrees and
letters of ancient bishops of Rome, by which, contrary to the truth of history
and the established constitution of the Church, it was purposely promulgated
that, as they said, Christian antiquity assigned to the bishops of Rome an
unbounded authority over the universal Church.
XVIII. These facts we
recall with sorrow of heart, inasmuch as the Papal Church, though she now
acknowledges the spuriousness and forged character of those decrees on which
her excessive claims are grounded, not only stubbornly refuses to come back to
the canons and decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, but even in the expiring years
of the nineteenth century has widened the existing gulf by officially
proclaiming, to the astonishment of the Christian world, that the Bishop of
Rome is even infallible. The orthodox Eastern and catholic Church of Christ,
with the exception of the Son and Word of God, who was ineffably made man,
knows no one infallible upon earth. Even the Apostle Peter himself, whose
successor the Pope thinks himself to be, thrice denied the Lord, and was twice
rebuked by the Apostle Paul, as not walking uprightly according to the truth of
the Gospel. [24] Afterwards the Pope Liberius, in the fourth century,
subscribed an Arian confession; and likewise Zosimus, in the fifth century,
approved an heretical confession, denying original sin. Virgilius, in the sixth
century, was condemned for wrong opinions by the fifth Council; and Honorius,
having fallen into the Monothelite heresy, was condemned in the seventh century
by the sixth Ecumenical Council as a heretic, and the popes who succeeded him
acknowledged and accepted his condemnation.
XIX. With these and such
facts in view, the peoples of the West, becoming gradually civilized by the
diffusion of letters, began to protest against innovations, and to demand (as
was done in the fifteenth century at the Councils of Constance and Basle) the
return to the ecclesiastical constitution of the first centuries, to which, by
the grace of God, the orthodox Churches throughout the East and North, which
alone now form the one holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ, the
pillar and ground of the truth, remain, and will always remain, faithful. The
same was done in the seventeenth century by the learned Gallican theologians,
and in the eighteenth by the bishops of Germany; and in this present century of
science and criticism, the Christian conscience rose up in one body in the year
1870, in the persons of the celebrated clerics and theologians of Germany, on
account of the novel dogma of the infallibility of the Popes, issued by the
Vatican Council, a consequence of which rising is seen in the formation of the
separate religious communities of the old Catholics, who, having disowned the
papacy, are quite independent of it.
XX. In vain, therefore,
does the Bishop of Rome send us to the sources that we may seek diligently for
what our forefathers believed and what the first period of Christianity
delivered to us. In these sources we, the orthodox, find the old and
divinely-transmitted doctrines, to which we carefully hold fast to the present
time, and nowhere do we find the innovations which later times of empty
mindedness brought forth in the West, and which the Papal Church having adopted
retains till this very day. The orthodox Eastern Church then justly glories in
Christ as being the Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils and of the first
nine centuries of Christianity, and therefore the one holy, catholic and
apostolic Church of Christ, 'the pillar and ground of the truth'; [25] but the
present Roman Church is the Church of innovations, of the falsification of the
writings of the Church Fathers, and of the misinterpretation of the Holy
Scripture and of the decrees of the holy councils, for which she has reasonably
and justly been disowned, and is still disowned, so far as she remains in her
error. 'For better is a praiseworthy war than a peace which separates from
God,' as Gregory of Nazianzus also says.
XXI. Such are, briefly, the
serious and arbitrary innovations concerning the faith and the administrative
constitution of the Church, which the Papal Church has introduced and which, it
is evident, the Papal Encyclical purposely passes over in silence. These
innovations, which have reference to essential points of the faith and of the
administrative system of the Church, and which are manifestly opposed to the
ecclesiastical condition of the first nine centuries, make the longed-for union
of the Churches impossible: and every pious and orthodox heart is filled with
inexpressible sorrow on seeing the Papal Church disdainfully persisting in
them, and not in the least contributing to the sacred purpose of union by
rejecting those heretical innovations and coming back to the ancient condition
of the one holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ, of which she also at
that time formed a part.
XXII. But what are we to
say of all that the Roman Pontiff writes when he addresses the glorious
Slavonic nations? No one, indeed, has ever denied that by the virtue and the
apostolic toils of SS. Cyril and Methodius the grace of salvation was
vouchsafed to not a few of the Slavonic peoples: but history testifies that at
the period of the great Photius those Greek apostles to the Slavs and intimate
friends of that divine Father, setting out from Thessalonica, were sent to
convert the Slavonic tribes not from Rome but from Constantinople, where
moreover they had been trained, living as monks in the monastery of St.
Polychronius. It is therefore utterly incoherent which is proclaimed in the
Roman Pontiff's Encyclical, that, as he says, a kindly relation and mutual
sympathy was brought about between the Slavonic tribes and the pontiffs of the
Roman Church; for even if the Pope is ignorant of it, history nevertheless
explicitly proclaims that these sacred apostles to the Slavs of whom we speak,
encountered greater difficulties in their work from the bishops of Rome through
their excommunications and opposition, and were more cruelly persecuted by the
Frankish papal bishops than by the heathen inhabitants of those countries.
Certainly the Pope knows well that the blessed Methodius having departed to the
Lord, two hundred of the most distinguished of his disciples' after many
struggles against the opposition of the Roman Pontiffs, were driven out of
Moravia and led away by military force beyond its boundaries, from whence
afterwards they were dispersed into Bulgaria and elsewhere. And he knows also
that with the expulsion of the more erudite Slavonic clergy, the ritual of the
East, as well as the Slavonic language then in use, were also driven out, and
in process of time all vestige of orthodoxy was effaced from those provinces,
and all these things done with the official cooperation of the bishops of Rome
m a manner not the least honorable to the holiness of the episcopal dignity.
But notwithstanding all this despiteful treatment, the orthodox Slavonic
Churches, the beloved daughters of the orthodox East, and especially the great
and glorious Church of divinely preserved Russia, having been preserved
harmless by the grace of God, have kept, and will keep till the end of the
ages, the orthodox faith, and stand forth conspicuous testimonies of the
liberty that is in Christ. In vain, therefore, does the Papal Encyclical
promise to the Slavonic Churches prosperity and greatness, because by the
goodwill of the most gracious God they already possess these blessings, and such
as these, standing firm m the orthodoxy of their fathers and glorifying in it
in Christ.
XXIII. These things being
so, and being indisputably proved by ecclesiastical history, we, anxious as it
is our duty to be, address ourselves to the peoples of the West, who through
ignorance of the true and impartial history of ecclesiastical matters, being
credulously led away, follow the anti-evangelical and utterly lawless
innovations of the papacy, having been separated and continuing far from the
one holy, catholic and apostolic orthodox Church of Christ, which is 'the
Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth, [26] in which
also their gracious ancestors and forefathers shone by their piety and
orthodoxy of faith, having been faithful and precious members of it during nine
whole centuries, obediently following and walking according to the decrees of
the divinely assembled Ecumenical Councils.
XXIV. Christ-loving peoples
of the glorious countries of the West! We rejoice on the one hand seeing that
you have a zeal for Christ, being led by this right persuasion, 'that without
faith in Christ it is impossible to please God'; [27] but on the other hand it
is self-evident to every right-thinking person that the salutary faith in
Christ ought by all means to be right in everything, and in agreement with the
Holy Scripture and the apostolic traditions, upon which the teaching of the
divine Fathers and the seven holy, divinely assembled Ecumenical Councils is
based. It is moreover manifest that the universal Church of God, which holds
fast in its bosom unique unadulterated and entire this salutary faith as a
divine deposit, just as it was of old delivered and unfolded by the God-bearing
Fathers moved by the Spirit, and formulated by them during the first nine
centuries, is one and the same for ever, and not manifold and varying with the
process of time: because the gospel truths are never susceptible to alteration
or progress in course of time, like the various philosophical systems; 'for
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.' [28] Wherefore
also the holy Vincent, who was brought up on the milk of the piety received
from the fathers in the monastery of Lérins in Gaul, and flourished about the
middle of the fifth century, with great wisdom and orthodoxy characterizes the
true catholicity of the faith and of the Church, saying: 'In the catholic
Church we must especially take heed to hold that which has been believed
everywhere at all times, and by all. For this is truly and properly catholic,
as the very force and meaning of the word signifies, which moreover comprehends
almost everything universally. And that we shall do, if we walk following
universality, antiquity, and consent.' [29] But, as has been said before, the
Western Church, from the tenth century downwards, has privily brought into
herself through the papacy various and strange and heretical doctrines and
innovations, and so she has been torn away and removed far from the true and
orthodox Church of Christ. How necessary, then, it is for you to come back and
return to the ancient and unadulterated doctrines of the Church in order to
attain the salvation in Christ after which you press, you can easily understand
if you intelligently consider the command of the heaven-ascended Apostle Paul
to the Thessalonians, saying: 'Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the
traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle'; [30]
and also what the same divine apostle writes to the Galatians saying: 'I marvel
that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ
unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you,
and would pervert the gospel of Christ.' [31] But avoid such perverters of the
evangelical truth, 'For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but
their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the
simple;[32] and come back for the future into the bosom of the holy, catholic
and apostolic Church of God, which consists of all the particular holy Churches
of God, which being divinely planted, like luxuriant vines throughout the
orthodox world, are inseparably united to each other in the unity of the one
saving faith in Christ, and in the bond of peace and of the Spirit, that you
may obtain the highly-to-be-praised and most glorious name of our Lord and God
and Savior Jesus Christ, who suffered for the salvation of the world, may be
glorified among you also.
XXV. But let us, who by the
grace and goodwill of the most gracious God are precious members of the body of
Christ, that is to say of His one holy, catholic and apostolic Church, hold
fast to the piety of our fathers, handed down to us from the apostles. Let us
all beware of false apostles, who, coming to us in sheep's clothing, attempt to
entice the more simple among us by various deceptive promises, regarding all
things as lawful and allowing them for the sake of union, provided only that
the Pope of Rome be recognized as supreme and infallible ruler and absolute
sovereign of the universal Church, and only representative of Christ on earth,
and the source of all grace. And especially let us, who by the grace and mercy
of God have been appointed bishops, pastors, and teachers of the holy Churches
of God, 'take heed unto ourselves,—and to all the flock, over which the Holy
Ghost hath made us overseers, to feed the Church of God, which He hath
purchased with His own blood,' [33] as they that must give account. 'Wherefore
let us comfort ourselves together, and edify one another.' [34] 'And the God of
all grace, who hath called us unto His eternal glory by Christ Jesus ... make
us perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle us,' [35] and grant that all those who
are without and far away from the one holy, catholic and orthodox fold of His reasonable
sheep may be enlightened with the light of His grace and the acknowledging of
the truth. To Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever.
Amen.
In the Patriarchal Palace
of Constantinople, in the month of August of the year of grace MDCCCXCV.
+ ANTHIMOS of
Constantinople, beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ NICODEMOS of Cyzicos,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ PHILOTHEOS of Nicomedia,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ JEROME of Nicea, beloved
brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ NATHANAEL of Prusa,
beloved brother and intercessor of Christ our God.
+ BASIL of Smyrna, beloved
brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ STEPHEN of Philadelphia,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ ATHANASIOS of Lemnos,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ BESSARION of Dyrrachium,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ DOROTHEOS of Belgrade,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ NICODEMOS of Elasson,
beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ SOPHRONIOS of Carpathos
and Cassos, beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
+ DIONYSIOS of
Eleutheropolis, beloved brother and intercessor in Christ our God.
Endnotes
1. Eph. 2:20.
2. John 14:6.
3. II Cor. 11:13.
4. Phot. Epist. iii. 10.
5. Patriarch of
Constantinople; c. 800.
6. Phot. Epist iii. 6.
7. Eph. 4:5-6.
8. See life of Leo 111 by
Athanasius, presbyter and librarian at Rome, in his Lives of the Popes. The holy
Photius also, making mention of this invective of the orthodox Pope of Rome,
Leo III, against the holders of the erroneous doctrine, in his renowned letter
to the Metropolitan of Acquileia, expresses himself as follows: 'For (not to
mention those who were before him) Leo the elder, prelate of Rome, as well as
Leo the younger after him, shew themselves to be of the same mind with the
catholic and apostolic Church, with the holy prelates their predecessors, and
with the apostolic commands; the one having contributed much to the assembling
of the fourth holy Ecumenical Council, both by the sacred men who were sent to
represent him, and by his letter, through which both Nestorius and Eutyches
were overthrown; by which letter he moreover, in accordance with previous
synodical decrees, declared the Holy Ghost to proceed from the Father, but not
also "from the Son." And in like manner Leo the younger, his
counterpart in faith as well as in name. This latter indeed, who was ardently
zealous for true piety, in order that the unspotted pattern of true piety might
not in any way whatever be falsified by a barbarous language, published it in
Greek, as has already been said in the beginning, to the people of the West,
that they might thereby glorify and preach aright the Holy Trinity. And not
only by word and command, but also, having inscribed and exposed it to the
sight of all on certain shields specially made, as on certain monuments, he
fixed it at the gates of the Church, in order that every person might easily
learn the uncontaminated faith, and in order that no chance whatever might be
left to secret forgers and innovators of adulterating the piety of us
Christians, and of bringing in the Son besides the Father as a second cause of
the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father with honor equal to that of the
begotten Son. And it was not these two holy men alone, who shone brightly in
the West, who preserved the faith free from innovation; for the Church is not
in such want as that of Western preachers; but there is also a host of them not
easily counted who did likewise.'—Epist. v.
53.
9. III Tim.
1:14; 1 Tim. 6:20-21.
10. St. Basil the Great, Ep. 243, To the Bishops of
Italy and Gaul.
11. Matt. 26:26, 28
12. Matt. 26:28.
13. Matt. 26:31; Heb.
11:39-40; II Tim. 4:8; II Macc. 12:45.
14. Col. 1:18.
15. Matt. 28:20.
16. Gal. 2:11.
17. Matt. 16:18.
18. Matt. 16:16.
19. 1 Cor. 3:10, 11.
20. Col. 1:24.
21. Eph. 2:19, 20. Cp. 1
Pet. 2:4; Rev. 21:14.
22. See Acts of the
Apostles 28:15, Rom. 15:15-16; Phil. 1:13.
23. Epist. 239.
24. Gal. 2:11.
25. I Tim. 3:15.
26. I Tim. 3:15.
27. Heb. 11:6.
28. Heb. 13:8.
29. 'In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est, ut
teneamus, quod ubique quod semper ab omnibus creditum est. Hoc est enim vere proprieque Catholicum
(quod ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat), quod omnia fere universaliter
comprehendit. Sed hoc fiet si sequimur universalitatem, antiquitatem,
consensionem' (Vincentii
Lirinensis Commonitorium
pro CatholicEe fidei antiquitate et universalitate cap. iii, cf. cap. viii and xiv).
30. 1Thess.2:15.
31. Gal. 1:6-7.
32. Rom. 16:18.
33. Acts 20:28.
34. I Thess. 5:11.
35. I Pet. 5:10.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου