2

            While the Roman Catholic Church can trace its bishops' lineage, it cannot demonstrate an unchanged faith or unchanged practices, for it does not adhere to the Apostolic teaching or Apostolic practices. After the Latin Church severed itself from the true Universal Church in 1054, the West entered into the Middle Ages, which marked the gradual transition between the ancient Christian worldview and the modern godless one. During that period, and continuing into the present time, the Latin Church made many deviations and changes from the ancient Christian faith and ancient Christian practices going back to the time of the Apostles.

            One of Rome's many innovations without Apostolic foundation is its proclamation of papal infallibility, a doctrine that caused the Christian world to reel in shock. According to this teaching, when the pope speaks ex cathedra (“from the throne” [of Peter]), that is, officially, concerning matters of faith and morals, he is incapable of speaking falsehood. However, papal infallibility was vehemently denied by popes and faithful laymen alike for almost nineteen centuries, it was not invented until 1870. Moreover, as chapter six of this book notes, papal infallibility continues to be denied by the very Church that invented it. It is an indisputable fact that many Roman popes were heretics and that they spoke falsehood when making ex cathedra pronouncements concerning faith and morals. The Roman Catholic Church itself admits this fact, and in this admission, it altogether negates this false teaching. (To this time, papal infallibility is denied in the Catholic Church. For example, according to an in-depth survey by the National Catholic Reporter dated September 11, 1987, only 26% of Roman Catholics in this country believe in the infallibility of the pope).

            Of further note, while Roman apologists make much of the Apostle Peter's supposedly exalted position, Holy Scripture makes it plain that Peter himself made grave errors both before and after Christ's death and Resurrection. The second chapter of Galatians shows that Peter spoke falsehood at the Apostolic Council held at Jerusalem, that he had to justify his actions before the Church, that Paul rebuked Peter “to his face” sternly and publicly, and that as a result, Peter turned from his erring ways. Clearly, there is neither “papal supremacy” nor “papal infallibility” here. Given the fact that Peter, who the Latin Church proclaims was its first pope, spoke falsehood at the Apostolic Council, Rome's argument of papal infallibility collapses. As chapter six additionally goes on to point out, the Roman Catholic Church is presently involved in a frenzied effort to explain its fraudulent papal claims in the face of a growing awareness among its clergy and laity that these claims are impossible to defend.

            Some years back, a Catholic seminarian struggled with Rome's papal claims. When he asked the seminary's rector if Rome's claims were valid, the rector replied that they were not. The seminarian then asked that, given the fact that the crux of Rome's claim to be the true Church hinged upon the matter of its papal claims, which of the two Churches actually is the ancient Church going back two thousand years — Rome or Orthodoxy? The rector replied that when the positions of Rome and Orthodoxy are examined, Rome's claim is altogether spurious and falsified, while Orthodoxy's claim is entirely valid. To the seminarian's query as to how the rector could remain in the Catholic Church if he did not believe it was the true Church, the rector replied that he was comfortable with his spirituality and that his family expected him to be Catholic. The seminarian could no longer feel comfortable, however, and he began a search that eventually brought him to the Orthodox Church and its priesthood. His conversion is but one of thousands of others like it, for when exposed to Orthodoxy's ancient teachings, people come to understand that the Eastern Orthodox Church alone has not distorted or falsified any single doctrine of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Christ. They also understand that the same Orthodox Church is that very Church that has maintained the same exact faith delivered to the Apostles.

            There were myriad deviations without Apostolic foundation that developed in the West over the course of its thousand-year separation from Orthodoxy. In addition to the doctrinal divergences, there were also departures from Apostolic practices as well. One of these changes involves the sign of the Cross, an important practice to examine.

An Orthodox Christian makes the sign of the Cross by putting the thumb and first and second fingers of the right hand together, which represent the three Persons of the Holy Trinity. At the same time, the fourth and fifth fingers are folded against the palm, and these represent the two natures of Christ. Then, in keeping with the most ancient tradition of the Holy Apostles and Holy Fathers, he or she touches the tips of the thumb and first two fingers to the forehead (for the blessing of the mind), and then the abdomen (for the blessing of one's internal feelings). From there, the crossbar is made by going from the right shoulder to the left shoulder (for the blessing of one's bodily strength). In this gesture, one affirms one's faith in Christ's sacrifice on the Cross at Golgotha, and affirms one's belief in the Holy Trinity and in the human and divine natures of Christ — that is, the basic dogmas of the Orthodox Christian faith. In the lives of the saints from Apostolic times down to the present, there are many references that bear witness to the tremendous spiritual strength and security that are given to a Christian through this ancient tradition of crossing oneself.