This article will focus on what Catholicism is and who are Catholics. This direction is considered one of the branches of Christianity, formed due to a large split in this religion, which occurred in 1054.
Who are in many ways similar to Orthodoxy, but there are differences. From other currents in Christianity, the Catholic religion differs in the peculiarities of the dogma, cult rites. Catholicism supplemented the "Creed" with new dogmas.
Spreading
Catholicism is widespread in Western European (France, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, Italy) and Eastern European (Poland, Hungary, partly Latvia and Lithuania) countries, as well as in the states of South America, where it is professed by the vast majority of the population. There are also Catholics in Asia and Africa, but the influence of the Catholic religion is not significant here. compared to the Orthodox are a minority. There are about 700 thousand of them. The Catholics of Ukraine are more numerous. There are about 5 million of them.
Name
The word "Catholicism" is of Greek origin and in translation means universality or universality. IN modern understanding this term refers to the Western branch of Christianity, which adheres to the apostolic traditions. Apparently, the church was understood as something general and universal. Ignatius of Antioch spoke about this in 115. The term "Catholicism" was officially introduced at the first Council of Constantinople (381). The Christian Church was recognized as one, holy, catholic and apostolic.
Origins of Catholicism
The term "church" began to appear in written sources (letters of Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna) from the second century. This is the word of the municipality. At the turn of the second and third centuries, Irenaeus of Lyon applied the word "church" to Christianity in general. For individual (regional, local) Christian communities, it was used with the appropriate adjective (for example, the Church of Alexandria).
In the second century, Christian society was divided into the laity and the clergy. In turn, the latter were divided into bishops, priests and deacons. It remains unclear how the management in the communities was carried out - collegially or individually. Some experts believe that the government was initially democratic, but eventually became monarchical. The clergy ruled spiritual advice headed by a bishop. This theory confirmed by the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, in which he mentions bishops as leaders of Christian municipalities in Syria and Asia Minor. Over time, the Spiritual Council became just an advisory body. And only the bishop had real power in a single province.
In the second century, the desire to preserve apostolic traditions contributed to the emergence and structure. The Church was supposed to protect the faith, dogmas and canons of Holy Scripture. All this, and the influence of the syncretism of the Hellenistic religion, led to the formation of Catholicism in its ancient form.
The final formation of Catholicism
After the division of Christianity in 1054 into western and eastern branches, they began to be called Catholic and Orthodox. After the Reformation of the sixteenth century, more and more often in everyday life, the word "Roman" began to be added to the term "Catholic". From the point of view of religious studies, the concept of "Catholicism" covers many Christian communities that adhere to the same doctrine as the Catholic Church, and are subject to the authority of the Pope. There are also Uniate and Eastern Catholic churches. As a rule, they left the power of the Patriarch of Constantinople and became subordinate to the Pope of Rome, but retained their dogmas and rituals. Examples are Greek Catholics, Byzantine Catholic Church and others.
Basic dogmas and postulates
To understand who the Catholics are, you need to pay attention to the basic postulates of their dogma. The main tenet of Catholicism, which distinguishes it from other areas of Christianity, is the thesis that the Pope is infallible. However, there are many cases when the popes, in the struggle for power and influence, entered into dishonorable alliances with large feudal lords and kings, were obsessed with a thirst for profit and constantly increased their wealth, and also interfered in politics.
The next postulate of Catholicism is the dogma of purgatory, approved in 1439 at the Council of Florence. This teaching is based on the fact that the human soul after death goes to purgatory, which is an intermediate level between hell and paradise. There she can, with the help of various trials, be cleansed of sins. Relatives and friends of the deceased can help his soul cope with trials through prayers and donations. From this it follows that the fate of a person in the afterlife depends not only on the righteousness of his life, but also on the financial well-being of his loved ones.
An important postulate of Catholicism is the thesis of the exclusive status of the clergy. According to him, without resorting to the services of the clergy, a person cannot independently earn God's mercy. A priest among Catholics has serious advantages and privileges compared to an ordinary flock. According to the Catholic religion, only the clergy have the right to read the Bible - this is their exclusive right. Other believers are forbidden. Only editions written in Latin are considered canonical.
Catholic dogma determines the need for systematic confession of believers before the clergy. Everyone is obliged to have his own confessor and constantly report to him about his own thoughts and actions. Without systematic confession, the salvation of the soul is impossible. This condition allows the Catholic clergy to penetrate deeply into the personal life of their flock and control every step of a person. Constant confession allows the church to have a serious impact on society, and especially on women.
Catholic sacraments
The main task of the Catholic Church (the community of believers as a whole) is to preach Christ in the world. The sacraments are considered visible signs of the invisible grace of God. In fact, these are the actions established by Jesus Christ that must be performed for the good and salvation of the soul. There are seven sacraments in Catholicism:
- baptism;
- chrismation (confirmation);
- the Eucharist, or communion (the first communion among Catholics is taken at the age of 7-10 years);
- sacrament of repentance and reconciliation (confession);
- unction;
- sacrament of priesthood (ordination);
- sacrament of marriage.
According to some experts and researchers, the roots of the sacraments of Christianity go back to pagan mysteries. However, this point of view is actively criticized by theologians. According to the latter, in the first centuries AD. e. some rites were borrowed from Christianity by the pagans.
How do Catholics differ from Orthodox Christians?
What is common in Catholicism and Orthodoxy is that in both of these branches of Christianity the church is the mediator between man and God. Both churches agree that the Bible is the main document and doctrine of Christianity. However, there are many differences and disagreements between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
Both directions agree that there is one God in three incarnations: Father, Son and Holy Spirit (trinity). But the origin of the latter is interpreted in different ways (the Filioque problem). The Orthodox profess the "Symbol of Faith", which proclaims the procession of the Holy Spirit only "from the Father". Catholics, on the other hand, add “and the Son” to the text, which changes the dogmatic meaning. Greek Catholics and other Eastern Catholic denominations have retained the Orthodox version of the Creed.
Both Catholics and Orthodox understand that there is a difference between the Creator and creation. However, according to Catholic canons, the world has a material character. He was created by God out of nothing. There is nothing divine in the material world. While Orthodoxy suggests that the divine creation is the incarnation of God himself, it comes from God, and therefore he is invisibly present in his creations. Orthodoxy believes that it is possible to touch God through contemplation, that is, to approach the divine through consciousness. This is not accepted by Catholicism.
Another difference between Catholics and Orthodox is that the former consider it possible to introduce new dogmas. There is also a doctrine of good deeds and merit" of Catholic saints and the church. On its basis, the Pope can forgive the sins of his flock and is the vicar of God on Earth. In matters of religion, he is considered infallible. This dogma was adopted in 1870.
Differences in rituals. How are Catholics baptized?
There are also differences in rituals, the design of temples, etc. Even the Orthodox prayer procedure is performed not quite the way Catholics pray. Although at first glance it seems that the difference is in some small things. To feel spiritual distinction, it is enough to compare two icons, Catholic and Orthodox. The first one is more like beautiful picture. In Orthodoxy, icons are more sacred. Many are interested in the question, Catholics and Orthodox? In the first case, they are baptized with two fingers, and in Orthodoxy - with three. In many Eastern Catholic rites, the thumb, index and middle fingers are placed together. How are Catholics baptized? A less common way is to use an open palm with the fingers pressed tightly and the big one slightly bent towards the inside. This symbolizes the openness of the soul to the Lord.
The fate of man
The Catholic Church teaches that people are weighed down by original sin (with the exception of the Virgin Mary), that is, in every person from birth there is a grain of Satan. Therefore, people need the grace of salvation, which can be obtained by living by faith and doing good works. Knowledge of the existence of God is, despite human sinfulness, accessible human mind. This means that people are responsible for their actions. Every person is loved by God, but in the end awaits him Last Judgment. Particularly righteous and charitable people are ranked among the Saints (canonized). The Church keeps a list of them. The process of canonization is preceded by beatification (canonization). Orthodoxy also has a cult of the Saints, but most Protestant denominations reject it.
indulgences
In Catholicism, indulgence is the complete or partial release of a person from punishment for his sins, as well as from the corresponding expiatory action imposed on him by a priest. Initially, the basis for receiving an indulgence was the performance of some good deed (for example, a pilgrimage to holy places). Then it was the donation of a certain amount to the church. During the Renaissance, there were serious and widespread abuses, which consisted in the distribution of indulgences for money. As a result, this provoked the beginning of protests and a reform movement. In 1567, Pope Pius V imposed a ban on the issuance of indulgences for money and material resources in general.
Celibacy in Catholicism
Another major difference between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church is that all the clergy of the latter give the Catholic clergy no right to marry and generally have sexual intercourse. All attempts to marry after receiving the diaconate are considered invalid. This rule was announced during the time of Pope Gregory the Great (590-604), and was finally approved only in the 11th century.
The Eastern churches rejected the Catholic variant of celibacy at Trull Cathedral. In Catholicism, the vow of celibacy applies to all clergy. Initially, small church ranks had the right to marry. Married men could be initiated into them. However, Pope Paul VI abolished them, replacing them with the positions of reader and acolyte, which ceased to be associated with the status of a cleric. He also introduced the institution of lifelong deacons (who are not going to advance further in church careers and become priests). These may include married men.
As an exception, married men who converted to Catholicism from various branches of Protestantism, where they had the ranks of pastors, clerics, etc., can be ordained to the priesthood. However, the Catholic Church does not recognize their priesthood.
Now the obligation of celibacy for all Catholic clergy is the subject of heated debate. In many European countries and the United States, some Catholics believe that the obligatory vow of celibacy should be abolished for non-monastic clergy. However, the Pope did not support such a reform.
Celibacy in Orthodoxy
In Orthodoxy, clergymen can be married if the marriage was concluded before ordination to the priestly or deaconate. However, only monks of the small schema, widowed priests or celibates can become bishops. In the Orthodox Church, a bishop must be a monk. Only archimandrites can be ordained to this rank. Bishops cannot simply be celibates and representatives of a married man. white clergy(non-monk). Sometimes, as an exception, hierarchal ordination is possible for representatives of these categories. However, before that, they must accept a small monastic schema and receive the rank of archimandrite.
Inquisition
When asked who the Catholics of the medieval period were, one can get an idea by familiarizing themselves with the activities of such an ecclesiastical body as the Inquisition. It was the judicial institution of the Catholic Church, which was intended to combat heresy and heretics. In the twelfth century, Catholicism faced the rise of various opposition movements in Europe. One of the main ones was Albigensianism (Cathars). The popes have placed the responsibility of fighting them on the bishops. They were supposed to identify heretics, judge them and transfer secular authorities to carry out the sentence. The highest punishment was burning at the stake. But the episcopal activity was not very effective. Therefore, Pope Gregory IX created a special church body, the Inquisition, to investigate the crimes of heretics. Initially directed against the Cathars, it soon turned against all heretical movements, as well as witches, sorcerers, blasphemers, non-believers, and so on.
Tribunal of the Inquisition
Inquisitors were recruited from various members, primarily from Dominicans. The Inquisition reported directly to the Pope. Initially, the tribunal was headed by two judges, and from the 14th century - by one, but it consisted of legal consultants who determined the degree of "heretics". In addition, the court employees included a notary (who certified the testimony), witnesses, a doctor (monitored the defendant's condition during executions), a prosecutor and an executioner. The inquisitors were given part of the confiscated property of heretics, so there is no need to talk about the honesty and fairness of their court, since it was beneficial for them to recognize a person guilty of heresy.
inquisitorial procedure
Inquisitorial investigation was of two types: general and individual. In the first, a large part of the population of any locality was surveyed. At the second time, a certain person was called through the curate. In those cases when the summoned did not appear, he was excommunicated from the church. The man swore an oath to sincerely tell everything he knew about heretics and heresy. The course of the investigation and proceedings were kept in the deepest secrecy. It is known that the inquisitors widely used torture, which was allowed by Pope Innocent IV. Sometimes their cruelty was condemned even by secular authorities.
The accused were never given the names of witnesses. Often they were excommunicated, murderers, thieves, perjurers - people whose testimony was not taken into account even by the secular courts of that time. The defendant was deprived of the right to have a lawyer. The only possible form of defense was an appeal to the Holy See, although it was formally prohibited by bull 1231. People who had once been convicted by the Inquisition could at any moment be brought to justice again. Even death did not save him from the investigation. If the deceased was found guilty, then his ashes were taken out of the grave and burned.
Punishment system
The list of punishments for heretics was established by bulls 1213, 1231, as well as by the decrees of the Third Lateran Council. If a person confessed to heresy and repented already during the process, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. The Tribunal had the right to shorten the term. However, such sentences were rare. At the same time, the prisoners were kept in extremely cramped cells, often shackled, ate water and bread. In the late Middle Ages, this sentence was replaced by hard labor in the galleys. Recalcitrant heretics were sentenced to be burned at the stake. If a person turned himself in before the start of the process over him, then various church punishments were imposed on him: excommunication, pilgrimage to holy places, donations to the church, interdict, various types of penances.
Fasting in Catholicism
Fasting among Catholics consists in abstaining from excesses, both physical and spiritual. In Catholicism, there are the following fasting periods and days:
- Great Lent for Catholics. It lasts 40 days before Easter.
- advent. The four Sundays before Christmas, believers should reflect on his forthcoming arrival and be spiritually focused.
- All Fridays.
- Dates of some major Christian holidays.
- Quatuor anni tempora. It translates as "four seasons". This special days repentance and fasting. The believer must fast once every season on Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.
- Fasting before communion. The believer must abstain from food one hour before communion.
The requirements for fasting in Catholicism and Orthodoxy are for the most part similar.
There are currently many different opinions about the attitude of Orthodoxy towards the Catholic denomination. In particular, this topic is widespread among Moscow priests and teachers of theological schools. What is the real Orthodox position? With this question, we turned to the representative of the Moscow Patriarchate, priest Anthony Smirnov.
Dear Fr. Anthony, as a clergyman and theologian, could you answer the question for our readers: what is the danger of a loyal attitude to the Latin faith?
Before answering your question, I would like to say that it is necessary to consider, first of all, the causal factor, i.e. why it is necessary to believe in God in the Orthodox way, and not in some other way.
Now they say that simple old women, allegedly, do not know the dogmas and canons, and are saved. And if this is so in fact, then it turns out: does it matter how to believe? They say that participation in the rites and sacraments of the Church is quite enough for salvation, and everything else only sows discord and squabbles in the church fence. Such an opinion is absolutely anti-Orthodox.
Believe me, as a priest, I can assure you that our Orthodox grandmothers know dogma no worse than the hierarchy, and sometimes even better. Their simple hearts perceive the truth so accurately that one involuntarily remembers the apostle fishermen whom the Lord has chosen to shame the wise of this world.
Indeed, the theologian is not the one who has the degree of doctor and master, but the one who has proved by his life that he is a true CHRISTIAN. And the source of true theology is often a simple believing people who, in the purity of their hearts, perceive the verbs of eternal life. Where there is sincere faith, there is no place for either church politics or intricate sophistication, which is what distinguishes modern titled theologians in particular today.
Some of them believe that an ignorant old woman who visits a heretical church, without delving into the dogmatic differences between heretics and Orthodox, can be saved.
This is the greatest delusion of modern times.
You can only be saved in the Orthodox faith. Because the slightest deviation from the truth already diverts saving grace from a person. There is only one way of salvation. This is clearly stated in Scripture: one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5).
The path of Orthodoxy lies in the humble fulfillment of the commandments of Christ. And these commands are exactly preserved in the teaching of the Orthodox Church. Other "Christian" denominations either added or took something away from the original teaching of the Lord Jesus, and therefore distorted the truth. Any such action clear sign pride. The followers of these religions, without exception, are in a state of delusion and, therefore, cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.
Humility and obedience to the Lord - this is precisely the hallmark of the Orthodox dogma.
But isn't such an opinion a condemnation of all non-Orthodox before the Last Judgment?
No. This is not a condemnation, but a fact. This is stated in the Holy Scriptures. When it says that all unrepentant sinners will go to hell, we take it for granted. Isn't a heretic an unrepentant sinner? And if someone, closing his eyes to the truth, follows the heretics, then the blame is on him. Because everyone has the opportunity to seek the truth, and if he did not seek it, then God is not to blame. Whoever seeks will find, and whoever knocks, the Lord opens to him.
We constantly encounter in our souls obedience to God and obedience to the devil. If we listen to God, then we do the right thing and we are saved, but if we listen to the devil, then we commit sin. This unceasing struggle takes place every minute and even every second in the heart of every believer.
How can you know the will of God?
The will of God is in the commandments of God. And therefore, if something is contrary to the commandment, then, accordingly, it is not the will of the Lord. However, the enemy often substitutes true concepts in order to entangle the unreasonable in the nets of lawlessness. For example, he suggests that denouncing heretics is a sin of condemnation and in such a cunning way leads a person to complicity in the betrayal of the truth. In two cases, condemnation is not a sin. St. Basil the Great speaks of this. Firstly, when we talk about a confessor who has sinned, and secondly, when we warn our neighbor about danger.
In this case, speaking of heresies, we do not condemn heretics, but warn our brothers about the danger.
They say that all faiths that confess Jesus Christ as the Son of God, i.e. Catholics, Protestants and other representatives, the so-called Christians, are pleasing to God. Is it really?
Today, the words of St. Filaret of Moscow, who wrote: “I dare not call any Church that believes that Jesus is the Christ false…” However, the words of the saint are full of deep meaning. After all, he himself always maintained that only the Orthodox Church believes that Jesus is the Christ.
You can say that I believe in this and that, and by deeds show complete disbelief. But the Lord teaches us to look not at words, but at fruits, i.e. affairs. And, as you know, faith without works is dead(James 2:20). That is why faith in Jesus, as in God, consists in following His precepts and commandments. And if we consider the correspondence between the deeds and words of Catholics, we will come to the conclusion that they do not believe in Jesus as in Christ God.
How can this be explained?
The apostle says: Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the Begotten loves the One who is born of Him (1 John 5:1). And further: For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments... For everyone who is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world, our faith (vv. 3-4). Catholics, on the other hand, are diligent in the service of the world. They believe in the heretical dogma that their dad is the "viceroy of God" on earth. Their teaching consists in one thing - complete obedience to the pontiff. They believe in the absurd unlimited power of the Roman high priest. “The Pope can do everything: change any commandment, cancel the apostolic decree, during his lifetime to judge the soul of a person, determining his eternal fate, and much more” they think.
If Catholics believed that Jesus is the Christ, they would not distort His most perfect Divine teaching by adding their own heretical innovations.
But now some theologians believe that Catholics are our brothers in Christ, and not heretics. How to deal with such an opinion?
Opinions always abound, but we must look at how the Church teaches. Catholics as heretics were anathematized at the Local Councils: 1054 under Michael Cerularius, under Gregory II (1283-1289), under Sergius II (999-1019), under the emperors Alexy, John, Manuel Komnenos (XI-XII centuries), in 1482 after the Council of Florence by the three Eastern Patriarchs, as well as at the Local Councils of the Russian and Moldovlachian Churches. Who should we trust? The opinion of modern interpreters or the decisions of Local Councils?
And could not, for example, the Councils be wrong?
There is such a rule in the Church: if the Local Council adopted a resolution contrary to the teachings of the Church, then this Council is recognized as heretical, its definitions are anathematized. The Roman confession was anathematized by about a dozen Local Councils, and not one of them was condemned by the Church as heretical.
Moreover, we have many testimonies from the Holy Fathers that Catholics are heretics. Saint Theophan the Recluse wrote: "The Latin Church is a deviation from the Church, a heresy". Rev. Paisius Velichkovsky, the founder of the eldership, gave them a strict assessment: "[Latins] - are not Christians… Latinism has fallen into the abyss of heresies and delusions… It lies in them without any hope of rebellion.”. St. Philaret of Moscow, to whom ecumenists like to refer, also wrote: "The papacy is like a fruit whose bark (shell) of Christian ecclesiasticism, inherited from antiquity, is gradually disintegrating to reveal its anti-Christian core."
And how did heresy spread among the Latins?
In the 9th century, contrary to the definitions of the Ecumenical Councils, which were elevated by the Church to the position of a doctrinal dogma, Catholics added “and from the Son” (filioque) to the Creed.
In 809, the Spanish bishops sent three hundred ambassadors to Pope Leo III to allow them to add to the Nicene Creed - in the place where it is sung: "And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father," add: "And from the Son." The Pope did not grant their request. However, the heresy began to spread rapidly and established itself among the Spanish bishops who had influence on Pope Leo III. Soon he yielded and ordered to put in the church of St. Peter two silver boards, on one of them the Nicene Symbol was written in Latin with the addition "and from the Son", on the other - in Greek, without this addition.
What did the Bishop of Rome do? He allegedly "out of love" yielded to the heretics. And this is what his “love” turned into. After 200 years, the Roman Church completely fell away from Orthodoxy.
This is the grossest mistake made by Pope Leo III. He tried to avoid disagreements and allegedly maintain peace in his Local Church, and therefore, to please the heretics, he allowed them to believe as they please. As a result, this caused the entire west to fall.
Guided by the Holy Spirit, the Orthodox Church established a Council in Constantinople in 864, at which four Patriarchs and a thousand bishops condemned the filioque and anathematized all who spread this heresy.
In 1014, the filioque was officially approved by Pope Benedict VIII and included in the text of the Creed for singing at the liturgy. Exhortations from the Eastern Patriarchs and Bishops were unsuccessful, and in 1054 Patriarch Michael Cerularius of Constantinople (1043-1058) convened a Local Council, at which he excommunicated Catholics and anathematized their heretical innovations.
Subsequently, St. Gregory Palamas wrote: “We will not accept you into communion until,” he wrote to the Latins (1296-1359), “as long as you say that the Holy Spirit also descends from the Son.” And in May 1848, the four Eastern Patriarchs, together with all the bishops of the Synods of Constantinople, Jerusalem and Antioch, announced the District Epistle of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church to all Orthodox Christians: "The United Holy Cathedral and Apostolic Church, following the holy fathers of the east and west, as she proclaimed in ancient times under our fathers, so now she again proclaims in the conciliar community that this newly introduced opinion that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son is sheer heresy, and his followers, whoever they may be, - heretics; the societies that are made up of them are heretical societies, and any spiritual and liturgical communion with them by the Orthodox children of the catholic Church is lawless.”
And what is the perniciousness of the filioque heresy? Maybe you shouldn't have focused on it. Well, let it come from "and from the Son" - what difference does it make to us?
Recently similar opinions have appeared, tending to imagine that the reason for the falling away of the Latin side was precisely the lack of love on both sides. Moreover, some ecumenical theologians believe that there was an alleged division of the Church. But it's not. The Church is indivisible, and the dogma of the holiness of the Church testifies that heretics fall away from the Church, and do not divide it.
The Filioque is a heresy that came to Latinism from Judaism. It distorts the basic dogma of the Trinity. Modern Jews, in contrast to the Old Testament, as you know, do not believe in the Holy Trinity. They recognize only God the Father, and reject Christ, the Son of God and the Holy Spirit. Gradually, the Catholic teaching absorbed this Jewish doctrine, belittling the Hypostasis of the Holy Spirit, reducing it to the level of angelic nature. An angel is a messenger of God. If the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son, then it turns out that the Holy Spirit loses its Divine principle, submitting to both Hypostases. Figuratively speaking, Catholics attributed to the Holy Spirit the properties of incorporeal ministers. Speaking more plain language, then this is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which, according to the word of the Savior, is not forgiven either in this age or in the future. Therefore, we cannot remain silent and agree with this blasphemy.
We believe in the Trinity consubstantial and indivisible, and in the Catholic teaching we encounter worship not of the Trinity, but of the idol of papism.
How to understand your words? In what sense can papism be an idol?
Papism is the denial of the Divinity of the Son of God, expressed in Latin as a new dogma of papal infallibility.
The beginning of a wide propaganda of unlimited papal authority Historians attribute it to the beginning of the 16th century, when in the west one of the main income items of the Latin Church was the indulgences introduced by the Pope.
The Dominican monk Johann Tetzel, the seller of indulgences or, as they were popularly called, the “new gospel”, assured that “the cross to which the [Roman] pope communicated the power of grace is equal to the one on which the Savior was crucified,” and the power of remission of the pope’s sins is such that it instantly forgives even the one "who would crucify Christ or encroach on the Mother of God."
Such a blasphemous doctrine of the papacy belittled in the teaching of the Latins the Divine property of the hypostasis of our Savior Jesus Christ Himself. Since that time, according to the teachings of the Latins, the Pope of Rome is elevated to a more perfect quality, since he has the right to cancel the commandments of Christ. The whole teaching of Catholics now comes down to the fact that you can not read either the Bible or the teachings of the holy fathers. It is enough to be in complete obedience to the pope in order to be saved. Hence the constant change in Catholic canon law. Their teaching markedly contradicts the original apostolic teaching.
Papism is a clear distortion of the doctrine of the Trinity and to some extent is a Christological heresy. Nevertheless, Catholics themselves claim that they believe in the Holy Trinity, but, as already mentioned, it is necessary to look not at words, but at deeds. And their works testify to complete unbelief.
And what about the talk that the Church allegedly recognizes the baptism of Catholics as valid, and therefore some tend to believe that their sacraments are blessed?
First, the sacraments of heretics cannot be grace-filled, since grace is lost even among schismatics. Saint Basil the Great, in the first rule of his epistle to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium, wrote: “Although the beginning of the apostasy occurred through a schism, those who apostatized from the Church no longer had the grace of the Holy Spirit upon themselves.”
All the disputes of modern theologians about the grace of the Catholic sacraments have one stumbling block - the agreement that Catholics can be accepted into Orthodoxy through Chrismation or even through Repentance. The error initially lies in the fact that no one had and does not have the right to change the canonical decree regarding the acceptance of Catholics into Orthodoxy. Initially, at the Council of 1054, it was established by the Church that those who came from the Latin faith should be baptized, since their baptism by sprinkling could in no way be recognized by the Church as valid.
Theodore Balsamon at the end of the 12th century, in his interpretation of canon 14 of the IV Ecumenical Council, testifies that the Orthodox rebaptized the Latins. The documents of the IV Lateran Council (1215) also testify to the baptism of Catholics. Our chronicles under the year 6841 (1333) also report that Grand Duke Ivan Danilovich married his son Semyon. “Having brought for him a princess from Lithuania named Augusta, and in holy baptism she was named Anastasia.”
And why did they subsequently begin to receive the Latins through Chrismation or even through Repentance?
In the 15th century, the Greeks stopped baptizing Latins. The reason for this was the Union of Florence, which Byzantium concluded with the Catholics. Therefore, at the Council of Constantinople in 1484, the rite of the accession of the Latins through anointing was also approved. Nevertheless, the practice of rebaptism continued to dominate in the Russian Church. Our chronicles say that in the 15th century, the Venetian Ivan Fryazin, who served as a coiner in Moscow, was baptized in Russia.
In the 16th century, the Catholic John of Lassky at the Lateran Council of 1514 reported on the Russians: “They say that all the subjects of the Roman Church are not true Christians and will not be saved…” IN early XVII century of St. Patriarch Hermogenes wrote in a letter to the Polish prince Vladislav, who had a Catholic baptism: “with all quietness and meekness and humility, receive holy baptism”. Moreover, those who did not baptize the Latins were severely punished.
So, in one of the chronicles there is a story about Patriarch Ignatius, who, "Pleasing a heretic of the Latin faith", to Uspensky Cathedral “Introducing Marinka’s heretical papal faith, he didn’t baptize her with holy baptism of the perfect Christian law, but only anointed her with holy chrism ... and as Judas is a traitor, and this scolded Christ ... He, Ignatius, for such a guilt of the hierarch of the great saint of the Russian Church, as if he despised the rules of the saints apostle and holy father, resigned and from hierarchship according to the rule of the saints in the summer of 7114 (1606).
However, the ancient Russian practice, confirmed by the Council of 1620, was abolished at the Moscow Council of 1667. Saint Hilarion Troitsky comments on this cancellation in the following way: “This is understandable. The Council of 1667 is famous for the fact that, led by the Greeks, often of dubious dignity, it condemned everything, even in the small rites of the Russian Church, that deviated from Greek practice ... But in support of its decision, the council could only cite the definition of the Council of Constantinople in 1484.
At the end of the 18th century, the Greek Pilot gave a clear definition of the re-baptism of the Latins. St. Athanasius Parios wrote that “The Latins are in an even worse condition than the Eunomians, who were baptized, albeit once, but still by immersion ... Therefore, those who come from the Latins must be baptized.” Rev. says the same. Nicodemus the Holy Mountaineer: “The baptism of the Latins is a false name, and therefore unacceptable.”
If you follow the canons and holy fathers, then there is no need to come up with any excuses. In Orthodoxy, everything is simple: Yes, yes; no no; but what is more than this is from the evil one (Matt. 5:37). But this was all before the Vatican Councils. After Vatican Councils I and II, where the dogma of the infallibility of the pope and the ecumenical union of all religions were legitimized, Catholics can be safely classified as pagans. And to talk about the grace of their sacraments is simply absurd.
And what should the Orthodox do if suddenly the Catholics wish to visit Orthodox church?
The Monk Elder Joseph of Optina perfectly answers this question, saying: “At the end of the Pilot’s Book, in the chapter “On the Fall of Rome, how you departed from the Orthodox faith, and from the holy Eastern Church”, the Pope of Rome with his followers, who incorrectly call themselves Catholics, are called heretics. There is nothing to say about other Protestant Christian denominations, since they deviated even further from Orthodoxy. In the same “Helmsman” book, in the 10th chapter, in the 6th canon of the Local Council of Laodicea, the following judgment of the Holy Church is generally pronounced on heretics: “it is not worthy to enter the church of God as a heretic.” And in the 33rd canon of the same Council of Laodicea it is said: “Let no one pray with heretics and with those who have rejected from the Catholic Church.”
When in the 9th century the papal legates went to Constantinople, they were stopped at the border and demanded to read the Creed. But since the legates refused to comply with this demand, they were not allowed to enter Constantinople. After waiting forty days at the border, they were forced to return to Rome. This is what our ancient fathers did with heretics.
Isn't such actions a manifestation of aggression or extremism, as they say now?
Saint Maximus the Confessor says: “I do not want heretics to suffer, and I do not rejoice in their evil. God forbid! “But I'm really happy about their conversion. For what can be sweeter for the faithful than to see the scattered children of God gathered together! I have not lost my reason to advise that mercy be valued above philanthropy. On the contrary, I advise with attention and diligence to do good to all people and to all faithfully to be everything for those in need. But at the same time, I say: you can’t help heretics in asserting their crazy beliefs, here you need to be sharp and implacable. For I do not call love, but misanthropy and falling away from Divine love, when someone affirms heretics in their error to their inevitable destruction.
Therefore, we must be strict in relation to Catholics and other heretics so that they do not establish themselves in the idea that we are brothers in Christ with them. Let them know that there is an abyss between us and them, and if they wish to be saved, then you are welcome. The doors of the Orthodox Church are open to all.
Interviewed
Dmitry Morozov
http://www.christian-spirit.ru/v9/9.%288%29.htm
How is Catholicism different from Orthodoxy? When did the division of the Churches occur and why did it happen? How should the Orthodox approach all this? Let's talk about the most important thing.
The separation of Orthodoxy and Catholicism is a great tragedy in the history of the Church
The division of the One Christian Church into Orthodoxy and Catholicism happened almost a thousand years ago - in 1054.
The one Church consisted, as the Orthodox Church does now, of many local churches. This means that the Churches - for example, Russian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox - have some external differences (in the architecture of temples; singing; the language of services; and even in how certain parts of services are conducted), but they are united in the main doctrinal questions, and between them there is Eucharistic communion. That is, a Russian Orthodox can take communion and confess in a Greek Orthodox church and vice versa.
According to the Creed, the Church is one, because at the head of the Church is Christ. This means that there cannot be several Churches on earth that would have different dogma. And it was precisely because of disagreements in doctrinal matters that in the 11th century there was a division into Catholicism and Orthodoxy. As a consequence of this, Catholics cannot take communion and confess in Orthodox churches and vice versa.
Catholic Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Moscow. Photo: catedra.ru
What are the differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
Today there are a lot of them. And conditionally they are divided into three types.
- Doctrine differences- because of which, in fact, there was a split. For example, the dogma of the infallibility of the Pope among Catholics.
- Ritual differences. For example, a form of Communion that is different from us among Catholics or a vow of celibacy (celibacy), which is obligatory for Catholic priests. That is, we have fundamentally different approaches to certain aspects of the Sacraments and Church life, and they can complicate the hypothetical reunification of Catholics and Orthodox. But they did not become the reason for the split, and they did not prevent us from reuniting again.
- Conditional differences in traditions. For example - org A us in temples; benches in the middle of the church; priests with or without beards; various forms of vestments for priests. In other words, external features that do not affect the unity of the Church at all - since some similar differences are found even within the Orthodox Church in different countries. In general, if the difference between Orthodox and Catholics consisted only in them, the One Church would never be divided.
The division into Orthodoxy and Catholicism that occurred in the 11th century was, first of all, a tragedy for the Church, which was and is being acutely experienced by both “us” and the Catholics. Reunification attempts have been made several times over the course of a thousand years. However, none of them turned out to be truly viable - and we will also talk about this below.
What is the difference between Catholicism and Orthodoxy - because of what the Church was actually divided?
Western and Eastern Christian Churches - such a division has always existed. The Western Church is conditionally the territory of modern Western Europe, and later - all the colonized countries of Latin America. The Eastern Church is the territory of modern Greece, Palestine, Syria, and Eastern Europe.
However, the division we are talking about has been conditional for many centuries. Too much different nations and civilizations inhabit the Earth, so it is natural that the same teaching in different parts of the Earth and countries could have some characteristic external forms and traditions. For example, the Eastern Church (the one that became Orthodox) has always practiced a more contemplative and mystical way of life. It was in the East in the III century that such a phenomenon as monasticism arose, which then spread to the whole world. The Latin (Western) Church - has always had the image of Christianity outwardly more active and "social".
In the main doctrinal truths, they remained common.
Saint Anthony the Great, founder of monasticism
Perhaps the differences, which later became insurmountable, could have been noticed much earlier and “agreed”. But in those days there was no Internet, there were no trains and cars. Churches (not only Western and Eastern, but simply - separate dioceses) sometimes existed for decades on their own and rooted in themselves certain views. Therefore, the differences that caused the division of the Church into Catholicism and Orthodoxy, at the time of the “decision” turned out to be too ingrained.
This is what the Orthodox cannot accept in Catholic teaching.
- the infallibility of the Pope and the doctrine of the primacy of the See of Rome
- changing the text of the Creed
- doctrine of purgatory
Pope Infallibility in Catholicism
Each church has its own primate - the head. In the Orthodox Churches, this is the patriarch. The primate of the Western Church (or the Latin Chair, as it is also called) was the pope, who is now the head of the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church believes that the pope is infallible. This means that any judgment, decision or opinion that he voices before the flock is the truth and law for the entire Church.
The current Pope is Francis
By Orthodox teaching no man can be above the Church. For example, Orthodox Patriarch- in the event that his decisions go against the teachings of the Church or rooted traditions, - he may well be deprived of his rank by decision Bishops' Cathedral(as happened, for example, with Patriarch Nikon in the 17th century).
In addition to the infallibility of the pope in Catholicism, there is a doctrine of the primacy of the See of Rome (the Church). Catholics base this teaching on a misinterpretation of the words of the Lord in a conversation with the apostles in Caesarea Filipova - about the alleged superiority of the Apostle Peter (who later "founded" the Latin Church) over the other apostles.
(Matthew 16:15-19) “He says to them: And who do you say that I am? Simon Peter, answering, said: You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Then Jesus answered and said to him: Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonas, because it was not flesh and blood that revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven; and I say to you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”.
You can read more about the dogma of papal infallibility and the primacy of the Roman throne.
The difference between Orthodox and Catholics: the text of the Creed
The different text of the Creed is another reason for disagreement between Orthodox and Catholics - although the difference is only in one word.
The Creed is a prayer that was formulated in the 4th century at the first and second Ecumenical Councils, and it put an end to many doctrinal disputes. It articulates everything that Christians believe.
What is the difference between Catholic and Orthodox texts? We say that we believe "And in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father", and Catholics add: "... from the "Father and the Son proceeding ...".
In fact, the addition of just this one word "And the Son ..." (Filioque) significantly distorts the image of the entire Christian teaching.
The topic is theological, difficult, it is immediately better to read about it at least on Wikipedia.
The doctrine of purgatory is another difference between Catholics and Orthodox
Catholics believe in the existence of purgatory, and Orthodox say that nowhere - in any of the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old or New Testaments, and even in none of the books of the Holy Fathers of the first centuries - is there any mention of purgatory.
It is difficult to say how this doctrine arose among the Catholics. Nevertheless, now the Catholic Church fundamentally proceeds from the fact that after death there is not only the Kingdom of Heaven and hell, but also a place (or rather, a state) in which the soul of a person who died in peace with God finds himself, but not holy enough to be in Paradise. These souls, apparently, will certainly come to the Kingdom of Heaven, but first they need to undergo purification.
Orthodox look at afterlife different from Catholics. There is Heaven, there is Hell. There are ordeals after death in order to be strengthened in peace with God (or fall away from Him). There is a need to pray for the dead. But there is no purgatory.
These are the three reasons why the difference between Catholics and Orthodox is so fundamental that a division of the Churches arose a thousand years ago.
At the same time, over the 1000 years of separate existence, a number of other differences arose (or took root), which are also considered to be what distinguishes us from each other. Something about the external rites - and it may seem like a rather serious difference - and something about the external traditions that Christianity acquired here and there.
Orthodoxy and Catholicism: Differences That Don't Really Divide Us
Catholics don't take communion the way we do - is that true?
Orthodox partake of the Body and Blood of Christ from the chalice. Until recently, Catholics took communion not with leavened bread, but with unleavened bread - that is, unleavened bread. Moreover, ordinary parishioners, unlike the clergy, communed only with the Body of Christ.
Before saying why it happened so, it should be noted that this form of Catholic Communion has recently ceased to be the only one. Now in Catholic churches other forms of this Sacrament also appear - including the “familiar” one for us: the Body and Blood from the chalice.
And the tradition of Communion, which is different from us, arose in Catholicism for two reasons:
- Regarding the use of unleavened bread: Catholics proceed from the fact that at the time of Christ, Jews at Easter broke not leavened, but unleavened bread. (The Orthodox come from the Greek texts of the New Testament, where in describing the Last Supper that the Lord performed with the disciples, the word “artos” is used, which means leavened bread)
- Regarding communion of parishioners only with the Body: Catholics proceed from the fact that Christ abides in equal and full measure in any of the parts of the Holy Gifts, and not only when they are combined together. (The Orthodox are guided by the text of the New Testament, where Christ directly speaks of His Body and Blood. Mt 26:26–28: “ And while they were eating, Jesus took bread, and having blessed it, broke it, and giving it to the disciples, said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he took the cup and gave thanks, and gave it to them, and said, Drink all of you from it, for this is My Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.»).
They sit in Catholic churches
Generally speaking, this is not even a difference between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, since in some Orthodox countries- for example, in Bulgaria - it is also customary to sit, and in many temples you can also see many benches and chairs there.
There are many benches, but this is not a Catholic, but an Orthodox church - in New York.
Catholic churches have A n
The organ is part of the musical accompaniment of the service. Music is one of the integral parts of the service, because if it were otherwise, there would be no choir, and the entire service would be read. Another thing is that we, the Orthodox, are now accustomed to singing alone.
In many Latin countries, an organ was also installed in temples, since they considered it a divine instrument - they found its sound so sublime and unearthly.
(At the same time, the possibility of using the organ in Orthodox worship was also discussed in Russia at the Local Council of 1917-1918. The well-known church composer Alexander Grechaninov was a supporter of this instrument.)
Vow of celibacy among Catholic priests (celibate)
In Orthodoxy, both a monk and a married priest can be a priest. We are quite detailed.
In Catholicism, any clergyman is bound by a vow of celibacy.
Catholic priests shave their beards
This is another example of different traditions, and not some fundamental differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. Whether a person has a beard or not - in no way affects his holiness and does not say anything about him as good or bad christian. It’s just that in Western countries it has been customary to shave a beard for some time (most likely, this is the influence of the Latin culture of Ancient Rome).
Now no one forbids shaving beards and Orthodox priests. It’s just that a priest or a monk’s beard is a tradition so deeply rooted in us that breaking it can become a “temptation” for others, and therefore few priests decide on it or even think about it.
Metropolitan Anthony of Surozh is one of the most famous Orthodox pastors of the 20th century. For a time he served without a beard.
The duration of worship and the severity of fasting
It so happened that over the past 100 years church life Catholics has been significantly "simplified" - if I may say so. The duration of divine services has been reduced, the fasts have become simpler and shorter (for example, before taking communion, it is enough not to eat food for only a few hours). Thus, the Catholic Church tried to reduce the gap between itself and the secular part of society - fearing that excessive strictness of the rules could scare away modern people. Whether it helped or not is hard to say.
The Orthodox Church, in her views on the severity of fasting and external rites, proceeds from the following:
Of course, the world has changed a lot and it will be impossible for most people to live in all severity now. However, the memory of the Rules and a strict ascetic life is still important. "By mortifying the flesh, we free the spirit." And you can’t forget about it - at least as an ideal, which you need to strive for in the depths of your soul. And if this "measure" disappears, then how to maintain the desired "bar"?
This is only a small part of the external traditional differences that have developed between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
However, it is important to know what unites our Churches:
- the presence of Church Sacraments (communion, confession, baptism, etc.)
- veneration of the Holy Trinity
- veneration of the Mother of God
- veneration of icons
- veneration of saints and their relics
- common saints for the first ten centuries of the Church's existence
- Holy Bible
In February 2016, the first ever meeting between the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Pope of Rome (Francis) took place in Cuba. An event of historical scale, but there was no talk of the unification of the Churches at it.
Orthodoxy and Catholicism - attempts to unite (Unia)
The separation of Orthodoxy and Catholicism is a great tragedy in the history of the Church, which is acutely experienced by both Orthodox and Catholics.
Several times in 1000 years attempts have been made to bridge the schism. The so-called Unias were concluded three times - between the Catholic Church and representatives of the Orthodox Church. All of them had the following in common:
- They were concluded primarily for political, and not for religious purposes.
- Each time, these were “concessions” on the part of the Orthodox. As a rule, in the following form: the external form and language of worship remained familiar to the Orthodox, however, in all dogmatic disagreements, the Catholic interpretation was taken.
- Being signed by some bishops, as a rule, they were rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church - the clergy and the people, and therefore turned out to be, in fact, unviable. The exception is the last Union of Brest.
Here are the three Unions:
Union of Lyons (1274)
She was supported by the emperor of Orthodox Byzantium, since the union with the Catholics was supposed to help restore the shaken financial position of the empire. The union was signed, but the people of Byzantium and the rest of the Orthodox clergy did not support it.
Ferrara-Florence Union (1439)
Both sides were equally politically interested in this Union, since the Christian states were weakened by wars and enemies (Latin states - by the Crusades, Byzantium - by confrontation with the Turks, Rus' - with the Tatar-Mongols) and the unification of states on religious grounds would probably help , everyone.
The situation repeated itself: the Union was signed (although not by all representatives of the Orthodox Church who were present at the council), but it remained, in fact, on paper - the people did not support the union on such conditions.
Suffice it to say that the first "Uniate" service was performed in the capital of Byzantium in Constantinople only in 1452. And less than a year later, the Turks captured it ...
Union of Brest (1596)
This Union was concluded between the Catholics and the Orthodox Church of the Commonwealth (the state that then united the Lithuanian and Polish principalities).
The only example when the union of Churches turned out to be viable - albeit within the framework of just one state. The rules are the same: all divine services, rituals and language remain familiar to the Orthodox, however, not the patriarch, but the pope is commemorated at the services; the text of the Creed is changed and the doctrine of purgatory is adopted.
After the division of the Commonwealth, part of its territories ceded to Russia - and with it a number of Uniate parishes also departed. Despite the persecution, they continued to exist until the middle of the 20th century, until they were officially banned by the Soviet authorities.
Today, there are Uniate parishes on the territory of Western Ukraine, the Baltic states and Belarus.
Separation of Orthodoxy and Catholicism: how to relate to this?
We would like to quote briefly from the letters of the Orthodox Bishop Hilarion (Troitsky), who died in the first half of the 20th century. Being a zealous defender Orthodox dogmas he nevertheless writes:
“Unfortunate historical circumstances tore the West away from the Church. Over the centuries, the church perception of Christianity was gradually distorted in the West. Teaching has changed, life has changed, the very understanding of life has departed from the Church. We [Orthodox] have preserved church wealth. But instead of lending to others from this unexpected wealth, we ourselves in some areas have come under the influence of the West with its theology alien to the Church.” (Letter 5. Orthodoxy in the West)
And here is what St. Theophan the Recluse answered to one woman a century earlier when she asked: “Father, explain to me: none of the Catholics will be saved?”
The saint replied: “I don’t know if the Catholics will be saved, but I know one thing for sure: that I myself will not be saved without Orthodoxy.”
This answer and the quotation from Hilarion (Troitsky) may very accurately indicate that correct attitude Orthodox person to such a misfortune as the division of the Churches.
Read this and other posts in our group in
Name: Catholicism ("universal, ecumenical")
Catholicism is rightfully considered one of the largest movements within the church. Having emerged at the dawn of the Christian era, two thousand years later, it spread its branches around the globe, gaining fame both due to its powerful organizational structure and due to the principles of dogma. The very term "Catholicism" arose in the first century AD - even then, despite the persecution by the Caesars, Christianity began to gradually spread throughout the Roman Empire. Finally, this dogma took shape only in 1054 after the separation christian church into Orthodox and Catholic. Since then, Catholicism has been actively planted in the countries of Europe and America. Despite the fact that subsequently many independent religious movements broke away from it (Baptism, Lutheranism, Anglicanism), subsequently Catholicism gained fame as the most powerful branch of the Christian religion.
Since the 60s, within the framework of Catholicism, a number of measures have been taken to modernize the canonical dogmas, as well as the Vatican's centralized policy. At present, the Vatican demonstrates by its example a vivid combination of secular and ecclesiastical power: leading all the Catholic organizations of the world, the city-state has all the attributes of a “state in miniature”: a flag, a coat of arms, an anthem, and even a telegraph and post office.
Catholicism of the present time has nothing to do with the Inquisition, witch hunts, and the fight against "heresies" - all this is left far in the past. It is not surprising that today the number of Catholics in the world reaches almost a billion people. Today, Catholics make up the majority of believers in Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Australia - and their numbers continue to grow.
Catholicism has a centralized administrative apparatus, characterized by a single system of government: all power is concentrated around the head of the church - it is the successor of the Apostle Peter, the Pope. He is infallible in matters of faith and is the direct vicar of Christ on earth. Together with the College of Cardinals and the Synod of the Bishop, the Pope is the supreme governing body of the entire Catholic Church.
Catholic churches are richly decorated: the eye of any believer is attracted by skillfully carved statues, colorfully painted images of saints ... Divine services held according to the Latin rite are distinguished by staged theatricality: they are held to organ music. Unlike the same Orthodox churches, you can sit in Catholic churches - parishioners sometimes joke that this is sufficient reason to attend Sunday Mass.
Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit comes from both God the Father and God the Son. In addition, they are characterized by belief in purgatory - the gap between heaven and hell. The source of faith among Catholics is not only Holy Scripture, but also Holy Tradition. As for the sacraments recognized by Catholics, there are only seven of them. Baptism takes place from left to right. Also, within the framework of Catholicism, there is a doctrine of indulgences, in other words, the removal of sins from the penitent after the obligatory communion, confession, and prayer.
Catholics are also characterized by ardent veneration of the Virgin Mary. Catholic priests are required to be celibate. Perhaps this is the reason for the strict separation in this creed of the laity (ordinary parishioners) and the clergy (priests) - they take communion separately from each other.
Also, this creed is characterized by a branched cult of saints: they are awarded a special place in the church hierarchy. Catholicism is distinguished by the veneration of all kinds of holy relics - from the nails with which, according to legend, Jesus Christ was nailed to the cross, and ending with the shroud, on which the face of the Virgin Mary was once imprinted.
To date, Catholicism has gained the attention of European youth mainly through adaptation to the problems of our time. Catholic organizations are using the Internet and television to promote their faith. Thanks to this, they manage to collect numerous donations for missionary work, helping hopeless patients and children from low-income families. In a word, the Catholic Church of the present time is the successor of the glorious Christian traditions of two thousand years ago.
22.01.2014
Probably, each of us has heard such a thing as "Catholicism", some are even ministers of this faith. But not everyone knows what it is. As you know, Catholicism is the most massive direction in Christianity in terms of the number of believers. It is said that this word comes from the ancient Greek expression "katholikos", which translates as "public". This is where it came from that Christians who have joined all the representatives of Catholicism are called Catholics.
A bit of history
IN modern world There are more than a billion bearers of this faith. It is worth saying that for a long time there was no division into Christians and Catholics. All were united and adhered to one faith - Christianity. Differences that arose from time to time between the bishops of the Western Roman and Eastern Roman Empires were mostly eliminated in a short period, and discussions ceased. But it so happened that these disagreements escalated almost into a war, which led to the fact that in 1054 there was a "Great Schism" - an event that forever separated the churches in Rome and Istanbul (then Constantinople). This happened after representatives of both faiths cursed each other. Two new churches appeared in the world: the Catholic, headed by the Pope, and the Orthodox, which was subordinate to the Patriarch of Constantinople. And although 1965 was marked by the fact that the anathema was canceled, the churches continued to function independently and separately from one another.
The question arises: “What could have influenced the schism of the Christian united church?”. Many facts can be cited. For example:
- Unlike the Orthodox, the Catholic Church believes that their ruler, the Pope, has no sins and is pure before God;
- According to Catholics, the Holy Spirit comes both from the Almighty and from his Son. The Orthodox deny this fact.
- During the process of the Sacrament of Communion, Catholics take small thin cakes from unleavened dough. They also call them "wafers".
- Baptizing a person, Catholics pour out all sacred water directly on him, but they do not immerse his entire body with his head directly under the water, as representatives of Orthodoxy do.
- The presence of "purgatory" in the faith of Catholics. Representatives of Catholicism believe that between heaven and hell there is a place where souls stop who have not gone to heaven or hell. This is the fundamental difference.
In our world there are a large number of religions, each of which appeared many, many years ago. Accordingly, they have staring traditions, some prohibitions and, of course, the style of behavior of believers. ...
After describing the structure of the services, it is worth asking one extremely important question - perhaps the central one for this book. The question was formulated by one of the readers of the first version of this book before its release...
Pope Alexander III was one of the most famous popes in the Roman Catholic Church in all its many years of existence. This well-known religious figure began his service in 1159 and served his adherents until...
