5164KRJ5KZL._SX305_BO1,204,203,200_A Theological Journey through Time

The Russian Church and the Papacy is a diamond hidden in the rough. Wherever you stand on the conservative Christian theological spectrum, I believe you can profit by considering the arguments made in this book and the history of Christianity it tells. Its name might suggest that its scope is more limited than it is in reality. This book is not about any particular historical period or event, but encompasses the historical development of the church, highlighting the historical trends and interplay between the Byzantine East, and the Roman West. Particularly if you are a Protestant Christian on the verge of leaving Protestantism but unsure whether to go East or West, you should read this book and consider the arguments it makes.

On the other hand you may be a Protestant Christian fully satisfied with your Christian faith tradition, in no crisis of conscience over its legitimacy, maybe even somewhat critical of the more ancient branches of the faith. While you may have significant criticisms of both Catholicism and Byzantine Christianity that this book does not address, it is still an enlightening exploration of the history and debates between the oldest denominations of Christianity that will allow you to understand where your Catholic or Eastern Orthodox brother is coming from and dialogue intelligently with him. The book is also useful for Catholics who desire to dialogue meaningfully with Eastern Orthodox friends or seeking a better reason than “I was born into it” for espousing Catholicism instead of Eastern Orthodoxy. In fact, this slim volume directly addresses the claims of one of the chief contenders (in many Christians’ opinion) against Roman Catholicism for the fullness of Christian faith and practice, Byzantine Christianity, or Eastern Orthodoxy.

Christianity By the Numbers

Screen Shot 2012-10-20 at 1.01.04 PM

Back in 2012, out of curiosity, I made up a list of the largest Christian faith communities with commonly acknowledged human leaders (whether one person or a regular council) and doctrinal unity, and their numbers at the time based on publicly available Wikipedia information and posted it on my blog. I imagine the picture has changed somewhat, but cannot have altered too radically in a mere four years. What we see is that Roman Catholicism is by far the most popular group of the planet’s Christians who acknowledge a single living leader or council of leaders aside from Jesus Christ himself. But Catholicism’s closest contender, numerically speaking, was Russian Orthodoxy, with roughly one tenth as many members. If someone else wants to run the numbers as they currently stand, I’d be happy to know the updated situation.

None of this data, of course, conclusively prove the true Faith. At one time, I read somewhere, it is believed that there were actually more Arian heretics than Trinitarian Christians. What these findings do, in my opinion, is shift the burden of proof to those whose view is sharply in the minority. If most of the people in the room disagree with you, it is only fair that your evidence must be that much better to persuade them and yourself. After all, what better claim do you have to being able to determine the truth than your fellows do? All other things being equal, like G.K. Chesterton, I am a democrat in the classic sense of the term. The Russian Church and the Papacy speaks directly against the next most popular view to Catholicism in favor of the Catholic position, and that makes its contribution to the age-old debate that much more valuable.

The Russian Church and the Papacy‘s Influence on Me

As those of you know who have read my mini-bio, I have not always been a Roman Catholic Christian. My Protestant parents prayed over me even in my mother’s womb, but I was not baptized until I was eight years old. Growing up, I enjoyed the benefits of morning, evening and mealtime prayer, and a father who was always willing to talk with me over matters of faith (and anything else), who did his best not to be dogmatic past what he felt the plain meaning of the Bible communicated. I would not be where I now am theologically without this foundation of reasoned dialogue.

The Russian Church and the Papacy was one of the most significant books I read in college that built on this foundation. When through studying Church history and our Christian literary tradition I decided that I could not remain consistently a Protestant, without being unable to make a reasoned defense for the hope that is in me, The Russian Church and the Papacy helped to settle the debate within me over whether to become Catholic or Byzantine. Intellectually speaking, I was unable to say why historically I thought the Roman Catholic faith had any firm advantage to Eastern Orthodoxy before I read this book. Beforehand I was leaning toward Catholicism due to its more universal acceptance and culture, but I also liked Orthodoxy since doctrinally it was closer to my native Protestantism and it also enjoyed deep historical roots and apostolic succession. Once I understood the history between the East and West, and reading Soloviev’s interpretation of that history, the debate changed, and my understanding of the important points in that debate changed as well.

Strengths of the Book

The Russian Church and the Papacy handles well the history of the Great Schism (A.D. 1054, one of those dates everyone should keep tucked in the back of his mind) between the Eastern and Western Church and subsequent attempts to heal this wound. It also delves into the nature and evolution of the office of the Papacy on the one hand. On the other hand it addresses the disturbing Caesaropapism (The tendency to combine the secular and religious authority in the person of one ruler: Think King Henry VIII for a Western example.) and recurrent heresy of Byzantine Christianity’s historical center in Constantinople, now Istanbul, the capital of a majority Muslim state, while also addressing the continuity of the Eastern Church in Russia. The Russian Church and the Papacy elucidates the need for some kind of governing office for Christians like the Papacy, and the danger in turning to secular governments for this office.

Finally, Soloviev repeatedly comes out and confesses his belief in the true identity of the Roman Catholic Church as a providentially independent counterbalance to overreaching governments who have repeatedly tried to co-opt and manipulate the Church to do their bidding. Soloviev makes no attempt to hide his views on this matter, and his identity as a former member of the Russian aristocracy, shunned and disenfranchised for his opinions and faith, makes this book a powerful witness for the importance of Truth and of defending what you believe no matter the material cost.

For a similar (though not identical) theological argument, “Why I Didn’t Convert to Eastern Orthodoxy” by Fr. Brian Harrison hosted on Catholic Answers online magazine also demonstrates what the author perceives as philosophical flaws in the Byzantine argument against papal claims to authority that form the major material separating East from West. The arguments therein probably also would have swayed me in favor of Catholicism over Eastern Orthodoxy, had I been exposed to the article at the time of my conversion. Again, wherever you stand on the theological spectrum, it is good to know the lines of argument made on all sides and to seek understanding with our brothers in Christ, even when we cannot at present fully agree.

Read it.

My theology blog: Defense for the Hope