Library › Eastern Patriarchs and the Nonjurors › Correspondence (1716–1725)

Correspondence (1716–1725)

Eastern Patriarchs and the Nonjurors, ed. Williams, 1868

4. No. 4: The Patriarchs’ Answers to the Proposals

The Answers of the Orthodox of the East to the Proposals sent from Britain for an Union and Agreement with the Oriental Church.

Since all Orthodox and pious Christians, and especially the high Priests and Shepheards of the Church, ought not only to believe with the heart unto righteousness, but also to confess with the mouth unto salvation¹ according to the holy Apostle, and moreover to be always ready to give an answer to every man that asketh a reason of the hope and faith that is in us willingly and with meekness²; We have thought fit by the assistance of God to put in writing some Answers to the propositions lately laid before us on the part of the religious Remnant of the Primitive Orthodoxy in Britain, in compliance with their desire: Wherefore since we are commanded by the Scriptures so to do, we thus begin our Answers to them by the help of God, and say, that:

Our holy unspotted and immaculate Faith, the faith of the holy and orthodox oriental Church, has never admitted any Doctrine foreign and disagreeable to that of our Lord and Saviour: but always holds and adheres to that and that only which she has received from our Saviour Christ Himself in the holy and divine Writings. That is to say, what the Apostles have taught, and the holy and œcumenical Synods have decreed, confirm’d and deliver’d to us, which to this time we both have preserved and do preserve without change or variation. So that this is indeed the only true, religious and right faith; the Hereticks themselves and those who differ from us being unable to say any thing, or to open their mouths and speak against it, or to pick any quarrel with it. For it is, and it continues undefiled and most pure. But that the Faith of the Eastern Orthodox, (who were formerly called Hellenes, but now Graïcoi, and new Romans from New Rome) is the only true and uncorrupted faith, may be plainly proved by many demonstrative Arguments. To omit the greatest part of them, we shall offer only three strong proofs of the truth of our proposition; namely first, that it is exactly agreeable to the Doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in no respect different from it, but may be proved from the Holy Writings themselves: for whatsoever we say, preach, and teach, we find it all without the least variation in the Holy Writings; being the same which the Holy Apostles taught and deliver’d both by word and in writing, and which the holy œcumenical Synods have decreed and confirm’d; other Religions being wholly unable to prove what they teach from the Divine Writings. For, if they teach Doctrines contrary to them, how should they prove them out of them? For the Holy Scriptures do by no means contradict themselves. To instance in the Papists. How should they prove the practice of giving the Faithful the Sacrament of the Eucharist in one kind only, and not under both the species of bread and wine, from the Holy Scriptures, which assert the contrary? For, our Lord said, Take, eat, and drink ye all of it, and under both kinds He delivered to His holy Apostles His venerable Body for food, and His life-giving Blood for drink. But they, as if they would be wiser than the Lord Himself, say that it is superfluous to give the Laity the Cup, because the Blood is contain’d in the Sacramental Body of the Lord; as if our Lord had not been aware of this, when he foresaw it and said, Drink ye of it, adding the word all, that they might not deprive any of the faithful of the participation of this Divine and vivifying Liquor. Or how can they prove out of the Scriptures, the pretended Monarchy of the Pope, and that he is head of the Church, when the Apostle says that Christ is the head of the Church³? Or how can they prove that the Spirit proceeds from the Son, when the Lord expresly says, The Spirit of truth, which proceeds from the Father⁴? To make which Doctrines agree with their opinion, they corrupt the divine Books, adding some things and taking away others, as they did in the sacred Creed of the second Holy Œcumenical Council, making themselves a Faith according to their will, and believing in those corruptions of which themselves are the Authors. To mention no more, that we may not be tedious. They act like all other hereticks; but it is not so with us: for we preserve the Doctrine of the Lord uncorrupted, and firmly adhere to the Faith he delivered to us, and keep it free from blemish and diminution, as a Royal Treasure, and a monument of great price, neither adding any thing, nor taking any thing from it. Therefore also we are able to prove it out of the Holy Writings, as the fountains of it from whence it springs and waters every Member of our Catholick Apostolical Oriental Orthodox Church, and whence our whole Christian Orthodox Body is enliven’d. The second Proof appears from hence, that the true and most pure faith of our Lord Jesus Christ continues only with us Orthodox Greeks, the Oriental Christians, according to Evangelical direction, and is by nobody else preserv’d unadulterated. For, since the Orthodox Faith of our Lord was some time since, namely before Luther appeared, to be found among no other people under Heaven, (for they had all lost it, Hereticks having no pretence to it, as is evident and acknowledged by all, but neither was it to be found among the Papists, as Luther and our Church agree, nor can the Luthero-Calvinists say it was preserv’d by them, because they were not yet in the world) it must therefore of necessity be said, either that the Faith of our Lord was wholly vanish’d out of the world, which it is impious even to think, since our Lord says, that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it⁵, or else it must be altogether owned that it was preserv’d and shone only among us Orthodox Oriental Grecian Christians. Which as formerly, so now also we maintain without change and variation, and are ready even to shed our blood for it; and we give thanks to God that He has not left us, nor suffer’d our Faith to fail, which we hold and will hold without innovation to the end of the World unto His glory. We have a third proof that our Oriental Faith is the only true Faith, and that it is the same which was preached by our Saviour, and confirm’d by the holy Apostles and the sacred Œcumenical Councils, and that beside this and this only there is no other Faith: We have, I say, a mark, a most certain criterion and proof, which is this: that other Heresies, and those who err from this Faith, and run away with foreign prejudices and believe contrary to truth, leave no stone unturn’d to shew their agreement with this our Faith, the only true one: and when they have so done, they think they have done every thing, and shall be esteem’d orthodox by other people, and especially by the more ignorant, and that this method will make their Doctrines acceptable to many. For, unknowing, vulgar men hearing that they are conformable to those of the Oriental Orthodox Greeks, and not knowing the Truth, easily receive them, and submit to these as true. But when they have learned how opposite they are to the Doctrines of the Eastern Orthodox, immediately they fly from them as from a poisonous serpent. We have a plain instance of this in the Luthero-Calvinists, of whom the bolder part, to make their own erroneous Doctrines acceptable to many, had the assurance to belye our Orthodox Church, as if she believed and held the same opinions with themselves. To which end they some time since made a Book entituling it the Confession of Faith of the Orthodox Oriental Greeks, as if publish’d by Cyril the Patriarch of Constantinople, the learned Lucar; whereas he had not the least knowledge of it, but rather privately and publickly taught the contrary to all the fictions of that lying Confession; thinking by such contrivances and misrepresentations, to deceive their own friends, and especially the more ignorant, and if possible those of us who were not perfectly acquainted with the sacred venerable and divine Doctrines among us. But it was all to no purpose. For, our Oriental orthodox Christians, seeing that forged Confession, and reading what they knew contain’d foreign, false, and impious Doctrines, immediately fell upon it, exposed and took it to pieces, and made the deceit that was wrapt up in it visible to every body; and declared, both that we do not believe the Doctrine there taught, but maintain the pure and divinely originated Faith, and not as that forged and false Confession misrepresents us; and also that Lucar was not such a man, as is plain from his writings and homilies and sermons and instructions preserved among us even to this time, written with his own hand. Since therefore our Orthodox, oriental, and apostolical Church does not only not admit the Doctrine of Hereticks, but also puts from her the very suspicion of it, according to that saying, “be not regardless of calumny tho’ it be false,” therefore we called a Council, and condemned Lucar upon this suspicion, and deliver’d over that forged book to Anathema and to the fire; and drove away the foreign and false doctrines contain’d in it far from our Orthodox pale, and condemn’d them. Such a monstrous Calumny as this, did the Luthero-Calvinists forge against us, and published it in order to deceive many: but it was to no purpose, for, our Eastern orthodox Faith is illustrious, and superior to all slander, and shines every where like the sun, and cannot therefore be darken’d and obscured by such clouds as these, but easily dispels them all and scatters them far off. Therefore, many among us fired with a divine zeal, wrote many books against the Articles of that fictitious and false Confession of Lucar, and chiefly the celebrated Patriarch of Jerusalem, the Lord Dositheus, and Meletius the ornament of divines, who also has confuted those Articles, and broken and dissolved them like a spider’s web, and plainly defeated the false Doctrines of the Luthero-Calvinists, in a large Book which was published in Bucurestie in Ugrovalachia, in the year 1690, which those who wou’d know more of this matter may take into their hands and read. These Treatises were ill received by the more violent of the Luthero-Calvinists, but the moderator part of them took a contrary method; for, they endeavour’d to shew that their false doctrines were the same with those which were believed and preached by the Eastern Orthodox. For the confutation therefore of this falsehood, an Orthodox Confession was drawn up by us faithful, largely expounding and particularly describing our divinely originated doctrines; which was printed at the charge of that most holy man of blessed memory, Panagiota Nicusius great interpreter of the Turkish Monarchy, and was afterwards enlarged and strengthen’d with the testimonies of the Holy Fathers, by the learned Bessarion Macre a Joannine, and printed at Bucurestie at the charge of Constantine Brancovano of blessed memory, then Governour of all Ugrovalachia. From whence every man that has a regard for Truth, may know and be fully satisfied, that our Orthodox, Oriental, Catholick, and Apostolical Church holds no Doctrine different from that of our Lord, or displeasing to God; and has neither borrowed from any other hereticks nor from the Scismatical Papists, nor from the Luthero-Calvinists themselves, but always holds and preserves those doctrines pure and uncorrupted, which from the beginning she has been taught by the Holy Writings, and has received from the Apostles and the seven divine and holy Œcumenical Councils. Beside this another short Exposition of the Faith was compiled by us Eastern Orthodox, and sent some time since to the Luthero-Calvinists upon their desiring to be informed what was the Faith of the Oriental Church. For, many false accounts had been imposed upon them; some saying that the Eastern Orthodox Church agreed with the Luthero-Calvinists; and others, that it was in union with the Papists. A monstrous slander! This short Exposition of our Holy Faith we have added, together with another more compendious, and that a Synodical one, at the end of this writing, that every one, who shall make enquiry after, and be desirous to learn, the divine doctrines of our Oriental Church, which we believe and hold as true and indubitable, may by reading them receive light and information. Thus for them. But those are more docile, and lovers of the right unspotted Faith of the Oriental Orthodox, who knowing well that the Luthero-Calvinistical and Popish Doctrines are not agreeable to our Orthodox Faith, but rather contrary to it, and far remote from Truth, reject both the one and the other of the patrons of these sentiments as enemies to that and to God, and would be united to the Orthodox Oriental Church, and agree with it, and coming to themselves would establish a coalition, and be made one Spirit with us, so as to have one head even Christ, and to acknowledge one Church; Who also do well, in that they have sent us some Propositions to procure an Union with us. There are indeed some difficulties attending this affair: for, tho’ these Gentlemen are benevolent and fervent lovers of Truth, yet being prepossessed with some old prejudices nourished and grown up with them, they cannot easily part with them. Therefore, also they are disposed to receive some of our holy Doctrines with readiness, but in others they require condescension: and some opinions not conformable to Truth, which long prejudice has bred in them, they will by no means part with: for length of custom has rivited them in their minds. Upon this account they desire emendations, answers and corrections to the Proposals they have made. Now the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th Proposals are the same.

Proposal 1

That the Church of Jerusalem be acknowledged as the true Mother-Church and principle of Ecclesiastical Unity, whence all the other Churches have been derived, and to which therefore they owe a peculiar regard.

Proposal 2

That a Principality of order be in consequence hereof allow’d to the Bishop of Jerusalem above all other Christian Bishops.

Proposal 3

That the Churches of Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople, with the Bishops thereof, his Collegues, be recognized as to all their ancient Canonical Rights, privileges and preeminences.

Proposal 4

That to the Bishop and Patriarch of Constantinople in particular, an equality of honour with that of the Bishop of Rome be given; and that the very same powers and privileges be acknowledged to reside in them both alike.

Proposal 5

That the Catholick Remnant of the British Churches, acknowledging that they first received their Christianity from such as came forth from the Church of Jerusalem, before ever they were made subject to the Bishop of Rome and that Church; and professing the same holy Catholick Faith deliver’d by the Apostles, and explain’d in the Councils of Nice and Constantinople; be reciprocally acknowledged as a part of the Catholick Church, in Communion with the Apostles, with the holy Fathers of those Councils, and with their Successors.

Answer

To these five Proposals we shall give one answer, because they relate to one point, namely the order of the five Patriarchal Thrones. For, they who call themselves the Remnant of Primitive Orthodoxy in Britain, would (if this be their meaning, which will be shewn to be otherwise hereafter) have them be dispossessed of the situation given them by Orthodox Princes and confirm’d by divine and holy Synods, and be settled in a new and different order; so that neither the Roman nor Constantinopolitan Throne should any longer have the preference, but that of Jerusalem. But somebody may thus bespeak them: If, Gentlemen, the subject of your union with the Orthodox Oriental Church, be matter of Doctrine and Holy Faith, to what purpose sho’d the order of the Patriarchal Thrones be changed, which can neither one way nor the other be any advantage or detriment to religion? It wou’d rather create division than conciliate an Union; for, it has the face of an Innovation; whereas our Oriental Church, the immaculate Bride of the Lord, has never at any time admitted any Novelty, nor will at all allow of any; but observes that saying, Remove not the ancient Landmarks which thy Fathers have placed⁶. And why wou’d they have the preference given to the throne of Jerusalem? Because, say they, from thence came out the Evangelical Law of Grace and the Truth, according to that Prophecy, Out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem⁷. That also was the scene of our Lord’s Passion and Resurrection. Now by these words they wou’d seem wiser and more provident than those who placed the Thrones in this order, as if they had acted rashly and unadvisedly in making such an appointment, which God forbid. For, the Authors and Legislators of this order, were divine men, of extensive knowledge and judgement, and had the Spirit of the Lord; nor can we pretend to be better or more sagacious than they, or to overturn or, in the least disorder, their wise settlements, lest we be found to fight against the saints and against God; for, says He, Whosoever despises you despises Me⁸. Now these are the holy members that make up the Church of Christ.

Some time since, the Pope of Rome being deceived by the malice of the Devil, and falling into strange novel Doctrines, revolted from the unity of Holy Church, and was cut off, and is now like a shatter’d rag of a sail of the spiritual vessel of the Church, which formerly consisted and was made up of five parts; four of which continue in the same state of unity and agreement, and by these we easily and calmly sail thro’ the ocean of this Life, and without difficulty pass over the waves of heresy, til we arrive within the haven of salvation: But he who is the fifth part, being seperated from the entire sail, and remaining by himself in a small piece of the torn sheet, is unable to perform his voyage; and therefore we behold him at a distance tossed with constant waves and tempests, til he return to our Catholick, apostolical, oriental, immaculate Faith, and be reinserted in the sail from whence he was broken off. For, this wou’d make him secure, and able to weather the spiritual storms and tempests that beset him. Thus therefore the Holy Church of Christ with us, subsists on four pillars, namely the four Patriarchs, and continues firm and immoveable. The first in order is the Patriarch of Constantinople, the second the Pope of Alexandria, the third of Antioch, and the fourth of Jerusalem. With these also in constituting and supporting the Church, concur the independent Archbishops, viz. the Archbishop of Muscovy, who is also Patriarch of all Russia, and the Archbishop of Iberia in Asia, who is by the Georgians emphatically called Catholick; also the Archbishop of Old Justiniana called the Archbishop of the Acrides; and the Archbishops of Cyprus, of Neo-Cesarea, and Pekia, and innumerable Bishops and Metropolitans subject to them; who to this day with one consent adhere firmly to and preserve the true doctrines of our oriental, catholick, and apostolical Church unalter’d and undeminish’d, without any innovation or corruption. If therefore those who call themselves the Remnant of Primitive Religion in Britain, wou’d join themselves to the Orthodox Oriental Church, and be united to us, why do they endeavour to subvert the ancient order of the Patriarchs; which would be neither beneficial nor hurtful to the Faith, and wou’d besides oppose the direction of those ancient and venerable persons who deliverd this order to the Church? For, if Unity and Concord be their aim, they ought to permit the Ordinances of those Holy Men, which are such as no ways contradict the divine and sacred Gospel, to continue undisturbed in the same situation they were before; but not to make differences and schisms, observing that saying of the Apostle, I exhort you, says he, my Bretheren, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you⁹. But if those who are called the Remnant of Primitive Orthodoxy, out of any particular affection of piety to the holy and apostolical Throne of Jerusalem, would prefer and esteem it above the rest, we have no objection to it; for we ourselves, tho’ for order sake we number it in the fourth place, yet pay it the utmost reverence and respect; and honour it as the place where the light of Religion and Salvation arose; whence the Redemption of Men and the preaching of the Gospel shone out unto all the world; and because there our Lord suffer’d for us, and there shed His precious Blood on the Cross for our Salvation, to deliver us from the servitude and oppression of the Devil: And if this be the desire of the pious remnant in Britain, if that desire proceeds from a good intention, we comply, we grant and allow it; only let them not despise the ancient order, nor accuse it of error, nor reject it; for, it was rightly and wisely and with much deliberation made by Princes of immortal memory, and by divine Fathers, as is plain from their holy Canons. But lastly, we must take notice, that if it be their intention that the whole Eastern Church should observe this new order, and not that which we have received from the holy Canons, we cannot at all agree to it. But if on the contrary, they mean that (when they have submitted themselves to the most blessed Patriarch of Jerusalem, and have chosen him exclusive of all others for their Shepheard and Patriarch, and would be united to his Diocese and Jurisdiction,) the Orthodox Christians in subjection to the Jerusalem Throne, and those who are called the Remnant of the Primitive religious Faith in Britain, should be and be called one rational fold, under his government and direction, and one Diocese; then it is right, lawful, and canonical, that in Britain, as well as in Jerusalem, they should mention him at the Altar by his Canonical Title, as being then rational sheep of his sacred fold, and subjects of his Patriarchate: for who else should they make mention of, when he alone is their Chief Shepheard and Patriarch? In this sense therefore, we don’t only not gainsay, but commend and applaud their proposal, and receive it as lawful and canonical: but it is necessary also that he should either immediately or by deputation, consecrate the British Bishops by the Grace of the Holy Spirit, no other Patriarch but that of Jerusalem daring to ordain in Britain, or to enter upon his Jurisdiction.

The sixth Proposal is in these words

That the said Catholick Remnant shall hereupon oblige themselves to revive what they have long profess’d to wish for, the ancient Godly discipline of the Church, and which they have already actually begun to restore.

Answer

We are to seek for the terms upon which those who are called the Catholick Remnant of the Britains, promise to revive the ancient Discipline, unless it be, as they say, that we the Orientalists should subvert the early and long establish’d order of the Patriarchal Thrones, which is altogether impossible. If this be their meaning, and not as we have just observed, that the Patriarch of Jerusalem should have the Supremacy over the Britains only, (for, that we look upon as right and lawful,) but not over our whole Church, because that would by consequence be to subject the Constantinopolitan to the Jerusalem Patriarch, which would seem a contradiction to ancient direction. But if the Patriarch of Jerusalem is to be look’d upon as Primus to the Britains only, as part of his Diocese, and acknowledging him alone for their Pastor and Patriarch, who from thenceforward is to have the jurisdiction over them, because they are to be made subject to him only, and to become his spiritual sheep, this we embrace and receive as right and agreeable to the laws. For then also he, and he alone, shall consecrate the British Bishops, and Britain shall be called, as it will be in fact, his proper Diocese; nor shall there be any difference between that and the Jerusalem Diocese, but both shall be esteem’d one and the same, as being united. And all that are to be subject to him, even all the British Islands, shall give him publick honour in the Church, and his Title shall be promulged by the Bishops there in all the British cities, in the same manner as at Jerusalem and in all his Diocese. And all Ecclesiastical questions that shall arise in Britain, shall consequently be submitted to his inspection and judgement, as the proper Patriarch of it. But if they are such as need a Synodical Examination, then they shall be refer’d to a Council of the Universal Church, and be determined by it. As to what follows, we can’t conceive what kind of discipline it is they wou’d instruct us in: if it be the Wisdom of the World, it is that which S. Paul has excluded from the pale of the Catholick Oriental Church, when he said, Let no man spoil you thro’ philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ¹⁰: And again, The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God¹¹. There is then no necessity for this qualification. But as for curiosity, and erudition, or subtilty of mind, if we were desirous of this kind of knowledge, we have Aristotle’s Works among us, and other Philosophers with their Commentators and expositors; and there are schools also in many of our Cities and Countries, in which they are taught and explain’d, whence we may reap a great harvest of Philosophy. However, we promise them a thousand advantages of probity and goodwill, tho’ we are not so zealous in a matter which is not necessary to Salvation. But if they mean not the Wisdom of the World, but Theology, then we declare that, if it be agreeable to our Orthodox Religion, we are willing to receive it: but if it be dissonant and disagreeable to the Orthodox Oriental Faith, we shall crown it with wool and send it back to those to whom it belongs; and will as long as we live, firmly adhere to primitive and evangelical Doctrine. Only we say this; that if the religious Remnant of the Britains do sincerely and without deceit desire to unite themselves to our Oriental catholic and apostolical Church, God be thank’d, who also assist and perfect this very great and unexpected good: for then we will, with meekness and brotherly love, mutually teach and be taught by each other, both all holy righteous and divine doctrines, and also the precepts of worldly literature, according to the differences of science deliver’d down to us in many and various books; some of which have never yet been publish’d, but are preserved by us in divers temples, monasteries and schools, and especially in the great Libraries of Alexandria, Jerusalem and Constantinople; which from thenceforward we will have in common between us: And there shall be an Union under God, not in any other points, but in necessary and salvable Doctrines; in the confession of which, we have a firm hope of salvation, but in denying of them do manifestly endanger our souls, that is, when we teach such Doctrines as are opposite to the unerring doctrines of our Lord. But let not the good and worthy Britons have such an opinion of us, as if we were wholly destitute of our ancient native and domestick Literature; part of which, even to this day, is by God’s assistance, better preserved among us than among some others. Nor let any censorious person impute this declaration of ours to vain-glory, for we speak what is true; having even at this time, as we said, by the goodness of God, schools and academies in many places, where sacred and profane Learning is with much labour and industry taught in Greek, in all its parts; the Doctrine of the Fathers being the rule for our Divinity-instructions, and Aristotle for Philosophy. We desire therefore to unite with you, O ye religious remnant of the Britons; not that we may possess your learning and wisdom, or grow more knowing in profane Literature, (for that, as we have often said, is by the Providence of God, to be found in some measure among us,) but that both of us may have one Church, to the glory of God; and that those who for a long time have lost the Orthodox oriental and unspotted Faith, may again recover it as formerly in the times of the first and second General Councils, and may be one with us of the Eastern Church; and that all men and angels may rejoice with us; and Religion, which has long been a stranger to those parts, may again shine out; and there may be a harmony and agreement between us and you in Charity and Faith, as shall be pleasing to God, to Angels, and to the Saints. It is upon this account, that we are so eager for this Union and coalition, and not for any carnal, frail, and vain lucre, which God forbid. And let this suffice for this Proposition.

The seventh Proposal is in these Words

That in order still to a nearer Union, there be as near a conformity in Worship established, as is consistent with the different circumstances and customs of Nations, and with the rights of particular Churches in that case allowed of.

Answer

This Proposal seems obscure and involved. For, what rights of particular Churches, what customs of Nations, and what present circumstances of things are we to understand? These want clearing, to be perfectly apprehended. But this we say; that if, by God’s permission, the wish’d-for Union be effected, then all these things shall be settled; so those customs, rights, and circumstances be not altogether foreign and diametrically opposite to each other, and such as may make a breach in the desired Union. For, the Customs of the Orthodox ought to be grave and laudable, not ridiculous and contemptible, nor such as may give the ignorant an occasion of scoffing and mockery. But neither can the Circumstances of things be any hindrance to a religious Faith, and a right Judgment. Let us not, says the Gospel of Christ, be ashamed of His Cross; for according to David, we must speak before Kings and rulers and not be confounded¹², as he did.

Proposal 8

The eighth Proposal promises immediately to restore the most ancient English Liturgy to daily use, and to reject that which is now used by the English. For, this they say, is disagreeable to the Oriental orthodox Liturgy; but that, as it is more ancient, so it more nearly approaches to the manner of the Oriental Church, than the Liturgy now in use among them: and this they will do with such proper additions and alterations, as may be agreed on to render it still more conformable both to that and to the primitive standard.

Answer

To this we answer, That the Oriental orthodox Church acknowledges but one Liturgy, the same which was deliver’d down by the Apostles, but written by the first Bishop of Jerusalem, James the brother of God, and afterwards abbreviated upon account of its length, by the great Father Basil Archbishop of Cesaria in Cappadocia, and after that again epitomized by John the goldentongued Patriarch of Constantinople; which from the times of Basil and Chrysostom until now, the Oriental orthodox Church receives and uses every where, and by them administers the unbloody Sacrifice in every Church of the Orthodox. It is proper therefore, that those, who are called the Remnant of primitive piety, should when they are united to us, make use of these, that in this point also there be no discord between us; but that they, as well as we, should on proper days officiate by the Liturgy of S. Basil, and daily by that of Chrysostom. As for the English Liturgy, we are unacquainted with it, having never either seen or read it; but we have some suspicion of it, because many and various Heresies Schisms and Sects have arisen up in those parts, lest the hereticks should have introduced into it any corruption or deviation from the right Faith. Upon this account it is necessary we should both see and read it; and then either approve of it as right, or reject it as disagreeable to our unspotted Faith. When therefore we have consider’d it, if it needs correction we will correct it; and if possible, will give it the sanction of a genuine form. But what occasion have those for any other Liturgy, who have the true and sincere one of the divine Father Chrysostom; which is made use of in all the Oriental Churches of the Orthodox Greeks, Russians, Iberians and Arabians, and many other orthodox nations? For, if they, who are called the Remnant of Primitive Piety, will receive this, they will thereby be more intimately united, and more nearly related to us. For, the people don’t so much look upon the heart as the appearance, and what is publickly and openly transacted; and if they discover any disconformity to the customs they have been used to, they are immediately animated to hatred, to aversion and revolt.

Proposal 9

The ninth Proposal promises that several of the homilies of the holy Father Chrysostom, and other Oriental Fathers’ works shall be translated into English, and be read in the publick Assemblies.

Answer

This we don’t only receive but commend, as what will be to excellent purpose; for by this means, the readers of them will find benefit to their souls. For, at present those Homilies can be serviceable to none but the Greeks and Latins; but then they will be of use to those who are ignorant of those languages, and know only the English tongue; if so be, they shall be translated fairly and sincerely, without any addition or diminution, or any alteration whatsoever, but faithfully and exactly.

Proposal 10 and Answer

The substance of the tenth Proposal is, that prayers and supplications, be made by the Orthodox Remnant in Britain, for the Oriental Orthodox, and contrariwise by these for them. This, upon the effecting and establishing a mutual Agreement in Doctrine and Discipline, shall be allow’d and observed; and both parties shall be publickly commemorated by each other.

Proposal 11 and Answer

The eleventh Proposal is much the same with the tenth; so we have the same sentiments of it, and the same answer to make to it: and will agree to it, if so be the querents will consent to the divine and holy articles of our pure Faith.

Proposal 12 and Answer

As to the circular and communicatory Letters mentioned in the twelfth Proposal, we say, that we will transmit to them in writing the Decrees of our Synods; and in like manner will receive their publick and Synodical determinations, and read them carefully over; and if they be agreeable to our Oriental orthodox Faith, will both acknowledge and confirm them.

After this, those who are called the Remnant of the Primitive orthodox Church in Britain, do in some Propositions lay down the particulars wherein they will agree with us: and upon a mutual acknowledgement of these, they declare for an intire coalition, but otherwise for the contrary.

Proposal 1 and Answer

We agree, say they, in the twelve Articles of Faith, that is, in the Creed, as what was well and piously ordain’d and establish’d in the first and second General Holy Councils; but we do not agree in the Creeds that have at different times been form’d by the Latin Church. In this we have no difference; for, neither do we receive any other Faith or Creed than that of the first and second General Councils, but disown and reject those that have been composed by the Latins; and are so far from admitting any such additionary insertion in the Creed, that we repudiate it as blasphemous. And thus far we agree with you.

Proposal 2 and Answer

The second Proposal also we commend and receive as Orthodox, in which those who are called the Remnant of Primitive orthodoxy in Britain, profess to agree in believing the Holy Ghost to be consubstantial with the Father and the Son. For, those who do not believe thus, are publickly anathematized by us every year as Semi-arians and Macedonians and πνευματομάχοι. And that it is necessary to believe, as we do, that the Father only is the fountain, original and cause both of the Generation of the Son and of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, we learn from the Sacred and divine Synods, and more fully before them from Dionysius the Areopagite, who says, that the only fountain and cause of the Supersubstantial Deity, is the Father; of whom the Son is begotten, and from whom the Holy Spirit proceeds. And that the Holy Spirit is consubstantial with the Father and the Son, we learn and believe upon the Authority of the Holy Scripture. Nay, the second Oecumenical Synod was assembled upon this account, and made Canons to this purpose, and excommunicated Macedonius for the contrary sentiment, and anathematized both him and his followers, and repulsed them as Hereticks and blasphemers; but gave those who confess Him to be true God, consubstantial to the Father and the Son, the honour of an everlasting memorial.

Proposal 3

In the third place, those who are called the remnant of primitive orthodoxy in Britain, declare their assent to the Orthodox oriental Faith, in believing, as they say, that the Holy Ghost is sent forth by the Son from the Father; and that when they say in any of their Confessions, that he is sent forth or proceedeth from the Son, they mean no more than what is and always has been confess’d by the orthodox oriental Church, that is, from the Father by the Son.

Answer

To this we answer, that we receive no other Rule or Creed than that which was settled, and most piously set forth by the first and second holy General Councils; in which it was decreed, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father. For, it says, We believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father. Therefore we receive none who add the least syllable (and the most perfect word wou’d fall far short) either by way of insertion, commentary or explication to this Holy Creed, or take any thing from it. For, the holy Fathers at that time anathematize all such as shall either take from or add to it any word or syllable. Upon this account, we cannot lawfully allow of the addition of the preposition διὰ or ἐκ, nor say either from or by the Son. But we wou’d have those who desire to communicate and agree with us, to keep it pure and without alteration, and to speak and read agreeably to the Original determination of those Holy Synods. We don’t allow it therefore to be either publickly or privately read with addition: But if any one has formerly inserted any word, let it be strook out; and let the Creed continue unalter’d, as it was at first written, and is to this day after so many years read and believed by us. Now, concerning this point we thus believe, that there is a twofold procession of the Holy Spirit; the one natural, eternal and before time; according to which, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone; and of which it is both written in the Creed, and the Lord has said, Another Comforter will I send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of Truth which proceedeth from the Father¹³. The other is temporal and deputative, according to which the Holy Spirit is externally sent forth, derived, proceeds and flows from both the Father and the Son, for the Sanctification of the Creature. But it is plain, that in the procession of the Holy Ghost the preposition ἐκ is never used for διὰ, nor vice versâ διὰ for ἐκ, from many testimonies, but especially from that Great Divine John Damascen, in the 60th Chapter of the first book of his Theology, where he says: The Spirit of the Father, as proceeding from the Father, and the Spirit of the Son, not as proceeding from Him, but by Him from the Father: for the Father only is the cause Here διὰ is applied to the Son, and ἐκ is declared to be unapplicable to Him, not as from Him says he, but as by Him. The prepositions ἐκ and διὰ are not therefore equivalent; for, if they were, what shou’d hinder him from saying, that He proceeds from the Son? For, he said that He proceeded from the Father by the Son. We therefore of the Oriental Orthodox Church, being taught by the Fathers, say, that the Holy Spirit proceeds absolutely from the Father with regard to that procession which is natural, eternal and before time; and upon that account make use neither of the preposition ἐκ nor διὰ when we speak of the Son. For, we do not say, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from or by the Son in that respect; for, as the Son was not begotten of the Father by the mediation of the Holy Spirit, so neither does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father by the mediation of the Son. But as to His temporal and outward Procession, we agree, that He proceeds, comes or is sent by the Son or thro’ the Son’s mediation, and from the Son in this sence of an outward procession, for the sanctification of the Creature. But this Πρόεσις or Mission we do not call Procession, lest we should be as unhappy as the Papists, who because of the limited dialect of the Latin language, which is unable to express the Πρόεσις or Emission by one word, and the ἐκπόρευσις by another, have called them both processionem; which afterwards grew into an error, and made them take the eternal procession for that Πρόεσις which was in time. Therefore, to avoid this equivocation of terms, we call that Procession which is inward and eternal, and not that Emission or effusion or profection which is external and in time. And this is the reason of that false opinion of the Latins, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son; which is contrary to the doctrine of our Lord and the holy Fathers. Now, that the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son, according to that procession which is before time, take the words of the above cited Father in the 8th Chapter of the 4th book of his Theology, which are these. We both say the Spirit which is from the Father, and the Spirit of the Father: but we do not say the Spirit from the Son, but the Spirit of the Son. For, says the holy Apostle, If any one says he has not the Spirit of Christ¹⁴; and we acknowledge that the Spirit is made manifest and communicated to us by the Son. What can be clearer than these words? And thus much for this Article.

Proposal 4 and Answer

In the fourth place, those who are called the Remnant of Primitive piety, profess to agree with us, in believing that the Holy Ghost did truly speak by the Prophets and the Apostles, and is the genuine author of all Scripture; which is perfectly right and agreeable to our Sentiments. However, we must add to the Prophets and Apostles, that He also speaks by the Holy Synods and divine Fathers; and then they will be in the right, and not far from the Truth. The 5th, 6th, and 7th Proposals are the same.

Proposal 5, 6, and 7

In believing that the Holy Ghost assisteth the Church in judging rightly concerning matter of Faith: and that both General and particular Orthodox Councils convened after the example of the first Council of Jerusalem, may reasonable expect that assistance in their resolutions.

Proposal 6

In the number and nature of the Charismata of the Spirit.

Proposal 7

In believing that there is no other foundation of the Church, but Christ alone; and that the Prophets and Apostles are no otherwise to be called so, but in a less proper and secondary sense, respectively only.

Answer

We have no objection to this Proposal, which has the words of Truth and Righteousness, and is consonant and agreeable to our Orthodox Doctrines. And as for what is said concerning Synods, if it be meant of future Synods, we allow it. But for former ones, there is no doubt but they were held by Divine direction: and that the same Holy Spirit which in the shape of fiery tongues illuminated the Apostles, did also in the seven General Councils, speak by the mouths of the holy Fathers, and gave a Divine sanction to their Decrees. Proceed we therefore to the eighth Proposal, which is in these words.

Proposal 8

They agree that Christ alone is the Head of the Church; which Title ought not therefore to be assumed by any one, much less by any secular person, how great soever: And that Bishops under Him have a vicarious headship, as His proper Representatives and Vicegerents; being thence subject in Spirituals to no temporal power on earth. And in consequence hereof, they hope the Patriarchs of the Oriental Church will be pleased by an express article to signify, that they own the independency of the Church in Spirituals upon all Lay-powers, and consequently declare against all Lay-Deprivations.

Answer

To this we say, that our Lord Jesus Christ is the only Head of the Church both in earth and heaven, militant and triumphant; but since He has set over his own creature Apostles and High-priests, Heads and Governours, Heads not original but derivative and secondary; containing and giving life to the whole earthly body of the Faithful, thro’ the first and universal Head, in whom we live and move and have our being, to be mediatours between God and men in performing the ministrations our Lord has commanded them; namely, in teaching and baptizing and administring all the Divine Mysteries; giving them as is confess’d, the power of binding and loosing; therefore every one of our Bishops both is, and is esteemed, a particular head of the Churches of each City, subject to the first and universal Head. Upon this account, the 34th Canon of the Holy Apostles calls the Primus among the Bishops, an Head, saying, The Bishops of every nation ought to know their Primus, and esteem him as their Head. For the Holy Spirit has placed the Bishops and Priests for Shepheards to the Church of God, administring the word of Life to the perfecting of the Saints. We don’t therefore improperly call them Heads and fountains of Sanctity among us: and we believe that from the Bishops we receive the sacred Mysteries and Charismata of the Spirit, as from Christ our Supreme Head. And as the Angels, taking upon them the form and person of God, as when it is said, I am the Lord thy God¹⁵, (for, the Law of God was deliver’d by Angels¹⁶,) did not thereby assume to themselves the nature of the Deity; so the genuine Governours of the Church, being called Heads, derive that appellation from the real Head, and perform His part, and refer all their ministrations to Him as the immediate Head, and not unto themselves; as Moses also was by God constituted a God unto Pharao, without any Injury to the Divine Majesty; and the Apostles as well as the Lord, were said to be the Light of the World. For, tho’ Christ be the Foundation of the Faith, yet the Prophets and Apostles both are, and are said to be so in Scripture. Bishops therefore, and Priests being thro’ Ordination and the Grace of the Holy Spirit chosen by God, Ministers of Christ, and Shepheards of Christian People, are by no means subject to the secular powers of the world in matters of spiritual and ecclesiastical cognizance. And as secular powers are prohibited from ordaining Bishops or Priests, so are they not allowed by the Divine Laws to deprive either of them. But the Church in Synod both ordains and deprives, as having the power of binding and loosing from the Lord; for, this was given to the Apostles only and to their successors. However, they are bound to be subject to them in secular and civil affairs, and in civil questions of right and wrong: For, Kings have a supreme power over all their Subjects, to judge and punish with Justice those who are delinquent, unless it be in spiritual matters, which are to be judged and determined by an Ecclesiastical Council. And this may suffice for a brief answer to the present Proposal. It is time to proceed to the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th following, which stand thus.

Proposal 9, 10, 11, 12

They agree that every Christian ought to be subject to the Church; and that the Church is by Christ sufficiently instructed and authorized to examine the Writings and censure the persons of her subjects or ministers, tho’ never so great.

They agree, that the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ ought to be administred to the faithful in both kinds; and that the Latin Church hath transgressed the institution of Christ by restraining from the Laity one kind.

They agree, that Baptism and this are of general necessity to Salvation for all the faithful: and that the other Holy Mysteries instituted by Christ or appointed by His Apostles, which are not so generally necessary unto all, ought nevertheless to be received and celebrated with due reverence, according to catholick and immemorial practice.

They agree, that there is no proper purgatorial fire in the future state, for the purgation of souls; nor consequently any redemption of souls out of the fire of Purgatory by the Suffrages of the Living: But that, notwithstanding, none do immediately ascend into the Heaven of Heavens, but do remain until the Resurrection in certain inferior Mansions appropriated to them, waiting in hope for the Revelation of that day, and joining in the prayers and praises of the Militant Church upon earth offer’d up in Faith.

The Answer to the above Proposals

These four Articles or Proposals are true, and speak our sentiments; wherefore, we receive them in the sense we judge they are to be taken; for, that all Christians are bound to obey the Church, we also are agreed, and that the writings, words and persons of all her subjects ought to be ecclesiastically and synodically approved or censured by the Church, cannot be denied. This is every where effectually done among us. So also, the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist is given to the People by us under both kinds; and not under one, as the Latin Papists wickedly administer it, contrary to the Institution, as we have largely proved above. We hold likewise, that the Holy Sacraments are seven in number; but two only exceed in necessity, and are such as no one can be saved without them. For, as for Baptism, it is our Lord’s saying, that Whosoever is not born again of Water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God¹⁷. And of the Eucharist He says, Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you¹⁸. However, the Sacrament of the Priesthood is one of the most necessary; for, without this, how shall the Sacrament of the Eucharist be performed, of which the Lord said unto His Apostles, Do this in remembrance of Me¹⁹? And how shall Christians have the Sacrament of the Participation of His precious Body and Blood, if there be no Priest to consecrate and perform the sacred Ministration? For, without a Priest, not all the Princes and Kings of the earth together can perform this supernatural Mystery, and distribute it to the faithful. The other four, and especially that of Chrism and that of Penance, are vastly profitable to salvation. For, without Chrism none can be a perfect Christian; that being the seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit, which was imposed as necessary both in the ancient and present Church. And since Baptism cannot be repeated, yet many sin after they are baptized, how shall they obtain forgiveness without Repentance and Confession, and without a person endued with the power of binding and loosing?

As for the Purgatorial fire, invented by the Papists to command the purse of the ignorant, we will by no means hear of it. For, it is a fiction and a doting Fable, invented for lucre and to deceive the simple; and in a word, has no existence but in the imagination. There is no appearance nor mention of it in the Sacred Scriptures or holy Fathers, whatsoever the Authors or Abettors of it may clamour to the contrary. But we say, that the Benefactions and holy Sacrifices, the alms and prayers of the Church and her Priests for the dead, are the things that greatly profit them; and not the purgatorial fire, which does not by any means any where exist. For, these relieve the pains which the souls endure in ἅδης, as is plain from the Centurion, whose Son our Lord healed at the Centurion’s petition, and from the Paralytick, whom He recover’d by a double cure for the faith of those that brought him to Him, and might be proved from a thousand other instances as clear as the Sun. (Concerning this read Syrigus’s book Cap. 18.) But not to be tedious. It is time to proceed to the point of greatest difficulty, viz. the proposals, in which those who are called the British Remnant of Primitive Piety, disagree with us. But this is not to be wondered at. For being born and educated in the principles of the Luthero-Calvinists, and possess’d with their prejudices, they tenaciously adhere to them, like Ivy to a tree, and are hardly drawn off. So paint of a deep colour sinking into a Garment, is almost indelible; and the garment will grow rotten and decayed before the tincture can be wash’d off. But since where God pleases, the order of nature is changed, and He it is that transforms and alters all things by His Omnipotence for the better; placing our trust in Him, and fervently and from the heart calling upon Him, we shall undertake to answer them. Now the first Proposition is in these words.

Proposition 1

Tho’ they have a great reverence for the Canons of ancient general Councils, yet they allow them not the same authority as is due to the Sacred Text; and think they may be dispensed with, by the Governours of the Church, where Charity or necessity require.

Answer

The particulars of this first Proposition can by no means be received by the Eastern Church: for, we cannot allow the Decrees, Laws, and Canons which have been well and rightly made, and as it seem’d fit unto the Holy Ghost by the joint Consent of Spiritual and holy men in Synod assembled, to be despised, changed or set aside, and others to be substituted in their room, the offspring of our fancy and not according to the direction of the Holy Spirit; and especially since these are not opposite to the holy Scriptures, but rather agreeable to them. For, we receive the Laws and Canons of the seven ancient, holy and sacred Councils, and the particular Synods held in the East (from the Apostolical age unto the reign of Copronymus in Constantinople) as the Holy Scriptures, according to the second Canon of the 6th holy General Council, and the 3rd digest of the 2nd Title of the Novels; in which we find, that the Canons and Decrees of the Seven Councils ought to be held as the Holy Scriptures. This is the 131st Novel of Justinian, and is to be found in the 5th book of the Basilica²⁰, Title 3. Cap. 1. § 1. and in the first book, Tit. 2. Digest 11, that arrogant orders contradicting the Canons were void. It is plain then, and the reason is plain, why we receive the Canons of holy Synods as the Holy Scriptures, because they are the settlements of Holy Men, whom God has placed in the Church as Apostles and Prophets, so also Teachers²¹, as the holy Apostle observes, who being inspired with the Holy Spirit, enacted those Canons to be as Lights shining in a dark place²², according to the Holy Scriptures. For, as has been observed, the Holy Spirit which spake by the Apostles, the same and no other spake by the Holy Fathers. This which we contend for, the Lord Himself declared, when He said, He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me²³, &c. How then can we dare boldly and securely to set aside the least Constitution and Legislation of the Holy Fathers, and that no ways contradicting the Holy Scriptures? And what Charity or necessity can oblige us to omit or neglect any thing, which they have unanimously decreed and ordained, especially in matters of Doctrine? But if ever there was any Condescension or dispensation allow’d, it was only in matters of practice and order and long custom by way of prudence, but not in matters of Faith and Doctrine; as for instance, not to eat fish in the great Quadragesimal Fast. For this was by way of condescension indulged the Northern people, upon the account of the scarcity of terrestrial food, such as herbs, pulse, and other fruit, but with the consent of a Synod; for, no one has liberty to do what he pleases in the Church; but all Ecclesiastical Questions are judged and determined by Synodical inspection, as well as Condescensions and Dispensations granted, if need so require. For, in matters of holy Doctrine there is no room for condescension or dispensation, they being perpetual, and reverently observ’d by all the Orthodox as immoveable. And he that transgresses the least of these, is condemned and anathematized as a schismatick and heretick, and is by every body look’d upon as an excommunicated person. However, we do by no means receive the rebellious Synods of Hereticks, as that of Ephesus, (we don’t mean the Orthodox but the Arian Council of Ephesus) and that of the Iconomachi, and those of the Papists; but especially that Caïaphas-like Consistory at Florence; a band of robbers, and not an assembly observing the form of the Apostolical Synod in Jerusalem, nor that of the first seven holy general Councils: but which at the same time had the Pope a Criminal at the bar, and a Judge upon the Throne, giving sentence according to his own pleasure in a tyrannical and illegal manner. Such Synods therefore as these, and such innovating and illegal Canons we do by no means receive, but reject and condemn them. If then, those who are called the Remnant of primitive piety in Britain, will be united to us the Oriental Orthodox, they will do well to agree with us also in this particular, who both think and speak what is true. And let this be sufficient for a short Answer to the first Proposition. Proceed we to the second, which is as follows.

Proposition 2

Tho’ they call the Mother of our Lord blessed, and magnify the Grace of God which so highly exalted her; yet are they afraid of giving the Glory of God to a Creature, or to run into any extreme by blessing and magnifying her: and do hence rather chuse to bless and magnify God for the high grace and honour conferr’d upon her, and for the benefit which we receive by that means.

Answer

Here we may fairly cry out with David, They were in great fear where no fear was²⁴. For, when we thus magnify and extol the holy Mother of God, and ever Virgin Mary, we do by no means give Divine honour either to this most glorious Creature, or any other, but acknowledge and adore one and one only Maker and Creator of all things visible and invisible; and serve, praise, and glorify Him alone as God the Almighty. For, we know how to make a distinction in Worship, and give that of Latria to God only, but that of Dulia to the Holy Apostles, Martyrs and righteous and godly Fathers, honouring them as faithful servants and true friends of God: therein imitating the holy Psalmist David, who says, I greatly honour thy friends, O God²⁵. For whom the Lord called His friends and children, (for He says, I no more call you Servants, but friends and children and heirs²⁶,) the same we honour and worship, not with Latria, but with Dulia; and call upon them for their intercession, as persons that are living after death, and have received favour from God, and as seeing and hearing what is done here, even as the Angels. Hear what Eusebius Pamphilus says in his second Oration of the Life of Constantine the Great. Says he, The Great Constantine in his Edict ordains that the Estates of the Martyrs, if they have no heir, should go to the Church. And why did he make this order? It is, says he, by no means hard even upon the dead, that she for whom they have been labouring, should be their heir. Indeed we worship our Lady the Virgin-Mother of God with hyperdulia, but not as God; as the θεοτόκος and Mother of God, but not with Latria: God forbid: that would be blasphemy. For God only do we worship with Latria, and make her our intercessor with Him for sins committed after Baptism, and by her hope for remission from Him. But let not this affrighten you. For, no one that is not wholly ignorant and without understanding, could worship or serve the creature above the Creator, unless he was an Idolater, a Polytheist and a Madman. For we honour also earthly Princes, and crown them, and bow down to them with much reverence, and worship them with bended knee; and are not upon that account called Menworshippers, nor are we looked upon as people that honour the creature above the Creator. For, the worship we give them is that of Dulia, as servants elect of God, and honoured of Him, and therefore both being and being called, θεοστεφεῖς. Nor are we found fault with for this. Besides, a terrestrial Prince seeing his friends and servants honour’d and worship’d by other inferiors, rejoyces and abundantly recompences the honour to them. For, we don’t pay them the same honour that is due to the King only, but such as is proper for the friends of a King. However, if this offends them, they may forbear saying, Holy Mother of God, help us; and instead of it, may say, Merciful and Almighty Lord, assist the intercessions of Mary the Holy Virgin and Mother of God, and save us; til in time they come to be reconciled to the other. But let us go on to the third Proposition, which speaks thus.

Proposition 3

Tho’ they believe, that both Angels and Saints have Joy in the Conversion of a sinner, and in the progress of a Christian, and do unite with us in our Prayers and Thanksgivings, when rightly offered to God in the Communion of the Church; yet are they jealous of detracting in the least from the Mediation of Jesus Christ; and therefore cannot use a direct Invocation to any of them, the ever blessed Virgin herself not excepted. While we desire nevertheless to join with these in spirit, and to communicate with them in their perfect Charity.

Answer

What we said above, will serve for a reply to the present Proposition. But as for the jealousy they speak of, it seems like the zeal of those, of whom the Holy Apostle says, I testify of them that they have a zeal, but not according to knowledge²⁷. They must pardon our language; for since they call themselves lovers of Piety, and are always conversant in the holy and inspired writings, and in the works and doctrines of the Holy Fathers; how came they not to see, that it is right and acceptable to God, to honour his Saints, and especially the God-bearing Virgin Mary, and those Intercessors for the remission of our daily failings, with Christ, the only true God and Mediator of salvation and redemption for us from the Tyranny of the Devil, by whom we are reconciled, and have access unto God the Father? For He is the Mediator of reconciliation with God our Father; because He reconciled us when we were enemies to God thro’ the disobedience and transgression of our fore-father Adam. For neither angel nor man, but our Lord himself saved us, and we are saved by grace²⁸. But the Saints and Mother of God mediate for our post-baptismal sins, and for our repentance, (for they rejoice over one sinner that repenteth²⁹,) and for help and assistance for us, for deliverance from dangers and other distresses, or diseases, or pains, or earthquakes, or fires, or plague, or famine, from incursion of strangers or civil war, from inundation or any other difficulties and misfortunes; they intercede that the God of the Universe may preserve us from them all. For, Christ is not said to be a Mediator with God for these. If the makers of these Proposals say that He is, let them express themselves thus in their addresses to God; Most high and most merciful God, have mercy upon us thro’ the intercession and mediation of thy Son and our God Jesus Christ. But to speak in this manner is altogether absurd, and I may venture to call it blasphemous. But we say, O Lord Jesus Christ, thro’ the intercession of the Holy Mother of God, or of Thy Baptist John, have mercy upon us and forgive us our sins. Now, for proof that the Saints mediate with God for us, let them read the history of King Hezekiah, how he was delivered from Sennacharib by David³⁰. Besides, it is plain that prayer was made incessantly unto God for Peter, when he was in prison. And S. Paul desired prayers and intercessions to be made unto God, when he said, I exhort you Brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in prayers unto God for me, that I may be delivered from them that do not believe in Judea³¹. The Divine Paul therefore makes them Mediators with God, and yet does by no means hinder Christ from being the only Mediatour of reconciliation and redemption for us with God and the Father. So we imitate Peter and Paul, for whom the Faithful incessantly prayed and interceded. Ye Lovers therefore of Piety, passing over these Mormoes [Grk. μορμω, a bug-bear], embrace closely the dictates of Piety, and those things which are profitable for the soul and are no ways hurtful to any body. Search, says He, the Scriptures, for in them ye shall find eternal life³². And set yourselves free from the heavy bondage, and as I may say, captivity of prejudice; shake it off, and submit yourselves to those true Doctrines which have been delivered from the beginning, and to the Traditions of the Holy Fathers, which are not opposite to the Holy Scriptures. For, we have good hopes of you, and do in our hearts spiritually rejoyce and leap for you. For, you give us great expectations (even in this Proposition) of the wish’d for, and much desired happy union and agreement: Which do Thou, O Christ our King, quickly effect by Thy Almighty help, for the intercession of Thy immaculate Mother and all the Saints: for, we earnestly, and as we may say, from the bottom of our heart desire it.

Proposition 4

Tho’ they believe a divine Mystery in the Holy Eucharist thro’ the Invocation of the Holy Spirit upon the Elements, whereby the Faithful do verily and indeed receive the Body and Blood of Christ: they believe it yet to be after a manner which flesh and blood cannot conceive. And seeing no sufficient ground from Scripture or Tradition to determine the manner of it; are for leaving it indefinite and undetermined: so that every one may freely, according to Christ’s own institution and meaning, receive the same in faith; and may also worship Christ in Spirit, as verily and indeed present, without being obliged to worship the Sacred Symbols of His presence.

Answer

How can any pious person forbear trembling to hear this Blasphemy, as I may venture to term it? For, to be against worshipping the Bread, which is consecrated and changed into the Body of Christ, is to be against worshipping our Lord Jesus Christ himself our Maker and Saviour. For, what else is the sacrificial Bread, after it is consecrated and transubstantiated by the access of the Holy Spirit? Truly, nothing less than the real Body of our Lord. Christ himself taught us this, when He gave the Bread to His holy Disciples and said, This is My Body, and unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you, and again, for My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed³³. But if the consecrated Bread which we eat, be not the very Body of Christ, nor ought, as ye say, to be worshiped, what is it else? And if, as ye affirm, there be united to the sacred Bread some Grace distinct from it, then you do not partake of the Body of Christ, but of Grace, which is neither the Substance nor the Body of Christ, but a spiritual Gift. Do you not regard our Lord, when He said, This is My Body? And why do you teach what our Lord did not say, as if you wou’d correct His words? For you say, there is in the Bread something Divine, which God forbid: our Lord did not say, My Body is in, or under, or with this; but, This is My Body; shewing them the bread which lay in His hand. Let us not distort and misinterpret the Lord’s words; but as Himself understood them, so let us receive them. And, since the Shew-bread of the Altar of the new Dispensation is changed into the Body of Christ, by the Invocation and access of the Holy Spirit, and by the Prayer and blessing of the Priest in secret, the accidents only remaining immutable, which yet partake of the consecration; and the Bread after it is changed into, and made one with the Body of Christ in Heaven, no longer subsisting under those accidents, that being then the property of our Lord’s real Body; (notwithstanding which, there are not two or more Sacrifices, tho’ many unbloody Oblations are made in different Churches, but one and one only after a supernatural manner,) therefore, when we draw near the Bread that is changed into the Body of Christ, and is so called upon the account of the visible accidents, we should say with Peter, I believe, Lord, and confess that thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God³⁴. I believe also that this is Thy immaculate Body, having our eyes upon the holy bread, and that this is Thy precious Blood, looking upon the holy cup, that we may enjoy the same Blessing that he had. Read the Holy Fathers that lived before us and you, and shone with splendor from the Apostolical age to the present times, and you will find in all of them, that the Shew-bread is changed, transformed, converted and transubstantiated into the very precious and unspotted Body of our Lord, and that it no longer continues bread, for it is changed into that which it was not before consecration, as Cyril of Jerusalem says, Catech. 1 and 5, and elsewhere. But to avoid prolixity in transcribing their Testimonies, we refer you to cap. 17. of Syrigus’s Treatise against the Luthero-Calvinists, pag. 115. printed at Bucuresty in 1690. And there you may find them all verbatim: which you may freely and carefully peruse. And the Lord grant, that you may understand and receive them according to the pious intention and in the right sense of their Authors.

Proposition 5

Tho’ they honour the memory of all the faithful Witnesses of Christ, and count it not in itself unlawful to assist the Imagination by pictures and representations of them and their glorious acts and sufferings; they are yet afraid of giving thereby on one hand scandal to the Jews and Mahometans, or on the other to many well meaning Christians. And they are moreover apprehensive, that tho’ the wise may be safe from receiving any damage by a wrong application, yet many among the vulgar may come thereby to be ensnared, and be carried to symbolize too much with the custom of Idolaters without designing it. To prevent which, they therefore propose, that the ninth Article of the second Council of Nice concerning the worship of Images, be so explain’d by the wisdom of the Bishops and Patriarchs of the Oriental Church, as to make it inoffensive, and to remove the scandal which may be occasioned by a direct application to them.

If a Concordate can be agreed on with some limitations and indulgence on both sides, then it is proposed, that a Church to be called the Concordia be built in or about London, which may be under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Alexandria; and in which, at certain times to be agreed on, there shall be the English Service of the united British Catholicks perform’d, according as the same shall be approved or licenced by that Patriarch, or by the Representatives of the Oriental Church. And that on the other side, if it shall please God to restore the suffering Church of this Island and her Bishops to her and their just Rights, they promise to use their best endeavours, that leave be granted to the Greek Bishop here for the time residing, or to such as shall be deputed by him, to celebrate upon certain days, Divine Service in the Cathedral Church of S. Paul, according to the Greek Rites. But, if one common Liturgy could be on both sides agreed on, which should be unexceptionable, being compiled out of the ancient Greek Liturgies, (some passages and rites only omitted which are not of the substance, and which may give offence to one side,) it is thought that nothing can more conduce to the establishing an Union and Communion betwixt both Parties on Catholic Terms: would but the Patriarchs of the Oriental Church graciously condescend, that the same Common Liturgy should be used in Great Britain, both by the Greeks themselves here residing, and by the united British Catholicks.

Answer

To honour the Saints, the Mother of God, and Christ our Saviour by Images and Pictures, is an ancient piece of Devotion, and is daily observed and piously practiced by us. Their Conflicts also and Sufferings, and their virtuous actions we allow to be painted and exposed to all, and that also as a matter very beneficial to the soul. By such Representations as these, every pious Christian is animated to the imitation of them, and to a constant contempt even of death itself, for the sake of Christ and of Godliness: For, picture is a kind of silent history, as history is a speaking picture. We commend you therefore for allowing and approving a work thus acceptable and well pleasing unto God. But some among you, ye say, are afraid of giving scandal to the Jews and Mahometans, and some others who by us are called Iconomachi, whom the sixth general Council has justly condemn’d, as having wrong sentiments. Let this give them no disturbance; because every good and pious Decree ought to be observ’d, and not to be rejected and despised: for, what have we to do to judge others? Many of the Jews were offended at the Abolition of the Sabbath; but, for all that, our Lord and His Apostles did not cease from doing it, nor were they at all concerned at the reproaches and folly of the Jews. These may be throughly confuted out of the Holy Scriptures, which allow the insculpt Seraphim to be upon the Holy Ark looking face to face, and represented with human countenances, as if they were human images. But more easily yet are they confuted from the first Chapter of the Book of Genesis; in which it appears that God first made Images, for, he says, Let us make Man after our own image and similitude. But the Mahometans which are among us, and to whom we are in bondage by God’s permission, for our sins, do not reject pictures, especially the more inquisitive and knowing of them; but, when they see us paying a relative worship to images, and mentally referring that worship not to wood and figure but to the Prototype, they make no objection, but commend us, when they understand the intention of our worship, namely that it is not Latria, but relative. Nay, this is allow’d among them; for, they themselves describe the feet and hands and face of him they call their Prophet, and honour them and bow down to them; so that they can by no means receive any scandal from Images. There are indeed some illiterate people among them, who having no notion of relative worship, are offended; but yet, when they are acquainted with the reason of it, they are satisfied, and especially when they are accustom’d to a frequent inspection of them. But what if they are offended at our Worship and Mysteries; must we therefore be obliged to abstain from them, and neglect our Office? What can be more absurd than this? Shall we abrogate Baptism and the Holy Communion, because they are a scandal to them; and leave off to believe and boldly to confess the Son of God, and the very God our Lord Jesus Christ, which more especially offends them? God forbid. For, when they hear that Christ is the Son of God, they stamp and tear their Clothes and beat their breasts: but for all this, we will not forbear boldly to preach and confess Him to be the true Son of God, before Kings and Princes; nor will we be at all ashamed, believing Him in our heart unto Righteousness, and confessing and publishing Him with our mouth unto Salvation. But as for what is said concerning their fear, lest the common people being ignorant of the relative worship of Images, should worship them as Gods, with Latria, as the Israelites and Samaritans did; this is an objection of no force: for, among our Orthodox there are many illiterate people, that worship them without deifying them or adoring them as Gods with Latria; but being interrogated, know how to give an immediate answer, that we honour the Image of Christ, but refer the worship to Himself; and will tell you upon enquiry, that the honour paid to the Image ascends to the Prototype, as the Great Basil expresses it. Those who thus worship them, have never yet made any breach in the Faith, nor fallen into Idolatry. But it is impossible to repeal the ninth Canon of the 2d holy Synod of Nice, as you desire; for, it was well and rightly enacted and decreed, and in an Assembly of many holy men in the presence of the Holy Ghost, which inspired, illuminated and directed them to the Truth. Therefore it is willingly received by all the world; by all nations, tribes and people, and to this day is reverently observ’d by all the Eastern Church; and is submitted to by all that are subject and obedient to her,—Greeks, Russians, Iberians, Arabians, Bulgarians, the Albanians, Valachians, Moldavians, and the parties of Hereticks, and Armenians, and Jacobites, and the Coptites, and the Schismatical Papists, and Abyssines and all others. Besides, we see the Images of S. Peter and S. Paul and of our Saviour in the Lutheran Temples, placed upon their Altars, and raised on pedestals in the walls of their Temples; which, God willing, we hope almost both to see and to worship among you; not with Latria, for that is reserved only for God, but relatively. We omit many things which we have here to say unto them upon this subject; and refer them to the Acts of the seventh Synod, and to the Treatises of the Learned in defence of Holy Images, and to John Damascen’s book concerning Images, and Theodorus Studites of happy memory, and others.

The proposals and promises at the end of these Propositions, are much to be desired; and are very acceptable and greatly wished for, by all the Orthodox of the East. Namely, that this desireable and pious Concordate concerning Religion, being by God’s help and assistance agreed on, a Church shall be erected in or about London, to the honour of God the Author and finisher of good, and shall be called the Concordia; in which Ecclesiastical Service shall be kept, and prayers made, and the Divine and holy Sacrifice offered up both in Greek and English by the Priests and Bishops of both Nations; namely, the Greek Orthodox, and the pious remnant of the primitive Faith in Britain now made one with us; and God, who is supreme over all, shall be glorified. But as for the Limitations and Indulgence, which you mention, but do not name what they are; we say, that doubtless in all temporary Decrees that have been made by us, and are no ways prejudicial to the Orthodox Oriental Faith, and the holy Doctrines of Religion, as far as possible, all proper and convenient Dispensation and Condescension shall be allow’d: but this with Synodical and exact scrutiny, lest thro’ negligence we happen to corrupt the divine doctrines of Faith, or wholly to change them. And that Article which says, that the Church of Concord to be erected with God’s permission, shall be subject to the Diocese of the blessed Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria, we very much commend and receive, as wisely and by God’s direction determined. For, this is a common usage among us. For in the Dioceses of the Patriarch of Constantinople and other Patriarchs, there are some such Churches and Monasteries, under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, called σταυροπηγιακὰ μετόχια. And may this affair succeed; the Lord grant an event suitable to those generous promises you have made with a divine zeal. And the Eastern Orthodox Bishops, or he only that is deputed by the Patriarch of Alexandria, with others and with you now made one and in communion with us, shall perform public Service in the Cathedral of S. Paul in both languages, namely in Greek and English, to the Glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, and to the boasting of each noble and glorious Nation, the English and the Greeks, and to our spiritual joy and exultation. And perhaps the Schismatical Papists will repent and be converted from their Apostacy, and will be united in the same sentiments and practice both with you and us now in communion with each other. As to what Liturgy will be most convenient and familiar for our use, we think S. John Chrysostom’s preferable to all others; for that is chiefly used by the Oriental Orthodox Christians all over the East; by the Greeks, Russians, Iberians, Arabians, Valachians, Bulgarians, the Albani, and all other pious and orthodox people. This we advise you to translate into your mother-tongue, or to use it in Greek as shall be agreed. Thus an Union and Agreement with all the Orthodox Nations of the Eastern Church will be more easy and secure, when they every where hear and repeat the Holy Offices they have been used to from Children. For, whatever is otherwise, whatever customs, words or doctrines, every one rejects and ridicules them as what they have not been used to. But, if you would have any part of this laid aside as superfluous, you may afterwards if you think fit, write about it to the Patriarch either of Jerusalem or Alexandria; and whatsoever they and the holy Synod of Bishops at Constantinople shall judge and pronounce reasonable, it shall be agreed to; provided there be nothing in the least prejudicial to Religion, for then we shall not receive it. But we rejoice and leap for joy, and are exceedingly transported, when we see your eager desire to unite and agree with the pious Oriental Church; and we stretch forth our hands unto God, earnestly praying that your and our hopes may have a good event, as by God’s help we promise our selves they will. For, it is the end crowns the work, as people say. And this we think sufficient for a sudden answer, such as the time would allow us, to the Proposals sent from thence.

We have added, as we promised at the beginning of this Writing, an Apology formerly sent thither, concerning the question, how the Oriental Orthodox Church of Christ holds and believes; which we offer to your consideration and benevolence. And, the God of peace, who came to seek the Sheep that was lost, and when He had found it, laid it upon His shoulders and join’d it to His flock, of His mercy grant us a mutual harmony and agreement by the help and inspiration of the Holy Spirit; that those sheep who have formerly separated themselves from us, may again meet together in brotherly Love and unity, shaking off and removing far from them their mistaken prejudices in the Lord who is our help; and may be made one with us to the Glory of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, one only God by nature. Amen.

The Answers here described to the Proposals sent from Britain, were drawn up by a Synodical Judgement and determination of the Eastern Church; after the most mature deliberations of the Lord Jeremias the most holy Œcumenical Patriarch of Constantinople the new Rome, and the most holy and most blessed Patriarchs, the Lord Samuel of Alexandria, and the Lord Chrysanthus of Jerusalem, with the holy Metropolitans and the holy Clergy of the great Church of Christ in Constantinople in Council assembled, in the year 1718, in the month of April, day 12th.

NB. The foregoing Paper, was in the original drawn up by the Lord Chrysanthus the present Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Previous · Contents · Next