The One True Church: St. Sophrony on Orthodoxy and the Fullness of Grace
- The Orthodox Ethos Team
- 5 days ago
- 10 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Archimandrite Sophrony (Sakharov) of Essex
There is One Unique and True Church Which Christ Founded Which Maintains Unspoiled the Teaching of Christ and Possesses the Fullness of Knowledge and Grace and Infallibility
“Forgive me; perhaps all this is superfluous. At this point, though, I would like to say a little about the fact that at the present time a significant part of the Christian world tends to accept one of the most dangerous heresies. What it consists of is people saying that in our days there is not one Church which has kept fully the true teaching of Christ; or which possesses complete knowledge of the mystery of the holy, grace-filled Christian life on the ethical and ascetic level. Supposedly, many of the Churches which are nominally Christian have equal grace, and because of that we should proceed towards the union of the Churches on the basis of some common program. One of the most frequent questions which one comes across is the question of who will be saved and who will not be saved. These people usually think that it is not only the Orthodox who will be saved (according to Orthodox teaching), not only the Catholics (according to Catholic teaching), but all virtuous people in general who believe in Christ. This viewpoint has passed from the Protestants to the faithful of other Churches. There are many among the Orthodox who hold this opinion.
Some people think that no single one of the existing Churches can receive the fulness of knowledge and grace, because each one of them in one or another degree has deviated from the truth. They think that only now ‘at the end of the ages’ they (these sages) have fully grasped the spirit of the teaching of Christ, and that the entire Christian world has been led astray for many centuries until now. That now the time has come when we must unite all the separated parts into one universal and apostolic Church, which will have the fulness of truth in all its aspects, even though this union will only embrace what is common to all the Churches. What is even worse, some of them are pondering in their hearts a certain high, supra-ecclesial, mystical, understanding of Christian religion, which… I won’t say more about this.
I digressed into discussing this for one reason only: to tell you that I very much want you (and I pray to God for this) not to be deceived by all that, but to be convinced firmly in your heart and mind that on this earth there is one unique and true Church which Christ founded; that this Church maintains unspoiled the teaching of Christ, that she in her totality (and not in her individual members) possesses the fulness of knowledge and grace and infallibility. [I want you to be convinced] that what for several people seems to be incompleteness in her teaching is none other than the potential for some scholarly elaboration of her inexhaustible and infinite riches—this, however, does not contradict in any measure what I said above about her possessing the fulness of knowledge.
The definitive form of expression of the Church’s teaching at the Ecumenical Councils cannot be subjected to any change. All future academic work must obligatorily concur with what was given in divine revelation and in the teaching of the Ecumenical Councils of the Church. The same is true in connection with grace: only the one and unique Church can have the fulness of grace. All the other Churches, however, do have grace because of their faith in Christ, but not in its fulness. We can, furthermore, believe that even in our days there are still people who, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, are equal to the great Saints of the Church of ancient times. (I am saying this in connection with what I heard about several people in Russia.) [This is] because Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever (Heb. 13:8). All this is the truth. Whoever departs from this faith will not stand.”*[1]
Some of the Errors of Catholicism According to St. Sophrony[2]
“But in Roman Catholicism (as compared to Orthodoxy) there are many basic errors, both from the dogmatic point of view as well as from the point of view of the (spiritual) church life. The [Roman Catholic] point of view about repentance and the practice of Confession is not in accord with the spirit of Christ (as I understand it), and this is connected with an incorrect vision of the work of man's redemption. There is a certain 'worldly', 'juridical', approach to resolving these questions. Anomalies and even frankly crude delusions in the moral-ascetic life are accepted as grace-given, and taken as criteria of holiness (for example the phenomenon of the stigmata.) And at the same time, the spiritual practices of the Orthodox ascetics are trampled on, ridiculed, and repudiated. Several of the holy Fathers who were more advanced in this noetic activity of inner prayer are treated as particularly inveterate heretics (for example, St. Gregory Palamas)."
“As for your unprompted impulsion towards tears and compunction: we must approach God, who ‘is a consuming fire’, as meekly and calmly and reverently as possible. One should preserve oneself by all means possible from artificial excitation of the nerves, of the blood, and also from reverie. Forgive me, I am saying this to you to put you on guard, out of love for you. The Catholics, according to what I have heard suffer precisely from these defects. That is why one observes among them cases of stigmata and sensory visions (or rather, apparitions). Apart from this, some people confuse the spiritual and the psychological, not understanding anything about the first, that is, about spiritual weeping, and they take these tears for psychological tears, and condemn them.”[3]
“When you are strengthened in faith, you will in consequence discover an immeasurable number of demonstrations of the truth of the Orthodox Church and the Orthodox faith: theological, moral-ascetic and historical in character. Then it will become incontrovertibly clear to you that the Orthodox Church is distinguished from all other Churches in three respects:
1) Only she is fully true in her theological doctrine.
2) Only she knows in its fulness the mystery of grace-filled, holy life and preserves divine grace in its fulness. And
3) She is the oldest, foundational, original, community, from which sections (smaller or greater) have been separated at various times.[4]
"Another copy [draft copy of his letter] contains the following undated text which it seems appropriate to include here as an appendix to this letter: ‘From your letter one gets the impression that Roman Catholics call “mental prayer” thoughts addressed to God without being expressed orally, προφορικώς – as they also call meditations about God and the divine. But by the term ‘noetic prayer’, ‘mental prayer’, we understand the stationing of the intellect in the heart in front of God, which may be accompanied by a feeling of gratitude, or glorification or fear, of supplication, or repentance. But every reflection, philosophizing, of the intellect is forsaken, and the mind stays its attention in the heart, and oversees the state of the heart, following what is taking place within it. By this vigilance the intellect can also see the enemy approaching, and with a sharp sword, or as with a burning flame, by the name of the Lord Jesus it repels him.’[5]
“…I would not even have dared to speak to you about this earlier, because first of all you had to be sure that by converting to Orthodoxy you were indeed avoiding hell…”[6]
“… I would never think of considering the Catholic Church as ‘some worldly, earthly organization’. If I do, nonetheless speak of them as ‘worldly’, I do so in comparison with what the Lord has given me to know in Orthodoxy. I hope that the Lord will gran you also to recognize that they have been ‘secularised’. These ‘worldly’, or ‘human’ elements have penetrated the whole life of the Catholic Church. We shall not speak about this, because involuntarily we shall be drawn towards discussing what has already been discussed by many people and set out in full detail; and no doubt you have read all about it. It is stupid, when somebody is defending his own Church, to accuse another one about transitory and inessential things like, for example, in adequacy in the personal life of the clergy, rituals, and such-like. But in Roman Catholicism (as compared to Orthodoxy) there are many basic errors, both from a dogmatic point of view as well as from the point of view of the (spiritual) church life. The [Roman Catholic] point of view about repentance and the practice of Confession is not in accord with the spirit of Christ (as I understand it), and this is connected with an incorrect vision of the work of man’s redemption. There is a certain ‘worldly’, ‘juridical’, approach to resolving these questions. Anomalies and even frankly crude delusions in the moral-ascetic life are accepted as grace-given, and taken as criteria of holiness (for example the phenomenon of the stigmata). And at the same time, the spiritual practices of the Orthodox ascetics are trampled on, ridiculed, and repudiated. Several of the holy Fathers who were more advanced in this noetic activity of inner prayer are treated as particularly inveterate heretics (for example, St. Gregory Palamas.)
You, however, will see that the noetic practice about which the Orthodox ascetic tradition teaches has existed in the Church throughout the centuries. Many of the saints of the Church in the past, up to the time of the schism, wrote about mental prayer, and an even greater number of them put it into practice, reaching the highest degrees of states of grace attainable on earth. Saints John Chrysostom, Gregory the Theologian, Hesychius of Jerusalem (the disciple of Gregory the Theologian at the beginning of the 5th century, d.433, who was already complaining of a ‘diminution and forsaking of noetic work’) John of the Ladder, Barsanuphius the Great, Abba Dorotheos [of Gaza], and others.
The Elder, Father Silouan, forbids us to occupy our mind with analyzing the teachings of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches and the comparison between them. He says that what is more necessary and profitable for us is to pray with a pure mind…. For me the question of the Churches has been definitively resolved – not, though, by means of detailed study and comparison, but by means of prayer. How much I prayed about this only the Lord knows! However, I am now wholly given to the Orthodox Church, on the level of intellectual conviction as well – but it is quite superfluous to explain this in detail…
My desire is that decisive change take place in your soul, so that the question about where the true Church is, and whether really there is such a thing, will no longer preoccupy you nor draw you away from your forward path. This question also comes up in your letter from Paris, where you write that your soul is attracted by Orthodoxy as something you feel at home with, whereas it turns away from Catholicism as from something strange, but indeed, ‘there is, of course, more to it than that’. I believe nonetheless as you do that the Lord will grant you to know the truth.”[7]
“You write ‘I have remained Orthodox in the cultural sense of the term’, but along with that, ‘I have ceased believing in many of the Orthodox dogmas,’ and even ‘My manner of life is not at all ascetic.’
So what does Orthodox culture consist of then? It seems to me that if one rejects the Orthodox Creed and ascetic experience acquired by centuries of life in Christ, all that is left of Orthodox culture is the minor tones of Byzantine chant and Russian four-part singing…
Your words create the impression that you have preferred Protestant liberty to the narrow limits of the Church. ‘By inward struggle I have acquired a certain spiritual freedom.’ In this struggle it is natural reason that has won the victory. The experience of history has shown that natural reason left to itself leads fatally to a perception of the world and a mysticism that are pantheist. And if that takes place in the soul of a Christian who does not actually desire to deny Christ… Leo Tolstoy is a case in point: he reaches a Protestant rationalism or ‘spirituality’ – a mysticism close to pantheistic. One way or another, I have become convinced within myself that rejection of the Church leads to rejection of the preaching of the Apostles. ‘That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life. For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life’ (1 John 1:1-2).
‘The Word became flesh’ (John 1:14). It is precisely this Incarnate Logos – visible, audible, tangible – that the Church preaches in its dogmas. The ultimate concrete Reality. The Body and Blood of Christ in the Liturgy….”[8]
“…I would be happy to hear from you that you are aware how only the spiritual is true reality, and all the rest is like an unreal dream.
In ascetic terminology we can come across expressions which at first sight diverge from the [Church’s] dogmatic teaching, which is actually of course impossible because these two are bound up together. Whoever makes a mistake in dogma will inevitably make a mistake in his inner, moral life too. So without fail, we must adopt the view that the true Church must be true in both the one and the other, because if it is in error somewhere in the one, it will inevitably be in error also in the other.
Of course here I am referring to the Church as a whole. Individual members of the Church may, while they live in the Church, be ignorant of many things, and even be mistaken in something, without however losing their salvation because of their incomplete knowledge. And in fact, knowledge is not accessible to any one man in its fulness; it belongs to the whole Church.
What I mean by this is that for salvation it is necessary to be a member of the true Church. Outside of her it is not possible for man to receive either true grace or true knowledge [in their fulness].[9]
References: * While the grace of the Holy Spirit is ‘everywhere present and fillest all things’, the Holy Spirit only enters man’s heart and operates in man for his purification, illumination and theosis through the Mysteries of the Orthodox Church. For this reason, the Fathers taught that the grace of God works work in the lives of those outside of the Church to bring them into the Church, while also stating that there is no grace in sacraments performed in outside of the Church by those in schism and heresy. For more on this quote from St. Sophrony and the distinction between the general activity of grace in all of creation versus the unique work of the Holy Spirit in the Mysteries of the Orthodox Church, see chapter 19 of “On the Reception of the Heterodox into the Orthodox Church: The Patristic Consensus and Criteria” from Uncut Mountain Press. - Editor.