Page images
PDF
EPUB

ARTICLE II.-STOURDZA ON THE GREEK CHURCH.

[BY REV. A. N. Arnold, d. d., WESTBOROUGH, MASS.]

INTRODUCTORY NOTE.-The author of the following little treatise, Alexander de Stourdza, of Odessa, is one of the ablest, fairest, and most learned of the apologists for the Greek Church. The apology here translated was published at the close of the year 1848. Just twelve months before, there had been printed in the modern Greek tongue, and widely distributed among the Christians of the Eastern communion, an encyclical letter from Pius IX., inviting and exhorting them to return to the bosom of the Roman Church. This Papal document called forth a formal answer from the patriarchs and bishops of the Eastern Church, assembled in council. Many private individuals also published reviews and refutations of it. Of several such which we have examined, including the official one just referred to, the one here translated, with considerable abridgment, from the French original, is altogether the most temperate, scholarly, and impartial. It is, besides, more suitable for presentation in these pages, from the fact that it treats of the differences that distinguish the Greek Church from Protestantism, quite as fully as of those which separate that church from the Papal religion. Hence the title under which it was published, of "The Double Parallel." In this respect, the translator supposed it might supply a want not infrequently felt by American scholars. The points of difference between the Oriental Church and the Reformed Churches of the West, he supposes not to be very generally and exactly understood. Nor are the sources of satisfactory information on the subject very readily accessible. It is hardly too much to say, that there is no surer authority on the questions here discussed, than Alexander de Stourdza. He has studied them long and thoroughly, and written upon them largely and ably. He states explicitly in the preface, that he offers this defence of Oriental Orthodoxy not merely to his Greek brethren, but to readers of all countries. It was for this reason, without doubt, that he wrote it in the French language.

Different persons will probably form different judgments as to the merits of this apology, and the weight of the author's arguments. To some, possibly, the reasoning, as a whole, may appear weak and puerile. To others it will probably appear plausible, and adapted, if not to convince Papists and Protestants of error, at least to re-assure and fortify the minds of adherents of the Greek Church who are exposed to hear its faith and rites attacked. If it should seem to any readers, that after all there is more to be said than they had supposed, in defence of certain doctrines and practices which they have always been used to regard as mere fables and superstitions, it may be that

neither truth nor charity would suffer any harm from such a conclusion. It is not likely that the naked presentation of the author's apology for the Greek Church, will make any converts from among the readers of the Christian Review.

It will be observed, that the phrase, "the Orthordox Church," is of frequent occurrence. This is the common designation of the Greek Church among her own members.

The question may naturally arise in the readers mind, why a literal translation was preferred to a condensed summary, in our own words. It would have been easy to have prepared such a summary; and it would have been more in accordance, perhaps, with the usuage of such periodicals as this Review: but on the other hand, it seemed impossible to put our readers in a condition to appreciate the thoughts and feelings of an intelligent adherent of the Greek Church, so fairly and fully in any other way, as by giving them a faithful transcript of his sentiments and expressions, as well as of his arguments. The Greek Church is here allowed to speak for herself, and to plead her own cause.

This apology was originally published in a time of great civil commotions and revolutions on the European continent. It is presented to American readers at a time when our own political foundations are shaken as never before. The words with which the author concluded his preface then, are hardly less appropriate here and now. "At a time when the kingdoms of the earth are tottering and threatening to fall, it is both proper and profitable for the christian to turn his thoughts to that kingdom which is not of this world, to raise his regards towards heaven at the moment when the earth trembles under his feet."

STATEMENT OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE EASTERN AND WESTERN CHURCHES.

PART FIRST.

Picture to yourself a building, whose vast dimensions rise majestically from the ground, until it has reached an imposing height, according to the original plan of the architect; when lo! this massive structure changes its aspect, and divides into two separate buildings. The one preserves the same selection of materials, the same style, and the same ornaments as their common lease; the other, more sumptuous, differs essentially from the plan and proportions of the foundation. It is a beautiful and gorgeous structure, eclipsing by its magnificence the ancient and simple forms of the building beside it. It is deservedly admired: but the question to be decided is, which of the two buildings has remained conformed to the primitive plan? In order to decide this question,

compare these rival summits, then turn your eyes to the foundation, and your doubts will immediately vanish.

Such is the picture of the Eastern and Western Churches in the xixth century. To prove the fidelity of the similitude, it will be sufficient to compare them with each other, and with the lease, which is common to them both. The result of such a comparison cannot but be agreeable to sacred truth.

This is the method which we will now follow.

I. The Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit. Our Lord, when he promised to his sorrowing disciples the supreme Comforter, described him in these words: "the Spirit of truth who proceedeth from the Father." The mission of the Spirit in time he attributes to himself; but in such a way as to intimate the eternal procession from the Father: "he whom I will send unto you from the Father." But some one may say, after the resurrection the Saviour breathed on the disciples, and said, "receive ye the Holy Ghost," manifested by the power of binding and loosing. But let every one judge whether this act of the Divinity in time, and with reference to certain select persons, implies the eternal procession from the Son as well as from the Father.

The fathers of the second Ecumenical Council confined themselves to the literal statement of the doctrine; the subsequent councils formally prohibited any addition to the symbol of faith. In the year 809, just before the schism, Leo III., Bishop of Rome, caused the Greek and Latin text of the creed to be engraved on tables of silver, and exhibited them to the view of the faithful, with this inscription: "Haec Leo posui, amore et cautela orthodoxæ religionis." John VIII., a short time after, wrote to Photius, that he was not ignorant of the addition of "filioque," and that he disapproved of it; but that it was necessary to show indulgence to the weak. After these came the Popes Nicholas and Adrian, who spoke very differently. Their bad faith consummated the work which the ambition of both parties had commenced. All the West adopted the addition of "filioque;" the Orthodox Church rejects it, and maintains the symbol in its integrity. On which Vol. xxviii.-3.

side do we find conformity and fidelity to the teachings of the universal church, and of Jesus Christ its head?

II. On the existence of Purgatory.

The terms Purgatory and Purgatorial fire were unknown to Christian antiquity. As for the doctrine, the Orthodox Church of the East has always taught, since the time of Cyril of Alexandria, not any expiation for the dead, effected by pains and sufferings in Purgatory, but simply this, that the prayers and alms of the living for the dead, joined to faith in the merits of the Redeemer, and chiefly the oblation by the church of the unbloody sacrifice, can procure effectual succors for departed souls: in fine, that souls, after their departure from the body, have to pass through gradations, or successive stations (reλáva) in ascending or descending to their eternal destination. This is all which the church has been able to infer from the divine revelations, which intimate that there are degrees, and various abodes, both in the place of blessedness and in the place of punishment. "In my Father's house," says our Lord, "there are many mansions." And he also speaks of an "outer darkness." The church prays, therefore, and commands us to pray, for the departed, but without venturing to sound the depths of the mercies of the Father through his well-beloved Son; without giving any vain encouragement to the curiosity of the spirit beyond the limits of express revelations.

We conclude from this, that our wise ignorance in regard to the pains and expiations of Purgatory is most conformed to the belief of the primitive church of the holy apostles and martyrs.

111. On the Communion in both kinds.

In instituting the Eucharist, our Lord, the High Priest and Spotless Victim, said expressly to his disciples, as he present. ed to them the cup of the new testament, "drink ye all of it." Now since the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ was instituted for a perpetual observance, even "until he come," and since our Savior has said, "except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you," the Eastern Church, faithful to primitive example,

has never dared to withhold the cup from the laity, nor even from infants of tender age. She ordains, moreover, that the bread shall be drenched in the consecrated wine.* The church of the West, on the other hand, has come at last to adopt that arbitrary distinction between the communion of priests and of the laity. She cannot justify such an innovation, either by the word of God, or by the universal tradition of the church: she cannot justify it by alleging such vain subtleties as this, that a body cannot be destitute of blood. And now, forsooth, will the church of the West, after having allowed the abuse in question to exist for centuries, try to prop itself up by the authority of the Council of Trent? But this will be to bear witness to itself, a witness which our Lord has declared null.

Here, then, is another point in dispute, which is settled at once by a simple comparison with the sacred usages of the universal church. (See Bossuet's History of Variations, and Fleury's History of the Church, on the Communion of Infants in primitive times.)

IV. On Immersion and Triple Immersion in Baptism.

In order to decide which party is in this case faithfully conformed to the divine word and to the holy traditions, it will suffice to read carefully that part of the Epistle to the Romans (vi: 4) which forms in our church a part of the baptismal service, and to appeal to the testimony in favor of the triple immersion in this initiatory rite, namely, the canons of the Second Ecumenical Council, and of that of Trullus, and the express words of Athanasius, of Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Catechetical Lectures, and lastly of John of Damascus. We, who follow with docility such examples and such precepts, are we not safe? The primitive plan of the building, which is not from the hand of man, speaks loudly in our favor. Cyril describes fully the ceremonies of baptism, and they are just those which we observe; Athanasius says in plain words, "we plunge the child into the water, and take it out, three

* In administering the Communion, the Greeks give to the communicant the bread, sodden in the wine, from the cup, with a spoon. (Tr.)

« PreviousContinue »